Distributive preferences and effort provision: A two-way link?

IF 1.6 3区经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics Pub Date : 2025-06-11 DOI:10.1016/j.socec.2025.102385

Jaromír Kovářík , Ibai Martínez-Macías , Luis Miller

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between effort and distributive preferences in a setting where effort does not affect the total amount available for distribution. While prior research has shown a link from effort to distributive preferences, we provide empirical evidence of the reverse relationship: individuals who make egalitarian choices exert less effort one year later compared to those who act selfishly. To test this, we use a unique dataset from participants who participated in a real-effort experiment with distributional choices on two distinct occasions, one year apart. Our findings offer an explanation for the self-serving interpretations of fairness observed in the literature and underscore the role of distributive preferences as a key determinant of effort and productivity.

查看原文本刊更多论文

分配偏好和努力提供：一个双向联系？

本文考察了在努力不影响可分配总量的情况下，努力与分配偏好之间的关系。虽然之前的研究已经表明了努力与分配偏好之间的联系，但我们提供了相反关系的经验证据：与那些行为自私的人相比，做出平等主义选择的人在一年后付出的努力更少。为了验证这一点，我们使用了一个独特的数据集，这些数据集来自于参与者，他们在两个不同的场合（间隔一年）参与了真正努力的分配选择实验。我们的研究结果为在文献中观察到的对公平的自私解释提供了一个解释，并强调了分配偏好作为努力和生产力的关键决定因素的作用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics ECONOMICS-

CiteScore

2.60

自引率

12.50%

发文量

113

审稿时长

83 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.