市场与道德:市场如何塑造我们对他人的(不)尊重

Daniel L Chen, Eric Reinhart
{"title":"市场与道德:市场如何塑造我们对他人的(不)尊重","authors":"Daniel L Chen, Eric Reinhart","doi":"10.1093/jleo/ewae016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars since Hume and Smith have debated possible causal connections between market experiences and moral beliefs. Here, we study the impact of market interactions on utilitarian versus deontological values, charitable donations, and whether individuals have differential in-group/out-group moral views. We randomly assign workers residing across several nations of varying income levels to different market conditions and found that, in low-income nations, tournament-based compensation increased deontological commitments, especially toward out-group members, and donations by productive workers, but decreased donations by less productive workers. In higher-income nations, the effect on deontological commitments reversed, while effects on out-group attitudes and donations became insignificant. These findings suggest that if utilitarian attitudes lead to more market-oriented policies, then multiple steady states arise wherein some countries sustain high levels of utilitarian attitudes and economic growth alongside progressively weakening deontological commitments and interpersonal regard for others, putting economic rationality and liberal moral development at odds.","PeriodicalId":501404,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Markets and morality: how markets shape our (dis)regard for others\",\"authors\":\"Daniel L Chen, Eric Reinhart\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jleo/ewae016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scholars since Hume and Smith have debated possible causal connections between market experiences and moral beliefs. Here, we study the impact of market interactions on utilitarian versus deontological values, charitable donations, and whether individuals have differential in-group/out-group moral views. We randomly assign workers residing across several nations of varying income levels to different market conditions and found that, in low-income nations, tournament-based compensation increased deontological commitments, especially toward out-group members, and donations by productive workers, but decreased donations by less productive workers. In higher-income nations, the effect on deontological commitments reversed, while effects on out-group attitudes and donations became insignificant. These findings suggest that if utilitarian attitudes lead to more market-oriented policies, then multiple steady states arise wherein some countries sustain high levels of utilitarian attitudes and economic growth alongside progressively weakening deontological commitments and interpersonal regard for others, putting economic rationality and liberal moral development at odds.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501404,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewae016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewae016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自休谟和斯密以来,学者们一直在争论市场经验与道德信念之间可能存在的因果关系。在此,我们研究了市场互动对功利主义与去道德主义价值观、慈善捐赠以及个人是否具有不同的群体内/群体外道德观的影响。我们将居住在不同收入水平的几个国家的工人随机分配到不同的市场条件下,结果发现,在低收入国家,基于锦标赛的报酬增加了生产性工人的道义承诺(尤其是对群体外成员的承诺)和捐赠,但减少了生产性较低工人的捐赠。在高收入国家,对义务承诺的影响发生了逆转,而对外群体态度和捐赠的影响变得不明显。这些研究结果表明,如果功利主义态度导致更多的市场导向政策,那么就会出现多种稳定状态,即一些国家在维持高水平的功利主义态度和经济增长的同时,逐渐削弱对他人的道义承诺和人际关怀,从而使经济理性和自由道德发展相悖。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Markets and morality: how markets shape our (dis)regard for others
Scholars since Hume and Smith have debated possible causal connections between market experiences and moral beliefs. Here, we study the impact of market interactions on utilitarian versus deontological values, charitable donations, and whether individuals have differential in-group/out-group moral views. We randomly assign workers residing across several nations of varying income levels to different market conditions and found that, in low-income nations, tournament-based compensation increased deontological commitments, especially toward out-group members, and donations by productive workers, but decreased donations by less productive workers. In higher-income nations, the effect on deontological commitments reversed, while effects on out-group attitudes and donations became insignificant. These findings suggest that if utilitarian attitudes lead to more market-oriented policies, then multiple steady states arise wherein some countries sustain high levels of utilitarian attitudes and economic growth alongside progressively weakening deontological commitments and interpersonal regard for others, putting economic rationality and liberal moral development at odds.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信