Just luck: an experimental study of risk taking and fairness

446 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Causal Reasoning for Algorithmic Fairness (2018, background): “Empirical studies of attitudes about distributive justice [6, 26] have found that most participants prefer redistribution to create fairer outcomes, and do so in ways that depend on how much control individuals have on their outcomes.”
Dictating the Risk: Experimental Evidence on Giving in Risky Environments (2013, result): “However, the observations that giving in T2 and T3 is less than in the standard dictator game is also in line with findings by Dana et al. (2007): since the potential payoffs to the recipient do not depend on the dictator’s choice, the dictator can exploit the “moral-wiggle room”.”
Cutthroat Capitalism versus Cuddly Socialism: Are Americans More Meritocratic and Efficiency-Seeking than Scandinavians? (2020, unknown): “…fundamentally shape individual behavior (Fehr and Schmidt 1999; Bolton and Ockenfels 2000; Andreoni and Miller 2002; Charness and Rabin 2002; Cappelen et al. 2007, 2013a; Falk and Szech 2013), and the prevalence of different social preferences in the United States and Scandinavia could…”
Peer effects in risk taking: Envy or conformity? (2015, background): “Recent evidence on fairness considerations in risk taking (Cappelen et al., 2013) suggests that relative payoff concerns may depend on whether the peer chose to take on more or less risk.”