On dividing justly

By M. Yaari, M. Bar-Hillel. 1984

How researchers see this paper

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

Citations in the corpus

Equity of Attention: Amortizing Individual Fairness in Rankings (2018, methodology): “Equity encodes the idea of proportionality of inputs and outputs [31], and might be employed to account for "differences in effort, in productivity, or in contribution" [33].”
Compensation and responsibility (2011, background): “First, the classical paper by Yaari and Bar-Hillel (1984) is well known as showing that the traditional welfarist solutions perform badly because different contexts seem to call for different choices of allocation rules.”
Empirical Social Choice: Questionnaire-Experimental Studies on Distributive Justice (2011, methodology): “More specifically, the seminal paper in empirical social choice (Yaari and Bar-Hillel, 1984) formulated in a clever way three different situations, which are formally identical from a welfarist perspective, but differ from each other with respect to situational features that should not influence the”
Combining Equity and Utilitarianism in a Mathematical Programming Model (2012, background): “There is some indirect evidence for this in Williams and Cookson (2006) and Yaari and Bar-Hillel (1984).”
Fair and square: the four sides of distributive justice (2001, background): “For instance, in cases where fairness implies equality, most survey respondents reject equality in goods in favor of equality in the health benefits conferred by them (Yaari and Bar-Hillel, 1984) or equality in the satisfaction derived from the goods (Konow, 1996).”
Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories (2003, background): “Yaari and Bar-Hillel (1984) present college applicants in Israel with a scenario in which two individuals metabolize the nutritional value of two foods differently.”
Beyond Distributive Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: Feature Selection for Procedurally Fair Learning (2018, methodology): “Our key insight, inspired by the work of Yaari and Bar-Hillel (1984) is to rely on humans’ moral judgments or instincts about the fairness of using input features in a decision making context.”
What Is Fair? Experimental Evidence (2002, background): “Need is offered as an important fairness criterion by the social psychology literature (Yaari and Bar-Hillel 1984; Gaertner 1994).”
Exploring the links between equity and efficiency in payments for environmental services: A conceptual approach (2010, background): “Within a multidimensional view of distributive justice, the ‘needs rule’ is often also called for in order to ensure the equal satisfaction of basic needs (Leventhal, 1980; Yaari and Bar-Hillel, 1984; Konow, 2001).”
The Focusing and Informational Effects of Norms on Pro-Social Behavior (2009, unknown): “1 See, for instance, Arrow (1971), Yaari and Bar-Hillel (1984), Fehr and Schmidt (1999), Kahneman, Knetsch, and Thaler (1986), Andreoni (1990), Cialdini, Reno, and Kallgren (1990), Sunstein (1996), Kallgren, Reno, and Cialdini (2000), Chekroun and Brauer (2002), Conlin, Lynn, and O’Donoghue (2003),…”