On the evolution of adjudicated contests and the principle of invidious

Limited resources (e.g. jobs research grants, welfare, attention) are often allocated to those who desire them according to assessments of merit or deservingness made by presumably neutral judges. The resulting adjudicated contests are, in principle, more fair than other means of allocation: market economies, violence, privilege, kickbacks, etc. However, as adjudicated contests evolve they tend to attract an increasing number of qualified contestants. If resources do not expand to reward these contestants, additional tests of merit or deservingness are often invoked to make increasingly small contestant discriminations. These additional tests are shown to be breeding grounds of invidious selection vitiating the principle of fairness that characterizes the contests in which they are employed. The causes and consequences of invidious selection are discussed, as are some possibilities of their avoidance.     

In fairness to future generations: The role of egocentrism, uncertainty, power, and stewardship in judgments of intergenerational allocations

In this paper, we found that fairness judgments in intergenerational allocation decisions depend on (1) individuals’ position in the intergenerational sequence (i.e., whether they are in the preceding or succeeding generation), (2) the amount of uncertainty about the effect of the preceding generation’s decisions on the succeeding one, and (3) whether the preceding generation is primed with power. We found that both power priming and greater levels of uncertainty about the future consequences of present decisions can elicit stewardship attitudes, which may temper self-interested behavior on the part of the preceding generation. Our data also indicate that the nature of the uncertainty is important; it is not just a matter of how much future generations will be affected, but also whether or not they will be affected at all by the decisions of earlier generations. Our findings help to explain (1) how intergenerational inequities can occur even when people are explicitly focused on achieving fair allocations of resources between generations, and (2) how social responsibility concerns can motivate intergenerational beneficence in the face of intergenerational conflict.     

Gender Issues in US Science and Technology Policy: Equality of What?

Fairness in evaluation processes for women in science and engineering is only one of a set of issues that need to be addressed to reach gender equality. This article uses concepts from Amartya Sen's work on inequality to frame gender issues in science and technology policy. Programs that focus on increasing the number of women in science and engineering careers have not generally addressed a broader set of circumstances that intersect with gender at various economic levels and stages of life. The agendas in research and innovation policies also need to reflect these issues, and fair allocation of resources within both science and technology needs to be on the agenda. Getting women into high-level positions is not enough. Articulating the full research and innovation agendas for women will require broader participatory processes.     

An affective-experiential perspective on reactions to fair and unfair events: Individual differences in affect intensity moderated by experiential mindsets

The present paper focuses on what psychological processes are driving people’s reactions to fair and unfair events. Specifically, by extending on ideas that people’s reactions to fair and unfair events consist at least partly of affect-related responses, and by adopting the assumption made in cognitive-experiential self-theory that the operation of experiential mindsets is intimately associated with affect-related experiences, we formulate the hypothesis that individual differences in affect intensity will moderate reactions to fair and unfair events. Introducing a novel manipulation of experiential and rationalistic mindsets to the research literature, the findings of two studies indeed reveal that especially for people in experiential (vs. rationalistic) mindsets negative affective reactions to fair and unfair events increase with high (vs. low) scores on affect intensity. Implications for the literature on social justice, experiential mindsets, and affect intensity are discussed.     

Fairness considerations: Increasing understanding of intentionality during adolescence

The development of fairness considerations in decision making is not well understood. Here we tested the hypothesis that increased understanding of intentionality during adolescence underlies increased fairness considerations in social decision making. We conducted three experiments using an adapted version of the Ultimatum Game with participants during four stages of adolescence: 9, 12, 15, and 18 years of age. Participants made or evaluated monetary offers, and we manipulated the intentionality context of offers. Results show that strategic thinking is already present at 9 years of age. There was no age difference in fairness of offers when the responder could not reject an offer (Experiment 1), but when they could reject an offer there was an age-related increase in taking into account the perspective and intentionality of other players when making offers (Experiment 2) and evaluating offers (Experiment 3). Taken together, the results demonstrate a linear developmental transition in fairness considerations that may have important implications for our understanding of social interactions during adolescence.     

Exploring the neural basis of fairness: A model of neuro-organizational justice

Drawing from the literature in neuroeconomics, organizational justice, and social cognitive neuroscience, I propose a model of neuro-organizational justice that explores the role of the brain in how people form fairness judgments and react to situations of fairness and/or unfairness in organizations. The model integrates three levels of analysis: (a) behavioral, (b) mental (cognitive and emotional), and (c) neural. The behavioral level deals with motivated actions displayed by the individual; the mental level deals with information processing mechanisms and emotional arousal; and the neural level concerns the brain systems instantiating mental processes. The paper also describes a fairness theory of mind that could help managers improve their ability to create fair working environments. The model’s implications for further research and management practice are discussed.     

The effect of culture and power on cooperation in commons dilemmas: Implications for global resource management

This study adopted a contextual framework to examine whether an interaction between group culture and economic power influences self-interest in a simulated commons dilemma. Full-time managers enrolled in executive MBA programs in Germany, Hong Kong, Israel, and the United States (US) made decisions in an asymmetric commons dilemma. Relative to managers from the US and Germany, Israeli managers were more likely to follow an individually rational decision-making approach, taking more resources in a high versus low economic power condition. In contrast, managers from Hong Kong in a high economic power condition followed a collectively rational approach, voluntarily taking fewer resources. Egocentrism mediated this interaction effect of group culture and economic power for the Israeli managers who were more egocentric and believed it was fair to harvest more resources in a high power condition. However, egocentrism did not mediate the interaction effect for managers from Hong Kong. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings highlight the importance of studying the proximal effect of group culture on contextual factors, such as economic power asymmetry, that influence cooperation in social dilemmas.     

Beyond family-friendly: The construct and measurement of singles-friendly work culture

Although research has examined work-family issues and organizational support for employees’ family responsibilities, few studies have explored the work-life issues of single employees without children. The current study examines single employees’ perceptions of how their organizations support their work-life balance in comparison to employees with families. A multi-dimensional scale is developed assessing five dimensions of singles-friendly culture: social inclusion, equal work opportunities, equal access to benefits, equal respect for nonwork life, and equal work expectations. Employees with families perceived more equity in most of these facets than did singles. Managerial and professional employees with higher incomes also perceived their organizations as more singles-friendly. Finally, social inclusion predicted organizational commitment for single employees, and this effect was mediated by perceived organizational support. In contrast, more equal work opportunities were related to lower turnover intentions among childfree singles.     

Perceptions of injustice in intercultural relations

Perceptions of injustice are likely to occur in intercultural relations because cultures often define justice and its implementation differently. This article reviews factors and processes that are unique to intercultural relations and that may give rise to feelings of injustice during intercultural interactions. Antecedents that can trigger a sense of injustice with regard to distributive, procedural, and retributive justice are reviewed. The consequences of perceived injustice are also analyzed. The implications of our analysis for research and practice are discussed.