Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/279572 
Authors: 
Year of Publication: 
2023
Series/Report no.: 
SAFE Working Paper No. 405
Publisher: 
Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, Frankfurt a. M.
Abstract: 
Meritocracies aspire to reward hard work and promise not to judge individuals by the circumstances into which they were born. However, circumstances often shape the choice to work hard. I show that people's merit judgments are "shallow" and insensitive to this effect. They hold others responsible for their choices, even if these choices have been shaped by unequal circumstances. In an experiment, US participants judge how much money workers deserve for the effort they exert. Unequal circumstances disadvantage some workers and discourage them from working hard. Nonetheless, participants reward the effort of disadvantaged and advantaged workers identically, regardless of the circumstances under which choices are made. For some participants, this reflects their fundamental view regarding fair rewards. For others, the neglect results from the uncertain counterfactual. They understand that circumstances shape choices but do not correct for this because the counterfactual-what would have happened under equal circumstances-remains uncertain.
Subjects: 
Meritocracy
fairness
responsibility
attitudes towards inequality
redistribution
social preferences
inference
uncertainty
counterfactual thinking
JEL: 
C91
D63
D91
H23
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.