Abstract
The core problem in the distribution dilemma is the trade-off between equity and efficiency. With the development of socio-economic conditions, the optimal decision changes between equitable and efficient options. The methods for nudging decision-makers to make optimal decisions without changing the event are extremely important. This study used two laboratory behavior experiments to explore the impact of maxim information on the trade-off between equity and efficiency. The study explores whether stake levels and division schemes affect the nudging effect of the maxim in a Trade-Off Game (TOG). We found that participants were affected by maxim information in decision-making scenarios, and participants showed different equity preferences as the maxim information changed, without relevance of the stake level. Additionally, the nudging effect of the maxim only exists under the condition that the distributor's interests is not affected.
Highlights
Efficiency and equity are important topics for human society, involving economic distribution, taxation, education, and pensions
This study explores the impact of maxims on decision making of equity and efficiency in the Trade-Off Game (TOG)
Consistent with Hypothesis 1, maxim messages affected TOG choice as expected: Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.61, 95% CI [1.10, 2.37], p = 0.014 (Fig 1)
Summary
Efficiency and equity are important topics for human society, involving economic distribution, taxation, education, and pensions. While maintaining equity may come at the expense of total social welfare, the pursuit of maximizing social efficiency can lead to unfair results. This question of trade-off between efficiency and equity has been studied extensively in the fields of moral psychology and behavioral economics [1,2,3,4]. Utilitarian theories of distributive justice hold seek maximum benefits (happiness) or the efficiency sum, rather than equity, even if it results in no happiness [5]. Deontological theories of distributive justice argue that correct behavior (i.e., equity) is more important. Even if the distributive act maximizes the good but violates the principle advocated by equity, rights, or obligations, it is considered a moral error [6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
