Reactions to equal reward allocations: Effects of situation, gender and values

Abstract

Subjects' reactions to equal allocations were investigated across four hypothetical scenarios spanning healthy/sick, older/younger, male/female and married/single performers. Performance input was varied across scenarios (equal or unequal), as was the competitive or cooperative nature of the male/female scenario. In the study 392 male and female subjects rated their agreement with the equal allocations and indicated how they would allocate rewards themselves. They also completed the Schwartz Value Survey, enabling classification of values into domains reflecting different value content and individualistic or collectivist interests. Results showed that subjects were more likely to favour equal allocations when performance input was equal rather than unequal and when the male/female scenario involved cooperation rather than competition. Subjects were biased in favour of like‐sex higher performers when allocating payments to male and female stimulus persons who were in competition. Subjects' agreement with the equal allocation in the healthy/sick scenario and the amount of their own allocation to the sick performer were both positively related to the strength of their prosocial and spirituality values but negatively related to the strength of their power, stimulation and hedonistic values. These findings are interpreted as indicating the effects of situational factors, allocation norms, social identity and value priorities on reactions to equal allocations.