ArticlePloS one2022
Inequality and fairness with heterogeneous endowments.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social networks affect redistribution decisions and polarization.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Reputations for treatment of outgroup members can prevent the emergence of political segregation in cooperative networks.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Inequality and fairness with heterogeneous endowments.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People differ in intelligence, cognitive ability, personality traits, motivation, and similar valued and, to a large degree, inherited characteristics that determine success and achievements. When does individual heterogeneity lead to a fair distribution of rewards and outcomes? Here, we develop this question theoretically and then test it experimentally for a set of structural conditions in a specific interaction situation. We first catalogue the functional relationship between individual endowments and outcomes to distinguish between fairness concepts such as meritocracy, equality of opportunity, equality of outcomes, and Rawl's theory of justice. We then use an online experiment to study which of these fairness patterns emerge when differently endowed individuals can share their resources with others, depending on whether information about others' endowments and outcomes is available. We find that while visible outcomes lessen inequality by decreasing the statistical dispersion of outcomes across the group, endowments need to be visible for better equality of opportunity for the most disadvantaged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.