Premium
Gain–loss‐frame in outcome‐interdependence: does it influence equality or equity considerations?
Author(s) -
De Dreu Carsten K. W.
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
european journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.609
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1099-0992
pISSN - 0046-2772
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(199603)26:2<315::aid-ejsp759>3.0.co;2-z
Subject(s) - distributive justice , framing (construction) , social psychology , psychology , framing effect , equity (law) , inequality , distributive property , economics , demographic economics , economic justice , political science , microeconomics , law , mathematics , mathematical analysis , structural engineering , persuasion , pure mathematics , engineering
Research suggests that framing outcomes as gains produces stronger concern for distributive justice than framing outcomes as losses. Unfortunately, however, this prior research manipulated own and other's outcomes only (and not own and other's input). Hence, it remained unclear whether framing affects concern with equality—everyone gets an equal share regardless whether one ‘deserves’ it or not—and/or equity—the share one gets is a function of the proportionality of one's own, and the other parties' inputs. The current experiment addressed this problem. Subjects ( N = 94) read a scenario manipulating own and some co‐workers' inputs, and subsequently rated satisfaction with pairs of outcomes providing themselves with more, equal or less outcomes than their co‐worker. Outcomes to oneself exceeded expectation (gain‐frame) or remained below it (loss‐frame). Corroborating and expanding prior research, results showed that people are more concerned with both equality and equity when they have a gain‐ rather than loss‐frame. In addition, results revealed evidence for a self‐serving bias, in that people prefer equity or equality, depending on what serves best their own interests. It is concluded that frame affects the degree to which people are concerned about distributive justice.