The equality rule is an important coordination rule in symmetric public good dilemmas. Although prior research emphasized that people use the equality rule out of efficiency concerns (as it helps to obtain the public good in the most efficient manner among group members), it may also reflect a true preference for fairness. More precisely, research examining emotional and retributive reactions as a result of a violation of the equality rule by a fellow group member showed that equality indeed is related to people’s personal values and what they consider to be fair. The present paper suggests that a violation of the equality rule results in emotional reactions, and these emotional experiences encourage further retributive actions. The different reactions following an equality violation are described as a function of three features: (1) the motives to use equality, (2) attributions for explaining the violation, and (3) the honesty of the given explanation.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams J. S. (1965) Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz L. (eds), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. (Vol. 2:267–299). Academic Press, New York
Allison S. T., McQueen L. R., Schaerfl L. M. (1992) Social decision making processes and the equal partitionment of shared resources. J. Exp. Social Psychol. 28:23–42
Allison S. T., Messick D. M. (1990) Social decision heuristics in the use of shared resources. J. Behav. Decision Making 3:195–204
Aristotle. (1998). Nicomachean Ethics: Books VIII and IX (M. Pakaluk, Trans.). Oxford: Clarendon Press
Bies R. J., Tripp T. M. (1996) Beyond distrust; “Getting even” and the need for revenge. In Kramer R. M., Tyler T. R. (eds), Trust in Organizations. Frontiers of Theory and Research. (pp. 246–260). Sage Publications, California
Brosnan S. F., De Waal F. B. M. (2003) Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature 425:297–299
Carlsmith K. M., Darley J. M., Robinson P. H. (2002) Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. J. Personality Social Psychol. 83:284–299
Carpenter J. P. (2003) Is fairness used instrumentally? Evidence from sequential bargaining. J. Economic Psychol. 24:467–489
Cropanzano R., Ambrose M. L. (2001) Procedural and distributive justice are more similar than you think: A monistic perspective and a research agenda. In Greenberg J., Cropanzano R. (eds), Advances in Organizational Justice. (pp. 119–151) Stanford University Press, Stanford CA
Darley J. M., Pittman T. S. (2003) The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality Social Psychol. Rev. 7:324–336
Dawes R. M. (1980) Social dilemmas. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 31:169–193
De Cremer D. (2002) The self-relevant implications of distribution rules: When self-esteem and acceptance are influenced by violations of the equity rule. Social Justice Res. 15:327–339
De Cremer D., Snyder M., Dewitte S. (2001) The less I trust, the less I contribute (or not)? The effects of trust, accountability and self-monitoring in social dilemmas. European J. Social Psychol. 31:93–107
Deutsch M. (1975) Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice?. J. Social Issues 31:37–149
Deutsch M. (1985) Distributive Justice. Yale University Press, New Haven/London
Edney J. J. (1980) The commons problem: Alternative perspectives. Am. Psy. 35:131–150
Eek D., Biel A., Gärling T. (2001) Cooperation in asymmetric social dilemmas when equality is perceived as unfair. J.Appl. Social Psychol. 31:649–666
Goldberg J. H., Lerner J. S., Tetlock P. E. (1999) Rage and reason: The psychology of the intuitive prosecutor. Eur. J. Social Psychol. 29:781–795
Homans G. C. (1961) Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. Harcourt, Brace and World, New York
Hume, D., (1739/1992). Treatise of Human Nature. Buffalo: Prometheus Books
Komorita S. S., Parks C. D. (1994) Social Dilemmas. Brown & Benchmark, Dubuque, IA
Konow J. (2003) Which is the fairest one of all?: A positive analysis of justice theories. J. Economic Literature 41:1188–1239
Leventhal G. S., Karuza J. Jr, Fry W. R. (1980) Beyond fairness: A theory of allocation preferences. In Mikula (eds) ,Justice and Social Interaction. Springer-Verlag, New York
Lind E. A. (1997). Litigation and claiming in organizations: Antisocial behavior or quest for justice?. In Giacalone R.A., Greenberg J. (eds.), Antisocial Behavior In Organizations. (pp. 150–171). Sage, Thousand Oaks
Loewenstein G. F., Lerner J. S. (2002) The role of affect in decision making. In Davidson R. J., Scherer K. R., Goldsmith H. H. (eds), The Handbook of Affective Sciences. (pp. 619–642) University Press, Oxford, English
Loewenstein G. F., Thompson L., Bazerman M. H. (1989) Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. J. Personality Social Psychol. 57:426–441
Luce R. D., Raiffa H. (1957) Games and Decisions. John Wiley & Sons, New York
Lutz M. A. (2001) On the norm of equality. Int. J. Social Econ. 28:782–799
Marwell G., Ames R. E. (1979) Experiments on the provision of public goods, I: Resources, interest, group size, and the free-rider problem. Am. J. Sociol. 84:1335–1360
Messick, D.M. (1993). Equality as a decision heuristic. In Mellers B.A., Baron J. (Eds), Psychological Perspectives on Justice: Theory and Applications. Cambridge Series on Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, US, pp. 11–31
Messick D. M. (1999a) Alternative logics for decision making in social settings. J. Economic Behav. Organ. 39:11–28
Messick D. M., Schell T. (1992) Evidence for an equality heuristic in social decision making. Acta Psychologica 80:311–323
Messick D. M., Sentis K. P. (1983) Fairness, preference, and fairness biases. In Messick D. M., Cook K. S. (eds), Equity Theory: Psychological and Sociological Perspectives. Praeger, New York
Mikula G. (1980) On the role of justice in allocation decisions. In Mikula G. (eds), Justice and Social Interaction. (pp. 127–165) Springer-Verlag, New York
Mikula G., Scherer K. R., Athenstaedt U. (1998) The role of injustice in the elicitation of differential emotional reactions. Personality Social Psychol. Bull. 24:769–783
Mitchell G., Tetlock P. E., Mellers B. A., Ordóñez L. D. (1993) Judgments of social justice: Compromises between equality and efficiency. J. Personality Social Psychol. 65:629–639
Nesse R. M. (1990) Evolutionary explanations of emotions. Human Nature 1:261–289
Rabin M. (1993). Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. The Am. Economic Rev. 83:1281–1302
Rawls, J. (1971/1999). A theory of justice. Oxford: University Press
Ring P. S., Van de Ven A. H. (1994) Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Acad. Manage. Rev. 19:90–118
Roseman I. J. (1991). Appraisal determinants of discrete emotions. Cognition and Emotion 5:161–200
Sampson E. E. (1975) On justice as equality. J. Social Issues 31:45–64
Schelling T. C. (1980) The strategy of conflict. Harvard University, Cambridge
Scherer K. R. (1999). Appraisal theory. In Dalgleish T., Power M.J. (eds), Handbook of Cognition and Emotion. (pp. 637–663) John Wiley and Sons, Chichester
Shaver K. G. (1985) The attribution of blame; Causality, responsibility, and blameworthiness. Springer-Verlag, New York
Smith C. A., Ellsworth P. C. (1985) Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. J. Personality Social Psychol. 48:813–838
Smith H. J. (2002) Thinking about deservingness. Social Justice Res. 15:409–422
Stouten J., De Cremer D., Van Dijk E. (2005a) All is well that ends well, at least for proselfs: Emotional reactions to equality violation as a function of social value orientation. Eur. J.Social Psychol. 35:767–783
Stouten, J., De Cremer, D., & Van Dijk, E. (2005b). (In)tolerance for equality violation: When violations of equality in social dilemmas affect contribution decisions. Manuscript submitted for publication
Stouten, J., De Cremer, D., and Van Dijk, E. (2006). Violating equality in social dilemmas: Emotional and retributive reactions as a function of trust, attribution, and sincerity. Personality and Social Psychol. Bull., 32, 894–906
Tyler T. R., Belliveau M. A. (1995) Tradeoffs in justice principles: Definitions of fairness. In: Bunker B. B., Rubin J. Z. (Eds), Conflict, Cooperation, and Justice: Essays Inspired by the Work of Morton Deutsch The Jossey Bass Management Series and the Jossey Bass Conflict Resolution Series. (pp. 291–314) Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, San Francisco CA US
Tyler T., Dawes R. M. (1993) Fairness in groups: Comparing the self-interest and social identity perspectives. In Mellers B., Baron J. (Eds), Psychological Perspectives on Justice: Theory and Applications (pp. 87–108). Cambridge University Press, New York
Van Dijk E., Wilke H. (1993) Differential interests, equity, and public good provision. J. Experimental Social Psychol. 29:1–16
Van Dijk E., Wilke H. (1995) Coordination rules in asymmetric social dilemmas: A comparison between public good dilemmas and resource dilemmas. J. Experimental Social Psychol. 31:1–27
Van Dijk E., Wilke H. (2000) Decision-induced focusing in social dilemmas: Give-some, keep-some, take-some, and leave-some dilemmas. J. Personality Social Psychol. 78:92–104
Van Lange P. A. M. (1999) The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. J. Personality Social Psychol. 77:337–349
Weiss H. M., Suckow K., Cropanzano R. (1999) Effects of justice conditions on discrete emotions. J. Appl. Psychol. 84:786–794
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The write-up of this paper was partly supported by GOA/05/04 from the Research Fund of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. The research and write-up was supported by a fellowship of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO, Grant No. 016.005.019), awarded to the second author.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stouten, J., De Cremer, D. & van Dijk, E. Managing Equality in Social Dilemmas: Emotional and Retributive Implications. Soc Just Res 20, 53–67 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0032-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0032-1