IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v3y2008i5p417-424_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Liberal-conservative differences in inclusion-exclusion strategy choice

Author

Listed:
  • Jasper, John D.
  • Ansted, Daniel

Abstract

Inclusion and exclusion strategies for allocation of scarce goods involve different processes. The conditions under which one strategy is chosen in favor of the other, however, have not been fully explicated. In the present study, decision makers chose a single strategy after reading through descriptions of 16 potential organ recipients; they then narrowed the list of transplant candidates. Most liberals chose to use exclusion under conditions of abundance and inclusion under scarcity. In contrast, conservatives preferred an inclusion strategy under abundance and exclusion (though not significantly) under scarcity. Theoretical implications as well as ongoing work in inclusion-exclusion strategy choice, political ideology, and distributive justice are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jasper, John D. & Ansted, Daniel, 2008. "Liberal-conservative differences in inclusion-exclusion strategy choice," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(5), pages 417-424, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:5:p:417-424_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500000449/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mehmet Özer Demir & Biagio Simonetti & Murat Alper Başaran & Sezgin Irmak, 2021. "Voter Classification Based on Susceptibility to Persuasive Strategies: A Machine Learning Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 355-370, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i:5:p:417-424_7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.