IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/huj/dispap/dp479.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Manipulating Allocation Justice: How Framing Effects can Increase the Prevalence of the Talmudic Division Principle "Shnaim Ohazin"

Author

Listed:
  • Yevgeni Berzak
  • Michael Fink

Abstract

In the role of judges in bankruptcy problems, people may prescribe various just divisions of the available goods to claimants who have rights for them. Two widespread division rules are equality and proportionality. A less known rule is the Talmudic "Shnaim Ohazin" principle, whose basic rationale is applying an equal division only to that part of the goods which is genuinely under dispute. This paper demonstrates that the ratio of subjects that prefer the "Shnaim Ohazin" principle over equality and proportionality can be increased by a simple framing manipulation. These results suggest that framing effects might be a prevalent factor in the realm of distributive justice.

Suggested Citation

  • Yevgeni Berzak & Michael Fink, 2008. "Manipulating Allocation Justice: How Framing Effects can Increase the Prevalence of the Talmudic Division Principle "Shnaim Ohazin"," Discussion Paper Series dp479, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    • Handle: RePEc:huj:dispap:dp479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ratio.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/publications/dp479.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aumann, Robert J. & Maschler, Michael, 1985. "Game theoretic analysis of a bankruptcy problem from the Talmud," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 195-213, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Thomson, William, 2015. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: An update," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 41-59.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emin Karagözoğlu, 2014. "A noncooperative approach to bankruptcy problems with an endogenous estate," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 217(1), pages 299-318, June.
    2. William Thomson, 2007. "On the existence of consistent rules to adjudicate conflicting claims: a constructive geometric approach," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 11(3), pages 225-251, November.
    3. Gabrielle Demange & Michel L. Balinski, 1989. "An Axiomatic Approach to Proportionality between Matrices," Post-Print halshs-00670952, HAL.
    4. Ketelaars, Martijn & Borm, Peter & Herings, P.J.J., 2023. "Duality in Financial Networks," Other publications TiSEM 26750293-9599-4e05-9ae1-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    6. Peter Knudsen & Lars Østerdal, 2012. "Merging and splitting in cooperative games: some (im)possibility results," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 41(4), pages 763-774, November.
    7. Juan Moreno-Ternero & Antonio Villar, 2006. "The TAL-Family of Rules for Bankruptcy Problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(2), pages 231-249, October.
    8. Cano Berlanga, Sebastian & Giménez Gómez, José M. (José Manuel) & Vilella Bach, Misericòrdia, 2015. "Enjoying cooperative games: The R package GameTheory," Working Papers 2072/247653, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    9. Juarez, Ruben & Ko, Chiu Yu & Xue, Jingyi, 2018. "Sharing sequential values in a network," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 734-779.
    10. Wulf Gaertner & Richard Bradley & Yongsheng Xu & Lars Schwettmann, 2019. "Against the proportionality principle: Experimental findings on bargaining over losses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Vijay V. Vazirani, 2024. "The Assignment Game: New Mechanisms for Equitable Core Imputations," Papers 2402.11437, arXiv.org.
    12. Erik Ansink & Hans-Peter Weikard, 2012. "Sequential sharing rules for river sharing problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(2), pages 187-210, February.
    13. Jingyi Xue, 2018. "Fair division with uncertain needs," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(1), pages 105-136, June.
    14. Lahiri, Somdeb, 2001. "Axiomatic characterizations of the CEA solution for rationing problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 162-170, May.
    15. Giulia Cesari & Roberto Lucchetti & Stefano Moretti, 2017. "Generalized additive games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 46(4), pages 919-939, November.
    16. Padilla Tinoco, Silvia Valeria & Creemers, Stefan & Boute, Robert N., 2017. "Collaborative shipping under different cost-sharing agreements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 263(3), pages 827-837.
    17. Sylvain Béal & Stéphane Gonzalez & Philippe Solal & Peter Sudhölter, 2023. "Axiomatic characterizations of the core without consistency," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(3), pages 687-701, September.
    18. Dutta, Bhaskar & Ehlers, Lars & Kar, Anirban, 2010. "Externalities, potential, value and consistency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(6), pages 2380-2411, November.
    19. José Alcalde & Josep E. Peris, 2022. "Equalizing solutions for bankruptcy problems revisited," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 45(2), pages 481-502, December.
    20. Pálvölgyi, Dénes & Peters, Hans & Vermeulen, Dries, 2014. "A strategic approach to multiple estate division problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 135-152.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:huj:dispap:dp479. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Michael Simkin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crihuil.html .

    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.