IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20240017.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Born That Way: Beliefs about Genetics’ Importance and Redistribution Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Pogliano

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

Abstract

Meritocratic fairness justifies inequality when it stems from performance. Yet performance is influenced by one’s genetics. I investigate whether individuals’ redistribution preferences are affected by their beliefs about genetics’ role in generating performance inequality. In an incentivized online experiment, impartial spectators can redistribute the earnings that two workers earned based on their performance in a mathematical task. Across two treatments, I modify beliefs about the importance of genetics in performing in the task by means of an information provision treatment. I find that spectators for whom genetics is framed to play a larger role compensate the worse performer more, compared to those for whom genetics is framed to play a smaller role. When comparing the spectators’ decisions before and after the provision of information, I find that about 23% of spectators compensate the worse performer more whereas the majority does not change their allocation. This study highlights that individuals’ redistribution preferences are affected by their beliefs about genetics’ role in generating performance inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Pogliano, 2024. "Born That Way: Beliefs about Genetics’ Importance and Redistribution Preferences," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 24-017/I, Tinbergen Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20240017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/24017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Hufe & Andreas Peichl, 2020. "Beyond Equal Rights: Equality of Opportunity in Political Participation," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 66(3), pages 477-511, September.
    2. Sang Yoon (Tim) Lee & Ananth Seshadri, 2018. "Economic Policy and Equality of Opportunity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(612), pages 114-151, July.
    3. Matthew S. Lebowitz & Kathryn Tabb & Paul S. Appelbaum, 2019. "Asymmetrical genetic attributions for prosocial versus antisocial behaviour," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(9), pages 940-949, September.
    4. Ingvild Almås & Alexander W. Cappelen & Bertil Tungodden, 2020. "Cutthroat Capitalism versus Cuddly Socialism: Are Americans More Meritocratic and Efficiency-Seeking than Scandinavians?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(5), pages 1753-1788.
    5. Ruben Durante & Louis Putterman & Joël Weele, 2014. "Preferences For Redistribution And Perception Of Fairness: An Experimental Study," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1059-1086, August.
    6. Nicholas W Papageorge & Kevin Thom, 2020. "Genes, Education, and Labor Market Outcomes: Evidence from the Health and Retirement Study," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 1351-1399.
    7. Alexander W. Cappelen & James Konow & Erik ?. S?rensen & Bertil Tungodden, 2013. "Just Luck: An Experimental Study of Risk-Taking and Fairness," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(4), pages 1398-1413, June.
    8. Nicolas L. Bottan & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2022. "Choosing Your Pond: Location Choices and Relative Income," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(5), pages 1010-1027, December.
    9. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2022. "How to Run Surveys: A Guide to Creating Your Own Identifying Variation and Revealing the Invisible," NBER Working Papers 30527, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Sørensen, Erik Ø. & Tungodden, Bertil, 2010. "Responsibility for what? Fairness and individual responsibility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 429-441, April.
    11. Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos, 2005. "Fairness and Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 960-980, September.
    12. Preuss, Marcel & Reyes, Germán & Somerville, Jason & Wu, Joy, 2022. "Inequality of Opportunity and Income Redistribution," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264138, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Sonja Settele, 2022. "How Do Beliefs about the Gender Wage Gap Affect the Demand for Public Policy?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 475-508, May.
    14. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    15. Hyeokmoon Kweon & Casper A.P. Burik & Richard Karlsson Linner & Ronald de Vlaming & Aysu Okbay & Daphne Martschenko & Kathryn Paige Harden & Thomas A. DiPrete & Philipp D. Koellinger, 2020. "Genetic Fortune: Winning or Losing Education, Income, and Health," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 20-053/V, Tinbergen Institute, revised 01 Dec 2020.
    16. Alberto Alesina & Stefanie Stantcheva & Edoardo Teso, 2018. "Intergenerational Mobility and Preferences for Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 521-554, February.
    17. Alain Trannoy, 2019. "Talent, equality of opportunity and optimal non-linear income tax," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 17(1), pages 5-28, March.
    18. Akbaş, Merve & Ariely, Dan & Yuksel, Sevgi, 2019. "When is inequality fair? An experiment on the effect of procedural justice and agency," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 114-127.
    19. Alexander W Cappelen & Karl Ove Moene & Siv-Elisabeth Skjelbred & Bertil Tungodden, 2023. "The Merit Primacy Effect," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 133(651), pages 951-970.
      • Alexander Cappelen & Karl Ove Moene & Siv-Elisabeth Skjelbred & Bertil Tungodden, 2017. "The Merit Primacy Effect," Working Papers 2017-047, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    20. K. Paige Harden & Philipp D. Koellinger, 2020. "Using genetics for social science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 567-576, June.
    21. Christine L Exley & Judd B Kessler, 2022. "The Gender Gap in Self-Promotion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 137(3), pages 1345-1381.
    22. Casper A.P. Burik & Hyeokmoon Kweon & Philipp D. Koellinger, 2021. "Disparities in socio-economic status and BMI in the UK are partly due to genetic and environmental luck," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-035/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    23. Sonja Settele, 2022. "How Do Beliefs About the Gender Wage Gap Affect the Demand for Public Policy?," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 179, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    24. Lippert-Rasmussen, Kasper, 2004. "Are Some Inequalities more Unequal than Others? Nature, Nurture and Equality," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 193-219, July.
    25. Lu Dong & Lingo Huang & Jaimie W Lien, 2022. ""They Never Had a Chance": Unequal Opportunities and Fair Redistributions," Discussion Papers 2022-11, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Alexander Cappelen & Yiming Liu & Hedda Nielsen & Bertil Tungodden, 2024. "Fairness in a Society of Unequal Opportunities," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 506, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    2. David Hope & Julian Limberg & Nina Weber, 2023. "Technological Change, Task Complexity, and Preferences for Redistribution," ifo Working Paper Series 398, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    3. Marcel Preuss & Germán Reyes & Jason Somerville & Joy Wu, 2023. "Inequality of Opportunity and Income Redistribution," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0309, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    4. Marcel Preuss & Germán Reyes & Jason Somerville & Joy Wu, 2023. "Inequality of Opportunity and Income Redistribution," CESifo Working Paper Series 10383, CESifo.
    5. Yuchen Huang & Zhexun Mo, 2022. "Meritocracy as a WEIRD Phenomenon: Fairness Reasoning and Redistributive Preferences across the World," Working Papers halshs-04129246, HAL.
    6. Yuchen Huang & Zhexun Mo, 2022. "Meritocracy as a WEIRD Phenomenon: Fairness Reasoning and Redistributive Preferences across the World," World Inequality Lab Working Papers halshs-04129246, HAL.
    7. Peter Andre, 2021. "Shallow Meritocracy: An Experiment on Fairness Views," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 115, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    8. Lasse J. Jessen & Sebastian Koehne & Patrick Nüß & Jens Ruhose, 2024. "Socioeconomic Inequality in Life Expectancy: Perception and Policy Demand," CESifo Working Paper Series 10940, CESifo.
    9. Belguise, Margot & Huang, Yuchen & Mo, Zhexun, 2023. "Non-Meritocrats or Conformist Meritocrats? A Redistribution Experiment in China and France," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2308, CEPREMAP.
    10. Margot Belguise & Yuchen Huang & Zhexun Mo, 2024. "Non-meritocrats or choice-reluctant meritocrats? A redistribution experiment in China and France," Discussion Papers 2024-05, Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP).
    11. Cohn, Alain & Jessen, Lasse J. & Klašnja, Marko & Smeets, Paul, 2023. "Wealthy Americans and redistribution: The role of fairness preferences," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 225(C).
    12. Schwaiger, Rene & Huber, Jürgen & Kirchler, Michael & Kleinlercher, Daniel & Weitzel, Utz, 2022. "Unequal opportunities, social groups, and redistribution: Evidence from Germany," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    13. Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan & Boon Han Koh, 2022. "By chance or by choice? Biased attribution of others’ outcomes when social preferences matter," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 413-443, April.
    14. Michele Bernasconi & Enrico Longo & Valeria Maggian, 2023. "When merit breeds luck (or not): an experimental study on distributive justice," Working Papers 2023:02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    15. Grimalda, Gianluca & Farina, Francesco & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2018. "Preferences for redistribution in the US, Italy, Norway: An experiment study," Kiel Working Papers 2099, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    16. Marcelo Bérgolo & Gabriel Burdín & Santiago Burone & Mauricio de Rosa & Matías Giaccobasso & Martín Leites, 2020. "Dissecting Inequality-Averse Preferences," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 20-19, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    17. Fehr, Dietmar & Müller, Daniel & Preuss, Marcel, 2024. "Social mobility perceptions and inequality acceptance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 366-384.
    18. Jeffrey, Karen & Matakos, Konstantinos, 2024. "Automation anxiety, fairness perceptions, and redistribution: Past experiences condition the response to future job loss," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 174-190.
    19. Marcel Preuss & Germ'an Reyes & Jason Somerville & Joy Wu, 2022. "Inequality of Opportunity and Income Redistribution," Papers 2209.00534, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Meritocracy; Genetics; Beliefs; Fairness; Inequality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies

    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:tin:wpaper:20240017. 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: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.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.