Affect and fairness in economics

Social Justice Research

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 35-52

  Van Winden, Frans ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Affect; Economics; Experiments; Fairness

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249877433     PISSN: 08857466     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11211-007-0029-9     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In Berkowitz, L. (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York.
2. Anderson, S., Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., and Damasio, A. R. (1999). Impairment of social and moral behavior related to early damage in human prefrontal cortex. Nat Neurosci, 2, 1032-1037.
3. Ashby, F., Isen, A., and Turken, U. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition. Psychol. Rev., 106, 529-550.
4. Ben-Shakhar G., Bernstein G., Hopfensitz A., and van Winden F. (2004). Reciprocity and emotions: arousal, self-reports, and expectations, CREED working paper, University of Amsterdam.
5. Binmore, K. (1994). Playing Fair : Game Theory and the Social Contract, Vol. 1, Cambridge Mass: MIT Press.
6. Bolton, G., and Ockenfels, A. (2000). A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Am. Econ. Rev., 90, 166-193.
7. Bosman, R., and van Winden, F. (2002). Emotional hazard in a power-to-take experiment. Econ. J., 112, 147-169.
8. Bosman, R., Sutter, M., and van Winden, F. (2005). The impact of real effort and emotions in the power-to-take game. J. Econ. Psychol., 26, 407-429.
9. Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral Game Theory, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
10. Camerer, C., Loewenstein, G. and Rabin, M. (eds) (2004). Advances in Behavioral Economics, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
11. Conlisk, J. (1996). Why bounded rationality?. J. Econ. Lit., 34, 669-700.
12. Cremer, D., and Dijk, E. (2005). When and why leaders put themselves first: Leader behaviour in resource allocations as a function of feeling entitled. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 35, 553-563.
13. Falk, A., Fehr, E., and Fischbacher, U. (2005). Driving forces behind informal sanctions. Econometrica, 73, 2017-2030.
14. Falk, A., and Fischbacher, U. (2006). A theory of reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 54, 293-315.
15. Fehr, E., and Fischbacher, U. (2002). Why social preferences matter - the impact of non-selfish motives on competition, cooperation and incentives. Econ. J., 112, 1-33.
16. Fehr, E., and Schmidt, K. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly J. Econ., 114, 817-868.
17. Fehr, E., and Schmidt, K. (2002). Theories of fairness and reciprocity - evidence and economic applications. In Dewatripont, M., Hansen, I. and Turnovsky, S. (eds.), Advances in Economics and Econometrics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
18. Forgas, J. P. (1995). Mood and judgement: The Affect Infusion Model (AIM). Psychol. Bull., 117, 39-66.
19. Frank, R. H. (1988). Passions within Reason, New York: Norton.
20. Frijda, N. (1986). The Emotions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence, New York: Bantam.
22. Handgraaf, M. J. J., van Dijk, E., and De Cremer, D. (2003). Social utility in ultimatum bargaining. Soc. Justice Res., 16, 263-283.
23. Hopfensitz A., and Reuben E. (2005). The importance of emotions for the effectiveness of social punishment, CREED working paper, University of Amsterdam.
24. Kolm, S. C. (1996). Modern Theories of Justice, Cambridge Mass: MIT Press.
25. Kruglanski, A. W., Thompson, E. P., Higgins, E. T., Atash, M. N., Pierro, A., and Shah, J. Y. (2000). To "do the right thing" or to "just do it": Locomotion and assessment as distinct self-regulatory imperatives. J. Person. Soc. Psychol., 79, 793-815.
26. LeDoux, J. (1998). The Emotional Brain, New York: Touchstone.
27. Lerner, J., and Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. J. Person. Soc. Psychol., 81, 146-159.
28. Loewenstein, G. F., and Thompson Bazerman, L. M. H. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. J. Person. Soc. Psychol., 57, 426-441.
29. Messick, D. M., and Sentis, K. P. (1985). Estimating social and non-social utility functions from ordinal data. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 15, 389-399.
30. Moll, J., de Oliveira-Souza, R., Eslinger, P. J., Bramati, I. E., Mourao-Miranda, J., Andreiuolo, P. A., and Pessoa, L. (2002). The neural correlates of moral sensitivity: A functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation of basic and moral emotions. J. Neurosci., 22, 2730-2736.
31. Ortony, A., Clore, L., and Collins, A. (1988). The Cognitive Structure of Emotions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Pillutla, M. M., and Murnighan, J. K. (1996). Unfairness, anger, and spite: emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organ. Behav. Human Dec. Proce., 68, 208-224.
33. Rabin, M. (1993). Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. Am. Econ. Rev., 83, 1281-1302.
34. Reuben E., and van Winden F. (2004). Reciprocity and emotions when reciprocators know each other, CREED working paper, University of Amsterdam.
35. Reuben E., and van Winden F. (2005). Negative reciprocity and the interaction of emotions and fairness norms, CREED working paper, University of Amsterdam.
36. Sanfey, A., Rilling, J., Aronson, J., Nystrom, L., and Cohen, J. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision making in the ultimatum game. Science, 300, 1755-1758.
37. Sen, A. (1990). On Ethics & Economics, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
38. Spinoza (1979), Ethica, Wereldbibliotheek, Amsterdam (originally published as part of the Opera Posthuma, 1677).
39. Tangney, J. P., and Dearing, R. L. (2002). Shame and Guilt, New York: Guilford.
40. van Winden, F. (2001). Emotional hazard exemplified by taxation-induced anger. Kyklos, 54, 491-506.
41. Walster, E., Walster, G. W., and Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and Research, Boston: Allyn & Bacon.