The distributional preferences of an elite

Science

Volumn 349, Issue 6254, 2015, Pages

  Fisman, Raymond ^a   Jakiela, Pamela ^b   Kariv, Shachar ^c   Markovits, Daniel ^d  

^a Boston University   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EDUCATION; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION; RESEARCH INSTITUTION; STUDENT; TRADE-OFF;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BUDGET; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ECONOMIC INEQUALITY; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; EXTERNAL VALIDITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LAW; MALE; NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION; NORMAL HUMAN; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY; SOCIETY; STUDENT; UNITED STATES; ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; ATTITUDE; BEHAVIOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EMPLOYMENT; JURISPRUDENCE; PSYCHOLOGY; PUBLIC OPINION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

BURKINA FASO; UNITED STATES; YALE;

ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL; ADULT; ATTITUDE; CAREER CHOICE; EMPLOYMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; JURISPRUDENCE; ORGANIZATIONS, NONPROFIT; POWER (PSYCHOLOGY); PUBLIC OPINION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIAL JUSTICE; STUDENTS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84942849174     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.aab0096     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. A. M. Okun, Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff (Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, 1975).
2. J. Andreoni, J. Miller, Giving according to GARP: An experimental test of the consistency of preferences for altruism. Econometrica 70, 737-753 (2002). doi: 10.1111/1468- 0262.00302.
3. R. Fisman, S. Kariv, D. Markovits, Individual preferences for giving. Am. Econ. Rev. 97, 1858-1876 (2007). doi: 10.1257/aer.97.5.1858.
4. R. Fisman, P. Jakiela, S. Kariv, The distributional preferences of Americans. National Bureau of Economic Research 20145 (2014); available at www.nber.org/papers/w20145.
5. R. Fisman, P. Jakiela, S. Kariv, How did distributional preferences change during the great recession? J. Public Econ. 128, 84-95 (2015). doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2015.06.001.
6. S. N. Afriat, The construction of utility functions from expenditure data. Int. Econ. Rev. 8, 67-77 (1967). doi: 10.2307/2525382.
7. H. R. Varian, The nonparametric approach to demand analysis. Econometrica 50, 945-972 (1982). doi: 10.2307/1912771.
8. H. R. Varian, Non-parametric tests of consumer behavior. Rev. Econ. Stud. 50, 99-110 (1983). doi: 10.2307/2296957.
9. S. N. Afriat, Effciency estimates of production functions. Int. Econ. Rev. 13, 568-598 (1972). doi: 10.2307/2525845.
10. J. G. Altonji, T. E. Elder, C. R. Taber, Selection on observed and unobserved variables: Assessing the effectiveness of Catholic schools. J. Polit. Econ. 113, 151-184 (2005). doi: 10.1086/426036.
11. M. Gilens, B. I. Page, Testing theories of American politics: Elites, interest groups, and average citizens. Perspect. Polit. 12, 564-581 (2014). doi: 10.1017/S1537592714001595.
12. E. Saez, S. Stancheva, Generalized social marginal welfare weights for optimal tax theory. National Bureau of Economic Research 18835 (2013); available at www.nber.org/papers/w18835.
13. I. Kuziemko, M. I. Norton, E. Saez, S. Stancheva, How elastic are preferences for redistribution? Evidence from randomized survey experiments. National Bureau of Economic Research 18865 (2013); available at www.nber.org/papers/w18865.
14. P. K. Piff, Wealth and the inflated self: Class, entitlement, and narcissism. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 40, 34-43 (2014). doi: 10.1177/0146167213501699; pmid: 23963971.
15. S. Choi, R. Fisman, D. Gale, S. Kariv, Revealing preferences graphically: An old method gets a new toolkit. Am. Econ. Rev. 97, 153-158 (2007). doi: 10.1257/aer.97.2.153.
16. S. G. Bronars, The power of nonparametric tests of preference maximization. Econometrica 55, 693-698 (1987). doi: 10.2307/1913608.
17. G. S. Becker, Irrational behavior and economic theory. J. Polit. Econ. 70, 1-13 (1962). doi: 10.1086/258584.