|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
This study investigates how experiencing unequal opportunities firsthand influences redistributive preferences and beliefs about fairness. Participants are randomly assigned to perform either an easy or a hard version of an effort task that appears identical across conditions but subtly differs in difficulty, mimicking hidden structural barriers. After this experience, all participants act as impartial spectators and decide how to redistribute income between two agents who faced unequal opportunities in the same task. By comparing redistribution choices and belief updating across those who experienced advantage (easy task) and disadvantage (hard task), we test whether direct exposure to inequality increases fairness-driven redistribution, shifts attributions from effort to circumstance, and enhances empathy toward disadvantaged individuals. Our design isolates the experiential channel—separate from self-interest or outcome bias—and provides novel evidence on how lived experience of unequal opportunities shapes moral reasoning and support for redistribution.
|
After
This study investigates how experiencing unequal opportunities firsthand influences redistributive preferences and beliefs about fairness. Participants are randomly assigned to perform either an easy or a hard version of an effort task that appears identical across conditions but subtly differs in difficulty, mimicking hidden structural barriers. After this experience, all participants act as impartial spectators and decide how to redistribute income between two agents who faced unequal opportunities in the same task. By comparing redistribution choices and belief updating across those who experienced advantage (easy task) and disadvantage (hard task), we test whether direct exposure to inequality increases fairness-driven redistribution, shifts attributions from effort to circumstance, and enhances empathy toward disadvantaged individuals. Our design isolates the experiential channel—separate from self-interest or outcome bias—and provides novel evidence on how lived experience of unequal opportunities shapes moral reasoning and support for redistribution.
13-04-2026: We add three treatment arms—MIXED EXPERIENCE, REPORTS, and STATISTICS—to compare experiential and informational channels. This extension tests whether exposure to information can replicate the effects of direct experience.
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
December 01, 2025 11:29 AM
|
After
April 13, 2026 04:40 AM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
Participants are randomly assigned to one of two conditions that differ only in the difficulty of an effort task. In both conditions, the task appears identical but differs subtly in cognitive difficulty, thereby simulating hidden structural barriers.
-Treatment group (HARD version): Participants complete a more demanding version of the counting task, in which identifying the target character is made harder through visual decoys and less favorable character size.
-Control group (EASY version): Participants complete an easier version of the same counting task, where the target character is easier to detect.
The key intervention is the firsthand experience of unequal opportunities. Both groups later make redistribution decisions as impartial spectators between two agents—one who performed the easy task and one who performed the hard task. Because all participants make the same decisions after experiencing either advantage or disadvantage, differences in redistribution behavior and fairness beliefs can be causally attributed to the experiential manipulation of opportunity inequality.
|
After
Participants are randomly assigned to one of two conditions that differ only in the difficulty of an effort task. In both conditions, the task appears identical but differs subtly in cognitive difficulty, thereby simulating hidden structural barriers.
-Treatment group (HARD version): Participants complete a more demanding version of the counting task, in which identifying the target character is made harder through visual decoys and less favorable character size.
-Control group (EASY version): Participants complete an easier version of the same counting task, where the target character is easier to detect.
The key intervention is the firsthand experience of unequal opportunities. Both groups later make redistribution decisions as impartial spectators between two agents—one who performed the easy task and one who performed the hard task. Because all participants make the same decisions after experiencing either advantage or disadvantage, differences in redistribution behavior and fairness beliefs can be causally attributed to the experiential manipulation of opportunity inequality.
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
Participants are randomly assigned to perform either an easy or a hard version of a short counting task that appears identical across conditions but subtly differs in difficulty, mimicking hidden structural barriers. This manipulation creates two experiential conditions: one of advantage and one of disadvantage.
After completing the task, all participants act as impartial spectators in redistribution decisions between two agents—one who faced the easy version and one who faced the hard version. These decisions are partly incentivized and probabilistically consequential.
The experiment measures how prior experience with advantage or disadvantage affects (i) redistributive choices toward disadvantaged agents, (ii) beliefs about the role of effort versus circumstance, and (iii) emotions and empathy. The design thus isolates how the experience of unequal opportunities, independent of self-interest, shapes fairness judgments and support for redistribution.
|
After
Participants are randomly assigned to perform either an easy or a hard version of a short counting task that appears identical across conditions but subtly differs in difficulty, mimicking hidden structural barriers. This manipulation creates two experiential conditions: one of advantage and one of disadvantage.
After completing the task, all participants act as impartial spectators in redistribution decisions between two agents—one who faced the easy version and one who faced the hard version. These decisions are partly incentivized and probabilistically consequential.
The experiment measures how prior experience with advantage or disadvantage affects (i) redistributive choices toward disadvantaged agents, (ii) beliefs about the role of effort versus circumstance, and (iii) emotions and empathy. The design thus isolates how the experience of unequal opportunities, independent of self-interest, shapes fairness judgments and support for redistribution.
13-04-2026: We introduce three additional treatment arms—MIXED EXPERIENCE, REPORTS, and STATISTICS—to disentangle the roles of direct experience, narrative evidence, and statistical information.
|
|
Field
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
|
Before
325
|
After
325
13-04-2026: 180 (for extension treatments)
|