Non-universal Universalists? Group Loyalty in a Redistribution Context.
Most recent version
Abstract: This paper studies how individuals make decisions about redistribution between in- and out-group members: a situation where moral considerations about group loyalty and fairness coincide. In a representative two-wave online survey of 4,060 Germans, respondents were randomly assigned (within- and between-subject) to two versions of a third-party spectator game. One version elicits respondent’s baseline level of groupishness and universalism in a simple allocation setting, the other one adopts a redistribution context. I found that respondents were on average significantly less in-group biased and more universalist in the redistribution context (43% versus 15% full universalism). Consistent with trade-offs between group loyalty and fairness, this difference was related to more engagement with meritocratic and egalitarian) impartial fairness ideals when making decisions about redistribution. I use the within-subject gap in universalism to derive a typology, reflecting how people differ with respect to this trade-off and capturing the dominance of group loyalty as a moral principle. Particularists (∼37%) were considerably in-group biased in both games, while universalists (∼14%) always treated in- and out-group members identically. Malleable particularists (∼33%) were generally groupish but fully discarded these tendencies in a redistribution context. The typology maps onto respondent’s social and political preferences, with implications for public policy communication about various forms of inter-group transfers.
Conferences and Workshops: Thurgau Experimental Economics Meeting (theem) 2026, In_equality Conference 2026, Behavioral Measurement Conference 2026, NCBEE 2026, BEE workshop 2026 "Inequality and Discrimination"
Inequality aversion and International Distribution Preferences: The Case of the Covid-19 Vaccine Rollout (with Janina Isabel Steinert and Tim Buethe) [R&R The Journal of Economic Inequality]
Abstract: This paper examines how inequality aversion shapes public support of international redistributive policies. We investigate this question in the context of the global allocation of vaccines during the Covid-19 pandemic, using online survey data from incentivized behavioral games and a discrete choice experiment conducted with German citizens in April 2021 (N=2,402). We distinguish between aversion to advantageous inequality (others worse off, the ’guilt’ parameter) and aversion to disadvantageous inequality (others better off, the ’envy’ parameter). These two forms of inequality aversion shape German citizens’ attitudes towards the cross-country allocation of resources in distinct ways: While higher levels of the guilt parameter significantly increase respondents’ likelihood to prioritize an equitable vaccine allocation, the envy parameter is associated with lower support thereof. These findings suggest that inequality aversion matters for citizens’ support of redistribution beyond the national level and emphasize that distinguishing between both forms of inequality aversion is crucial.
Spousal Trust Alignment and Strategic Cooperation in the Household (with Janina Isabel Steinert and Sebastian Vollmer)
[R&R Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization]
Abstract: How do trust relations shape the degree and success of strategic cooperation in the household? This paper introduces the alignment of trust and trustworthiness as an indicator for the accuracy of spouses’ perceptions about cooperative household behaviors and, consequently, of whether strategic cooperation can be successful. We first theoretically outline these considerations using a simple theoretical framework and then investigate them empirically: We implemented a binary trust game with 351 Indian couples, which revealed substantial variation in trust alignment, distinguishing between no alignment (48.43%), positive alignment (trust met trustworthiness; 32.19%) and negative alignment (mistrust met lack of trustworthiness; 19.37%). We then utilize additional data from a randomized controlled trial to further explore how trust alignment affects spouses’ strategic cooperation in the context of household savings. We find that the provision of a cooperatively or uncooperatively usable saving device significantly increased the wives’ savings only in households where trust game decisions were aligned. Under positive alignment, higher savings were achieved through wives’ increased involvement in household decisions. Under negative alignment, wives were able to effectively use the device to conceal money to realize higher savings. Our findings suggest that household-based interventions should consider spouses’ (mis)perceptions about household cooperation.
Gender Norm Perceptions and Parental Son Preference (with V.S. Pillai) [Draft writing stage]
Risk and Norm Perceptions around Women’s Public Safety (with V.S. Pillai) [Draft writing stage]
The Impact of Communicating Scientific Uncertainty on Public Trust (with J.I. Steinert, N. Sudharsanan, J. Dowd, and A. Venkataramani, T. Buethe) [Draft coming soon]
Compliance in the public versus the private realm: Economic preferences, institutional trust and COVID‐19 health behaviors (with Janina Isabel Steinert and Tim Buethe)
Health Economics, 2024, 33(5), 1055-1119.
Assessing the perceived effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions on SARS-Cov-2 transmission risk: an experimental study in Europe (with Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri, Janina Isabel Steinert, Matteo M. Galizzi, Barbara Fasolo, Ploutarchos Kourtidis, Tim Buethe and George Gaskell)
Scientific Reports, 2024, 14, 4857.
How to reduce Vaccine Hesitancy? The Relevance of Evidence and its Communicator (with Jens Eger and Lennart Kaplan)
Vaccine, 2023, 41(27), 3964-3975.
COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Eight European Countries: Prevalence, Determinants and Heterogeneity (with Janina Isabel Steinert, Hannah Prince, Barbara Fasolo, Matteo M. Galizzi, Tim Buethe and Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri)
Science Advances, 2022, 8(17), eabm9825.
How Should COVID-19 Vaccines be Distributed between the Global North and South? A Discrete Choice Experiment in Six European Countries (with Janina Isabel Steinert, Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri and Tim Buethe)
eLife, 2022, 11, e79819.
Psychological and Behavioural Aspects of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Systematic Evidence and Takeaways (with Ploutarchos Kourtidis, Janina Isabel Steinert, Tim Buethe, Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri, Barbara Fasolo, Matteo M. Galizzi). In: Behavioural Economics and Policy for Pandemics: Insights from Responses to COVID-19 (edited by Joan Costa-Font and Matteo M. Galizzi)
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2024, S.191-219.