Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-t27h7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-16T23:34:12.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Empirical Social Choice: Questionnaire-Experimental Studies on Distributive Justice, Wulf Gaertner and Erik Schokkaert. Cambridge University Press, 2012, 228 pages.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2012

Joshua Rust
Joshua Rust*
Affiliation:
Stetson University, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , November 2012 , pp. 443 - 450
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Amiel, Y., Cowell, F.A. & Gaertner, W. 2009. To be or not to be involved: a questionnaire-experimental view on Harsanyi's utilitarian ethics. Social Choice and Welfare 32: 253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckman, S., Formby, J., Smith, J. & Zheng, B. 2002. Envy, malice and Pareto efficiency: an experimental examination. Social Choice and Welfare 19: 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinberg, J. 1970. Justice and personal desert. In Doing and Deserving. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Frohlich, N., Oppenheimer, J. & Eavey, C. 1987. Choices of principles of distributive justice in experimental groups. American Journal of Political Science 31: 606–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaertner, W. 1992. Distributive judgments. In Social Choice and Bargaining Perspectives on Distributive Justice, ed. Gaertner, W. and Klemisch-Ahlert, M., Chapter 2. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaertner, W. & Schwettmann, L. 2007. Equity, responsibility and the cultural dimension. Economica 74: 627–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gamliel, E. & Peer, E. 2006. Positive versus negative framing affects justice judgments. Social Justice Research 19: 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R. 1985. The priority of needs. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45: 615–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrero, C., Moreno-Ternero, J. & Ponti, G. 2010. On the adjudication of conflicting claims: an experimental study. Social Choice and Welfare 34: 145–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knobe, J. & Nichols, S. 2008. Experimental Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konow, J. 1996. A positive theory of economic fairness. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 31: 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konow, J. 2001. Fair and square: the four sides of distributive justice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 46: 137–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindholm, L., Emmelin, M. & Rosen, M. 1997. Health maximization rejected: the view of Swedish politicians. European Journal of Public Health 7: 405–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, J. 2005. A Theory of Justice: Original Edition. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scanlon, T.M. 1975. Preference and urgency. Journal of Philosophy 72: 655–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. 1980. Equality of what? In The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, ed. McMurrin, S., 353–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yaari, M. & Bar-Hillel, M. 1984. On dividing justly. Social Choice and Welfare 1: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar