Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 5 - When Material Self-interest Trumps Fairness Reasoning

  • Charlotte Cavaillé, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
  • Book:
    Fair Enough?
    Published online:
    07 September 2023
    Print publication:
    21 September 2023, pp 101-124

  • Summary

    Chapter 5 examines the conditions under which people are informed of the pocketbook consequences of a given redistributive policy and act according to their material self-interest in spite of what fairness reasoning prescribes. When stakes are transparent and high, people will disregard their fairness concerns and take the self-interested position instead. This mechanism has the most consequences for policy attitudes shaped by reciprocity beliefs. Indeed, as discussed in Chapter 2, on redistribution to issues, many people are cross-pressured, that is, inclined, against their “objective” material interest, to support or oppose a given policy out of fairness concerns. For these individuals, reasoning as an income maximizer can result in a dramatic departure from what fairness reasoning would prescribe. Chapter 5 examines how this simple argument helps explain variations in the income gradient, i.e., differences in the extent to which the rich and the poor disagree on redistributive issues.