Diekmann K A, Samuels S M, Ross L, Bazerman M H
College of Business Administration, University of Notre Dame, Indiana 46556-0399, USA.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997 May;72(5):1061-74. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.72.5.1061.
Two studies explored the tension between self-interest and the equality norm in problems of resource allocation. Study 1 presented graduate business students with a hypothetical task requiring them to make a series of managerial decisions. On learning the outcome of those decisions, they were asked to divide a bonus pool between self and a rival manager (who had opted for very different decisions and achieved either the same results as self on 2 criteria or a better result on 1 criterion and a worse result on the other criterion). Study 2 required Stanford and San Jose State undergraduates to consider the division of a hypothetical scholarship fund between candidates from their 2 schools. Data from both studies contrasted the apparent evenhandedness and lack of self-interest manifested by allocators with the self-serving responses of evaluators. Furthermore, when faced with different claims, participants were inclined to justify an unequal allocation of resources--provided that they, or a representative of their group, received the larger share--that few personally would have recommended, demanded, or imposed.
两项研究探讨了资源分配问题中自身利益与平等规范之间的矛盾。研究1向商科研究生提出一项假设任务,要求他们做出一系列管理决策。在得知这些决策的结果后,要求他们在自己和一位竞争经理(该经理做出了截然不同的决策,在两项标准上取得了与自己相同的结果,或者在一项标准上取得了更好的结果而在另一项标准上取得了更差的结果)之间分配一笔奖金。研究2要求斯坦福大学和圣何塞州立大学的本科生考虑在两所学校的候选人之间分配一笔假设的奖学金基金。两项研究的数据都对比了分配者表现出的明显公平性和无私与评估者的利己反应。此外,当面对不同的主张时,参与者倾向于为资源的不平等分配辩护——前提是他们或他们群体的代表获得了更大的份额——而这种分配很少有人会亲自推荐、要求或强制实施。