Social deliberation systematically shifts resource allocation decisions by focusing on the fate of the least well-off
Social deliberation systematically shifts resource allocation decisions by focusing on the fate of the least well-off
复制标题
社会审议通过关注最不富裕者的命运来系统地改变资源分配决策
DOI：
10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104067
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Kameda Tatsuya
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ueshima Atsushi;Mercier Hugo;Kameda Tatsuya
应该容忍多大程度的不平等？应该如何对待最贫穷的人？尽管有时被混为一谈，但对不平等和最贫穷者命运的担忧涉及不同的分配原则，具有不同的社会政治影响。我们测试了商议--民主的核心--是否会影响关于分配原则的推理。322名参与者面临着在平等主义(分配差异较小)、功利主义(高总量)和最大化(最大化最贫穷者的福利)选项之间的分配决策。在最初的决定之后，参与者要么单独思考类似的决定，要么成对讨论，然后再单独面对相同的选择。社交但不是单独的深思熟虑导致了更多的最大限度的选择和更少的平等主义选择，这种变化在实验后至少持续了5个月。对大约7500个话语的对话分析表明，一些参与者最初做出了启发式的平等主义选择，而实际上他们主要关心最贫穷的人，对话促进了更多内在一致的最大限度偏好。
How much inequality should be tolerated? How should the poorest be treated? Though sometimes conflated, concerns about inequality and the fate of the poorest involve different allocation principles with different sociopolitical implications. We tested whether deliberation—the core of democracy—influences reasoning about distributive principles. 322 participants faced allocation decisions for others between egalitarian (low variance in allocation), utilitarian (high total amount), and maximin (maximizing the welfare of the poorest) options. After their initial decisions, participants either reflected upon similar decisions solely or discussed them in pairs before facing the same choices again individually. Social, but not solitary, deliberation led to more maximin and fewer egalitarian choices, and this change lasted at least 5 months after the experiment. Conversation analyses of approximately 7500 utterances suggest that some participants initially made egalitarian choices heuristically, when in fact they mostly cared about the poorest, and dialogue promoted more internally coherent maximin preferences.