Distribution of Rewards in a Triad: A Developmental Test of Equity Theory

Streater, Alicia L.; Chertkoff, Jerome M.

doi:10.2307/1128197

Cited by 20 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To date, there has been considerable research into children’s developing sense of what constitutes an equitable distribution (e.g. Damon, 1977, 1975; Hook, 1978; Lane & Coon, 1972; Leventhal & Anderson, 1970; Streater & Chertkoff, 1976). In these studies, children must divide a reward between multiple participants, each of whom has contributed different amounts of work towards completing the task.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They then transition to a period of strict equality, at around the age of five or six, in which they allocate rewards equally despite variations in effort by participants (Larsen & Kellogg, 1974; Lerner, 1974). Then, children exhibit an understanding of ordinal equity, in which they give more rewards to the hard worker, but not nearly in accordance with the proportion of work done (Coon, Lane & Lichtman, 1974; Streater & Chertkoff, 1976). Finally, as adolescents, participants start to show signs of proportional equity, and distribute rewards in strict proportion to the amount of work done by each party (Hook, 1978; Lane, Messe & Phillips, 1971; see Damon 1977 and Hook & Cook 1979 for overviews of this sequence).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Children's and adults' judgments of equitable resource distributions

McCrink

Bloom²,

Santos³

2009

Developmental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explored the criteria that children and adults use when evaluating the niceness of a character who is distributing resources. Four- and five-year-olds played the 'Giving Game', in which two puppets with different amounts of chips each gave some portion of these chips to the children. Adults played an analogous task that mimicked the situations presented to children in the Giving Game. For all groups of participants, we manipulated the absolute amount and proportion of chips given away. We found that children and adults used different cues to establish which puppet was nicer: 4-year-olds focused exclusively on absolute amount, 5-year-olds showed some sensitivity to proportion, and adults focused exclusively on proportion. These results are discussed in light of their implications for equity theory and for theories of the development of social evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children's and adults' judgments of equitable resource distributions

McCrink

Bloom²,

Santos³

2009

Developmental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years there have been a large number of studies examining behavior and judgments with respect to the distribution of rewards in experimental settings (for examples, see Adams, 1965;Brickman, 1977;Deci, 1975;Eiser andEiser, 1976, Khan, 1972;Lane and Coon, 1972;Lane and Messé, 197\,L aneet al, 1971;Lerner, 1974;Leventhal and Lane, 1970;Leventful andMichaels, 1969, 1971;Leventhal et ai, 1972Leventhal et ai, , 1973Messé and Lichtman, 1972;Pruitt, 1972;Sampson, 1969;Streater and Chertkoff, 1976;Weiner and Kun, 1976). However, these studies have not examined the applicability of their results to behavior and judgments about the distribution of personal possessions in everyday experience.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Inequalities in Personal Possessions: Explanations for and Judgments about Unequal Distribution

Furby¹

1979

Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines concepts about and evaluations of the unequal distribution of personal possessions. As an exploratory study, its purpose was to map the dimensions of (a) explanations for the existence of unequal distribution and (b) judgments or evaluations of inequality. Interview questions were administered to (a) 150 Americans, 30 at each of five age levels (kindergarten, second, fifth, and eleventh grades, and 40- to 50-year-old adults), and to (b) 120 Israelis, 60 from the kibbutz and 60 from the city (in each case, 30 of kindergarten age and 30 of fifth grade age). A content analysis was performed on the interview responses. The general developmental trend in explanations for the existence of unequal distribution was for (a) both differential amounts of money and differential preferences and needs to be frequent explanations at all ages, (b) differential acquisition explanations to become increasingly active in nature (e.g., working, earning), and (c) an increasing recognition that unequal distribution is due to circumstances beyond the individual’s control. The main cultural difference in reasons given for unequal distribution occurred for fifth graders, where both Israeli groups mentioned differential work and achievement, as a major reason for the existence of inequality, whereas this reason was not frequent among Americans until older age levels. With respect to evaluations of unequal distribution, the youngest two age levels had difficulty making any evaluative statements at all, but those few they made tended to be negative. Fifth graders and high school students also judged unequal distribution more negatively than positively, and only the adults gave as many positive as negative evaluations. The principal difference between cultural groups was that a greater number of kibbutz children stated explicitly that they were indifferent to unequal distribution. There were also a number of smaller developmental and cultural differences, and the general pattern of results is interpreted as reflecting different experiential histories with inequality.

show abstract

“…Retour à la table des matières Un grand nombre d'études a établi assez clairement comment une séparation prolongée d'avec la mère, dans la première année de la vie, a des conséquences négatives sur toute la suite du développement social, aussi bien chez l'homme (Spitz, 1945(Spitz, , 1965(Spitz, et 1968Bowlby, 1953Bowlby, , 1965Bowlby, , 1969Bowlby, et 1973 que chez d'autres primates (Harlow, 1958;Seay et al, 1962;Rosenblum et Harlow, 1963;Seay et Harlow, 1965;Arling et Harlow, 1967;Kaufman et Rosenblum, 1967a, 1967bHarlow et al, 1970;Suomi et al, 1973). C'est sans doute sous l'effet de cet ensemble de découvertes impressionnantes que les études portant sur l'attachement et la première année de la vie ont procédé comme si la mère était le seul pôle du développement social de l'enfant pendant cette période fondamentale (Ainsworth, 1969;Bowlby, 1969Bowlby, et 1973Shaffer, 1971;Zazzo, 1974), jusqu'à tout récemment (Lamb, 1977c;Weinraub et al, 1977).…”

Section: B) Reformulation Du Concept D'attachementunclassified

développement des relations sociales chez l'enfant

Racine¹

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distribution of Rewards in a Triad: A Developmental Test of Equity Theory

Cited by 20 publications

References 10 publications

Children's and adults' judgments of equitable resource distributions

Children's and adults' judgments of equitable resource distributions

Inequalities in Personal Possessions: Explanations for and Judgments about Unequal Distribution

développement des relations sociales chez l'enfant

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About