Behavioral Self-Management and the Strategic Shifting of Fairness Norms

Find full details about this seminar on the website of ACLE.

Abstract

People often act prosocially and voluntarily conform to social and legal norms. This has fueled the idea that law can guide behavior through its expressive power. By contrast, we offer a theoretical and experimental framework suggesting that people strategically alter their decision-making environment to shift the norm applicable to their actions to one that is in their self-interest and to the detriment of others. Norm-shifting is one strategy within a broader concept we refer to as Behavioral Self-Management (BSM).

To test norm-shifting, we implement a dictator game in which Allocators are offered an effort task before allocating a sum between themselves and a Recipient. Allocators receive the same endowment whether or not they work. We hypothesize that many will undertake the task to shift the applicable fairness norm from equal division to an effort-based norm that justifies their retaining a larger share. Prior evidence shows that costly effort is widely perceived as legitimizing unequal outcomes.

We find that many Allocators decide to work, thereby reducing average transfers. Their work choices are strategic: their odds of working are higher the more they expect work to shift the fairness norm in their favor and the more prosocial they are—that is, the higher the moral costs they face for violating the fairness norm. Finally, Allocators who work make transfers that they expect to conform to an effort-based norm in the view of others, to maintain their self- and social-image.

Our findings have implications for compliance with the law and with social norms. BSM can enable selfish non-compliance by undermining the social norms that underpin the law or by establishing social norms that provide justification for violation, while avoiding the social disapproval that would otherwise result.