Template-Type: ReDIF-Paper 1.0
Title: Shallow Meritocracy
Author-Name: Peter Andre
Author-Email: p.andre@uni-bonn.de

Classification-JEL: C91, D63, D91, H23
Keywords: Meritocracy, fairness, responsibility, attitudes toward inequality, 
redistribution, social preferences, inference, uncertainty, counterfactual thinking

Abstract: Meritocracies aspire to reward hard work but promise not to judge individuals
by the circumstances into which they were born. However, the choice to work hard
is often shaped by circumstances. I show that people’s merit judgments are insensitive
to circumstances’ effect on choice. In an experiment, US participants judge how much
money workers deserve for the effort they exert. Unequal circumstances discourage
some workers from working hard. Nonetheless, participants hold disadvantaged workers
responsible for their choices. Participants reward the effort of disadvantaged and
advantaged workers identically, regardless of the circumstances under which choices
are made. Additional experiments identify an important underlying mechanism. Individuals
understand that choices are influenced by circumstances. But, in light of an
uncertain counterfactual state – what exactly would have happened on a level playing
field – individuals base their merit judgments on the only reliable evidence they possess:
observed effort levels. I confirm these patterns in a structural model of fairness views.
Finally, a vignette study shows that merit judgments can be similarly “shallow” when
choices are shaped by racism or poverty.

Note: 
Length: 89
Creation-Date: 2022-02
Revision-Date: 
File-URL: https://www.crctr224.de/research/discussion-papers/archive/dp318
File-Format: application/pdf
Handle: RePEc:bon:boncrc:CRCTR224_2022_318v2