Cited by 354Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesPsychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The Right and the Good: Distributive Justice and Neural Encoding of Equity and Efficiency

Hsu, Ming, Anen, Cédric, Quartz, Steven R.·2008·Science

Abstract

Distributive justice concerns how individuals and societies distribute benefits and burdens in a just or moral manner. We combined distribution choices with functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the central problem of distributive justice: the trade-off between equity and efficiency. We found that the putamen responds to efficiency, whereas the insula encodes inequity, and the caudate/septal subgenual region encodes a unified measure of efficiency and inequity (utility). Notably, individual differences in inequity aversion correlate with activity in inequity and utility regions. Against utilitarianism, our results support the deontological intuition that a sense of fairness is fundamental to distributive justice but, as suggested by moral sentimentalists, is rooted in emotional processing. More generally, emotional responses related to norm violations may underlie individual differences in equity considerations and adherence to ethical rules.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1153651

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Striatal activity may underlie difficult giving decisions, such as how to efficiently and equitably allocate limited resources to others.

    “Moreover, striatal activity may underlie difficult giving decisions, such as how to efficiently and equitably allocate limited resources to others 65.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 29 · Cited by 354

Authors
Hsu, M., Anen, C., & Quartz, S. R.
Affiliations
  • California Institute of Technology (US)
  • Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology and Department of Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.
Corresponding author
  • Hsu, Ming
  • Quartz, Steven R.
Venue
Science
Published
2008-05-23
Volume
320
Issue
5879
Pages
1092-1095
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2127227735
Cited by
354
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 20
FWCI
70.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
distributive justice, equity-efficiency trade-off, inequity aversion, putamen, insula, caudate nucleus, subgenual prefrontal cortex, individual differences, utilitarianism, deontology, moral sentimentalism, functional MRI
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Caudate Nucleus, Cerebral Cortex, Choice Behavior, Emotions, Female, Humans, Judgment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Morals, Putamen, Reward, Social Behavior, Social Justice, Septum of Brain, Gift Giving

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review