Fairness of Individual Rewards and Fairness of the Reward Distribution: Specifying the Inconsistency Between the Micro and Macro Principles of Justice
Abstract
Guillermina Jasso, Fairness of Individual Rewards and Fairness of the Reward Distribution: Specifying the Inconsistency Between the Micro and Macro Principles of Justice, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 46, No. 3 (Sep., 1983), pp. 185-199
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the case of an inherent quality or virtue, more predictable outcomes imply more equality and fairness.
“In the case of an inherent quality or virtue, more predictable outcomes imply more equality and fairness (Cook & Hegtvedt, 1983;Jasso, 1983;Salganik et al., 2006).”
From Relative Feedback Increases Disparities in Effort and Performance in Crowdsourcing Contests (2022) · cites this paper as Jasso, 1983
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Relative Feedback Increases Disparities in Effort and Performance in Crowdsourcing Contests
Tsvetkova, M., Müller, S., Vuculescu, O., Ham, H., & Sergeev, R. A. (2022) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3555649 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jasso, G.
- Corresponding author
- Jasso, Guillermina
- ORCID
- Jasso, Guillermina
- Venue
- Social Psychology Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1983-09
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 185
- ISSN
- 0190-2725 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2318692507
- Cited by
- 68
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 8.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Psychology Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Keywords
- distributive justice, individual rewards, reward allocation, fairness
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
