Language:
English
Pages:
Online-Ressource
Titel der Quelle:
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
Angaben zur Quelle:
10 (2007) 4 ; 581-593, Online-Ressource
DDC:
302
Abstract:
Abstract: Six studies explored the hypothesis that third parties are averse to resolving preference disputes with winner-take-all solutions when disputing factions belong to different social categories (e.g. gender, nationality, firms, etc.) versus the same social category. Studies 1—3 showed that third parties' aversion to winner-take-all solutions, even when they are based on the unbiased toss of a coin, is greater when the disputed preferences correlate with social category membership than when they do not. Studies 4—6 suggested that reluctance to resolve inter-category disputes in a winner-take-all manner is motivated by a desire to minimize the affective disparity—the hedonic gap—between the winning and losing sides. The implication is that winner-take-all outcomes, even those that satisfy conditions of procedural fairness, become unacceptable when disputed preferences cleave along social category lines
Note:
Postprint
,
begutachtet (peer reviewed)
DOI:
10.1177/1368430207084721
URN:
urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-228460
URL:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-228460
URL:
https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207084721
Permalink