Panel a shows the average payoff (95% CI) while panel b shows the values normalized following the definition of “relative fairness”, where each participant is expected to contribute half of their initial capital. We observe that those who have more resources get a higher normalized payoff, and in the 60 € group it is even above the expected fair. Instead, the most vulnerable (20 € and 30 €) get a much lower payoff than the fair. There are significant differences between them and the rest of participants with higher endowments (S4 and S5 Tables).</p
<p>The table reports the acceptance rate (%) of Unfair (10–20 cents), Moderately Unfair (30 cents), ...
Recent experimental evidence has led to a debate about the nature of utility functions in which peop...
<p>Mean scores for participants' evaluation of the fairness of offers made by attractive and less at...
a. Contribution fairness: in this case fairness is defined by equal contributions, where each partic...
<p>(<b>A</b>) Proposers' offers. The equality and equity norms are shown in blue (horizontal) and re...
<p>Dotted curve on the top: the behavior preferred by the majority wins through (<i>p</i><sub>1</sub...
The equal treatment consists of 24 valid games in which all players are endowed with 40 €, and the u...
a. Behavioral patterns in the equal treatment based on average contribution during the evolution of ...
Third-parties’ average opinions (95% confidence intervals) about fair absolute and relative contribu...
<p>Panel A. Geometrical average of the gain participants were willing to accept in order to play the...
<p>Contributions increased as perceived threats increased (<i>b</i> = 0.31, <i>z</i> = 15.5, <i>p</i...
<p>Percentage of equal, unequal, and very unequal offers made by participants below the 25th percent...
We compare voluntary contributions to a public good in a symmetric setting to those in a weakly and ...
Experimental evidence has prompted a debate over the nature of utility functions in which people are...
<p>Each individual panel shows the average payoff of Mutualist A and Mutualist B, calculated as the ...
<p>The table reports the acceptance rate (%) of Unfair (10–20 cents), Moderately Unfair (30 cents), ...
Recent experimental evidence has led to a debate about the nature of utility functions in which peop...
<p>Mean scores for participants' evaluation of the fairness of offers made by attractive and less at...
a. Contribution fairness: in this case fairness is defined by equal contributions, where each partic...
<p>(<b>A</b>) Proposers' offers. The equality and equity norms are shown in blue (horizontal) and re...
<p>Dotted curve on the top: the behavior preferred by the majority wins through (<i>p</i><sub>1</sub...
The equal treatment consists of 24 valid games in which all players are endowed with 40 €, and the u...
a. Behavioral patterns in the equal treatment based on average contribution during the evolution of ...
Third-parties’ average opinions (95% confidence intervals) about fair absolute and relative contribu...
<p>Panel A. Geometrical average of the gain participants were willing to accept in order to play the...
<p>Contributions increased as perceived threats increased (<i>b</i> = 0.31, <i>z</i> = 15.5, <i>p</i...
<p>Percentage of equal, unequal, and very unequal offers made by participants below the 25th percent...
We compare voluntary contributions to a public good in a symmetric setting to those in a weakly and ...
Experimental evidence has prompted a debate over the nature of utility functions in which people are...
<p>Each individual panel shows the average payoff of Mutualist A and Mutualist B, calculated as the ...
<p>The table reports the acceptance rate (%) of Unfair (10–20 cents), Moderately Unfair (30 cents), ...
Recent experimental evidence has led to a debate about the nature of utility functions in which peop...
<p>Mean scores for participants' evaluation of the fairness of offers made by attractive and less at...