LAUSR

This research investigates the role of social distance between decision makers and their clients. In 11 experiments (total N = 1,653), participants decided about unfair and hyper-fair offers in an advisor game for themselves or for a client who varied in social distance (e.g., for a close friend vs. a stranger). Participants were strongly influenced by client identity. They systematically accepted more hyper-fair offers for themselves and close clients than for distant clients, while client identity played no role in unfair offers. We show that the driving mechanism of this client privileging effect is joy (happy-for-ness) participants experience particularly for close clients, while envy did not explain this effect. Across all types of clients and experiments, hyper-fair offers were accepted at only 86% which can only be explained by participants being not exclusively motivated by absolute monetary payoffs but also, to some extent, factoring in nonmonetary concerns.