Bibtex export

 

@article{ Garcia2007,
 title = {Social Categories and Group Preference Disputes: The Aversion to Winner-Take-All Solutions},
 author = {Garcia, Stephen M. and Miller, Dale T.},
 journal = {Group Processes & Intergroup Relations},
 number = {4},
 pages = {581-593},
 volume = {10},
 year = {2007},
 doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207084721},
 urn = {https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-228460},
 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.},
}