Reference health
Job Assignment and Fairness Concerns
50/50 checkable references clean · checked 2026-08-03
Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.
9 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.
The 50 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1257/aer.20141734
Gender Differences in Accepting and Receiving Requests for Tasks with Low Promotability
resolves10.1111/j.1468-0262.2008.00860.x
Measuring Inequity Aversion in a Heterogeneous Population Using Experimental Decisions and Subjective Probabilities
resolves10.1016/S0022-4359(97)90014-2
Contact employees: Relationships among workplace fairness, job satisfaction and prosocial service behaviors
resolves10.1006/obhd.1995.1068
When Social Outcomes Aren′t Fair: The Effect of Causal Attributions on Preferences
resolves10.1007/s10683-011-9272-x
The strategy versus the direct-response method: a first survey of experimental comparisons
resolves10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.07.010
Competitive rivalry, social disposition, and subjective well-being: An experiment
resolves10.1007/s10683-016-9477-0
Status quo effects in fairness games: reciprocal responses to acts of commission versus acts of omission
resolves10.1016/j.jebo.2010.08.008
Social comparison and performance: Experimental evidence on the fair wage–effort hypothesis
resolves10.1007/s40881-015-0004-4
Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE
resolves10.1086/467773
Entitlements, Rights, and Fairness: An Experimental Examination of Subjects' Concepts of Distributive Justice
resolves10.1006/game.1996.0026
Fairness in Ultimatum Games with Asymmetric Information and Asymmetric Payoffs
resolves10.1006/game.1995.1025
Outside Options and Social Comparison in Three-Player Ultimatum Game Experiments
resolves10.1257/aer.90.4.1072
Fair Shares: Accountability and Cognitive Dissonance in Allocation Decisions
resolves10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.711
Is There a Universal Positivity Bias in Attributions? A Meta-Analytic Review of Individual, Developmental, and Cultural Differences in the Self-Serving Attributional Bias.
resolves10.2307/2998575
Learning in High Stakes Ultimatum Games: An Experiment in the Slovak Republic
resolves10.1007/s10683-018-9561-8
Nice to you, nicer to me: Does self-serving generosity diminish the reciprocal response?
The 9 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedref1
no DOI — not checkedWhy is it so hard to be fair?
no DOI — not checkedref15
no DOI — not checkedref16
no DOI — not checkedref25
no DOI — not checkedG*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences
no DOI — not checkedA Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences
no DOI — not checkedAssignment models of the distribution of earnings
no DOI — not checkedref55
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this
work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none
carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings,
or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.
checked 2026-08-03 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record
Embed this badge
Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.
<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.3449092"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.3449092/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.2139/ssrn.3449092)