Pablo Soto-Mota - Work in progress

In her shoes: How information on menstrual symptoms shapes gendered policy preferences.

With Diana Álvarez Suárez, Raymundo Campos-Vazquez & Fernanda Márquez-Padilla

Using an information provision experiment we analyze whether learning about menstrual symptoms increases support for gender-equity policies and whether this effect varies by gender. The experiment uses a randomized design and was conducted on a representative sample of 4,833 individuals living in Mexico. We find that men significantly increased ther perception of menstruation as a workplace obstable and increase their support for menstrual-related policies accordingly, while woment did not–likely as the intervention provided less new information for them. Information did not alter willingness to finance these policies through taxation. Our results highlight the role of information in shaping attitudes toward non-monetary labor inequalities but suggest limits to its impact fiscal preferences.

Stage: Manuscript in preparation

Do people see a problem in the Non-Identity Problem? An experimental exploration using the dictator game

With Arne Nasgowitz

The Non-Identity Problem questions whether we can harm future individuals, raising challenges for moral responsibility toward future generations. A common response, the No-Difference view, holds that moral responsibility is independent of the identity of who is affected. Despite its importance in economic and policy contexts, little is known about non-philosophers’ intuitions on this problem. We conducted an economic experiment to test whether people make different distributive choices in scenarios reflecting the Non-Identity Problem. We find that the behaviour of the participants aligns with the No-Difference view and that they show limited agreement with arguments that use non-identity reasoning to reject moral responsibility.

Stage: Manuscript in preparation

Do feelings of unfairness make individuals more dishonest toward unassuming third parties?

With Joel Berge

This study uses an online experiment to investigate whether experiencing an unfair situation increases dishonesty toward third parties and whether spectators anticipate such behavior. We find no evidence that unfair experiences lead to greater dishonesty. However, spectators are approximately twice as likely to predict that participants who experienced unfairness would lie to a third party compared to those who had not. Our findings suggest a plausible explanation: individuals who experience unfairness exhibit heightened empathy toward third parties. This paper highlights that people not only overestimate the dishonesty of others but also exaggerate the role of situational factors in shaping dishonest behavior.

Stage: Manuscript in preparation

Projects in earlier stages

Ethical Considerations in risk sharing agreements and pension participation decisions

With Andre Lot and Xiaogeng Xu. Stage: Fully funded. Experimental design.

Many small lies or a few big ones: which is easier to tell?

With Jareef Bin Martuza & Dario Trujano-Ochoa. Stage: Experimental design