{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026004728132387706, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028368794326241134, 'mean_word_length': 5.13768115942029, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Does Equity Describe the Results of Allocation Experiments?

Adams' (1963, 1965) theory of inequity has recently been extended to predict the results of allocation experiments. Most of these experiments have been limited to groups of size two. The present experiment had subjects distribute bonuses among groups of two, four, or six workers in which one key worker produced 10, 30, 50, 70, or 90% of the group's output. Mean bonus allocations provided strong support for an equity rule, with added trends toward overreward of 50% producers and underreward of 70 and 90% producers in four and six person groups. Closer examination of reward distributions revealed that equity was the average of a number of divergent strategies. The complexities of determining allocation strategies from post hoc examination of reward distributions are discussed.