We measure the impact of religiosity on preferences over distribution of resources, using two surveys conducted among undergraduate students in Turkey. The subjects were asked to assess the fairness of three hypothetical distributions of resources between two agents. These agents differed in their ability to convert resources into goods that provide utility, and we manipulated the information about the source of these differences across different problems. Even though relative popularity of alternative distributions is similar among religious or non-religious people, some significant differences emerge between these two groups. With minimal information, less religious people are significantly more likely to prefer the Egalitarian distribution and significantly less likely to prefer the Rawlsian distribution. When differences are explained to be due to external factors, higher religiosity implies a higher likelihood of ranking both the Rawlsian and Utilitarian distributions above the Egalitarian distribution. However, when differences are due to voluntary choices of agents, differences between religious and non-religious people disappear inducing subjects to think efficiency as the most fair alternative. These results are robust when we control for other relevant factors. Religious and nonreligious people also disagree on the issues around working towards making everyone equal, and insuring people who make unlucky economic choices.

中文翻译：

---

宗教信仰和公平观念。

我们使用在土耳其本科生中进行的两项调查来衡量宗教信仰对资源分配偏好的影响。要求受试者评估两个代理之间三种假设的资源分配的公平性。这些代理在将资源转化为提供效用的商品的能力方面存在差异，我们在不同问题中操纵了有关这些差异来源的信息。尽管替代分布在宗教或非宗教人群中的相对流行程度相似，但这两个群体之间还是出现了一些显着差异。在信息最少的情况下，宗教信仰较少的人更可能更喜欢平等主义分布，而更不可能更喜欢罗尔斯分布。当差异被解释为由外部因素引起时，更高的宗教信仰意味着将罗尔斯分布和功利分布都排在平等分布之上的可能性更高。然而，当差异是由于代理人的自愿选择时，宗教和非宗教人士之间的差异就消失了，这导致主体认为效率是最公平的选择。当我们控制其他相关因素时，这些结果是稳健的。宗教人士和非宗教人士在努力使人人平等以及为做出不幸经济选择的人提供保险的问题上也存在分歧。当差异是由于代理人的自愿选择时，宗教和非宗教人士之间的差异就会消失，从而促使主体将效率视为最公平的选择。当我们控制其他相关因素时，这些结果是稳健的。宗教人士和非宗教人士在努力使人人平等以及为做出不幸经济选择的人提供保险的问题上也存在分歧。当差异是由于代理人的自愿选择时，宗教和非宗教人士之间的差异就会消失，从而促使主体将效率视为最公平的选择。当我们控制其他相关因素时，这些结果是稳健的。宗教人士和非宗教人士在努力使人人平等以及为做出不幸经济选择的人提供保险的问题上也存在分歧。