The present paper analyses the between-context uniformity in conflicting claims problems (O'Neill, 1982) by means of a questionnaire study that has been expressly designed with the aim of combining the strengths and avoid the weaknesses of those found in the related literature (Gaertner and Schokkaert, 2012). Furthermore, we include the following main features that, to the best of our knowledge, have not been jointly considered previously. Firstly, the sample is not restricted to degree students looking for improving its representativeness. Secondly, the contexts are accurately defined with the aim of providing all the needed information without leaving room to personal interpretation. Thirdly, a general explanation of each proposed fairness criterion is accompanied by its application to two different problems in order to encourage respondents to focus not just on one outcome but on the general principle underlying it. Fourthly, we do not only ask about the fairest criterion but also about the perception of each one being fair. Finally, the agents' wealth status quo is considered in order to obtain some evidence about both the role of solidarity as a basis of distributive justice and the support for the existence of a universal basic income. Keywords: Conflicting claims problems; fair allocation; social questionnaires JEL classification: D63