Where Does the Money Come From? Humanizing High Socioeconomic Status Groups Undermines Attitudes Toward Redistribution

The mediating role of attributions of poverty and wealth in the relationship between perceptions of economic inequality and redistribution preferences

Previous research has identified that the relationship between perceived economic inequality and supporting redistribution is mediated by beliefs about what causes poverty. Despite its usefulness, this approach has failed to recognize the role of perceived causes of wealth in explaining the relationship between these two variables. We conducted correlational (N = 523) and experimental (N = 226) studies, demonstrating that in contexts with high inequality, attributing poverty and wealth primarily to external factors resulted in greater support for redistribution. Furthermore, the attributions that served as mediators varied depending on the proposed redistributive measure. We delve into the significance of wealth attributional processes in understanding attitudes toward redistribution.

Perceived economic inequality enlarges the perceived humanity gap between low- and high-socioeconomic status groups

In this paper, we analyze the influence of the perceived level of economic inequality in daily life on people's recognition of the perceived humanity gap between low- and high-socioeconomic groups within society. To achieve this purpose, in Studies 1A-B, we analyzed the relationship between economic inequality and the humanity gap. In Studies 2A-B, we manipulated the level of inequality (low vs. high) to identify differences in the humanity gap. Results indicated that higher perceptions of economic inequality lead individuals to recognize a wider humanity gap between low- and high-socioeconomic groups in society. Implications are discussed.

Identifying hostile versus paternalistic classism profiles: a person-based approach to the study of ambivalent classism

Research on ambivalent classism suggests that individuals can manifest classism not only in a hostile and explicit manner but also in a condescending and paternalistic form. However, researchers have not determined the existence of individual profiles or population subgroups that show this ambivalence pattern. Therefore, to assess the existence of different profiles based on their manifestation of ambivalent classism, we carry out a latent profile analysis with a national representative sample (N = 1536). We identify different classist profiles among the population, including a minority of individuals who score low on both dimensions of classism (low generalized classists, 8.65%) and another minority who score high on both hostile and paternalism classism (high generalized classists, 8.13%). Further, we discovered that most of the population adhered to a moderated classism profile, endorsing both dimensions of classism (moderately generalized classist, 40.95%) or to an ambivalent profile, scoring low in hostile classism and high in paternalistic attitudes (paternalistic classists, 42.25%). The likelihood of adhering to the different profiles seems to be related to the individual’s level of education and system justification beliefs. Those individuals who score higher on system justification and with lower educational attainment are more willing to be highly generalized classists rather than be part of other profiles. Profiles also differ to an extent regarding concerns about economic inequality and social attitudes, with moderate and highly generalized classists being less concerned about economic inequality and less willing to support poor groups. We discuss the implications for developing targeted interventions aimed to confront classism patterns for each profile.

Perceived Economic Inequality Measures and Their Association With Objective Inequality and Redistributive Preferences

Abstract. Perceptions of economic inequality (PEI) play a central role in people’s responses to inequality. We aim to examine the consistency between different PEI measures (income gaps, diagrammatic figures, experienced downward and upward disparities), their relationship with objective inequality, and their association with redistributive preferences. Using data from the International Social Survey Programme 2019 ( N = 34,387, 22 countries), we performed multilevel regression analyses and found that PEI indicators were weakly and positively correlated, suggesting that they represent different dimensions of the same construct. Furthermore, objective inequality was not related to PEI measures. Finally, all PEI measures were positively associated with support for redistribution, except for experienced upward inequality. We discuss the multidimensional nature of PEI and its implications on redistributive preferences.

Convergence or Divergence: Preferences for Establishing an Unemployment Subsidy During the COVID-19 Period by Taxing Across Earnings Redistribution in Urban China

With the advancement of marketization, China has achieved rapid economic growth and economic class differentiation. This research analyzes the data from China's livelihood survey, divides the urban Chinese into five socio-economic classes, and tests their preferences and tendencies for income redistribution. It obtains the general attitude differences in subsidy policy and income inequality during COVID-19. Our conclusion are consistent with the existing literature to a great extent; that is, personal factors (self-interest and belief in fairness) play a crucial role in the attitude of Chinese citizens. In the analysis of situational factors, the results show that the higher the level of marketization, the people are more likely to have stronger negative emotions about subsidy or redistribution policies. Further analysis shows that people with the lowest income are susceptible to the fact that income inequality has become significant and show a strong willingness to support the government's redistribution policy. In contrast, middle-class people tend to favor the government's redistribution policy, although they will not benefit much from the redistribution policy. Therefore, they lack the motivation to support the government in vigorously implementing the subsidy policy. Significantly, high-income people are indifferent, as they lack such motivation even more. The difference in redistribution preferences between upper-class and lower-class groups signals polarization in Chinese society, especially income redistribution.

The Two Faces of Support for Redistribution in Colombia: Taxing the Wealthy or Assisting People in Need

Support for redistribution is crucial for reducing economic inequality. Despite people's desire for reducing extreme inequalities, they still have mixed opinions regarding how to do so. The aim of the article is to examine the underlying latent dimensions of support for redistribution and test its correlates to perceptions of and attitudes toward inequality. In two studies, we found that support for redistribution can be modeled as a latent construct depicting two different dimensions: one focused on taxing the wealthy and changing the income distribution schema, and other focused on assisting people in need and providing opportunities. We also found that the dimension related to taxing the wealthy (vs. assisting people in need) displayed higher internal reliability and correlated consistently with perceptions and attitudes toward inequality: the higher the support for taxing the wealthy, the higher the perceptions and concerns of inequality, and the lower the inequality-justifying ideologies. This research unveils distinct underlying dimensions of support for redistribution that shed light on different motivations that drive people's redistributive preferences.