Cutthroat Capitalism Versus Cuddly Socialism: Are Americans More Meritocratic and Efficiency-Seeking than Scandinavians?

Abstract

There is a striking difference in income inequality and redistributive policies between the United States and Scandinavia. To study whether there is a corresponding cross-country difference in social preferences, we conducted the first large-scale international social preference experiment, with nationally representative samples from the United States and Norway. We introduce a new experimental approach, which combines the infrastructure of an international online market place and the infrastructure of a leading international data collection agency. A novel feature of our experiment is that Americans and Norwegians make real distributive choices in identical situations where they have complete information about the source of inequality and the cost of redistribution. We show that Americans and Norwegians differ significantly in fairness views, but not in the importance assigned to efficiency. The study also provides robust causal evidence of fairness considerations being much more fundamental for inequality acceptance than efficiency considerations in both countries.

The development of children's preferences for equality and equity across 13 individualistic and collectivist cultures

“…Specifically, children from individualistic cultures may emphasize equitable distributions at an earlier age and to a greater degree than children from collectivist cultures. In individualistic cultures, personal work and wealth are essential to achievement and success (Triandis, 2001), which could lead children to attenuate earlier to cues of merit and need and view inequalities based on these factors as more acceptable (Almås et al, 2016). Children from collectivist countries are still expected to demonstrate an age-related shift from equal to equitable distribution decisions (Sigelman & Waitzman, 1991).…”

“…Likewise, participants from two individualistic cultures, the United States and Norway, viewed inequality produced by luck as less acceptable than inequality resulting from merit; however, participants from the United States, which is ranked higher on the individualistic spectrum than Norway (Hofstede & Hofstede, 1991), were overall more accepting of inequalities than participants from Norway overall (Almås, Cappelen, & Tungodden, 2016). I/C levels within a country thus appear to influence permissibility of unequal outcomes.…”

“…Need was a more compelling justification for inequality in a more collectivist culture, and similarly, participants from India and Indonesia both favor need‐based inequity to a greater extent than participants from the United States (Murphy‐Berman, Berman, Singh, Pachauri, & Kumar, ). Likewise, participants from two individualistic cultures, the United States and Norway, viewed inequality produced by luck as less acceptable than inequality resulting from merit; however, participants from the United States, which is ranked higher on the individualistic spectrum than Norway (Hofstede & Hofstede, ), were overall more accepting of inequalities than participants from Norway overall (Almås, Cappelen, & Tungodden, ). I/C levels within a country thus appear to influence permissibility of unequal outcomes.…”

Measuring and Bounding Experimenter Demand

“…16 We collect data on this sample through an online survey in collaboration with the market research company, Research Now. This provider has been used in previous research, for example by Almås et al (2016).…”

We must agree to redistribute wealth more fairly

“…4 This may be partly because Norwegians view fairness, and reducing the impact of luck on prosperity, as important. 5 Like Norway, we could do more to improve our health and happiness as a society by agreeing to redistribute wealth more fairly. The richest and most powerful may fear that they will lose out if this happens; but, if we don't, all of the rest of us-including those of us who are reasonably well off but not so affluent that we don't need to care-will lose out.…”