Development of the conception of economic inequality: II. Explanations, justifications, and concepts of social mobility and change.

Abstract

Children and adolescents from four social classes were interviewed about their concepts of economic inequality. Adolescents were more likely than children to explain and justify inequality by referring to equity and were more fatalistic in their conceptions of change and in justifying wealth and poverty. Younger children were more likely than adolescents to claim that individual mobility and social change could be achieved through others giving money and less likely to say that social change could be achieved by changing the social structure. Upper-middleclass subjects were more likely than others to claim that poverty cannot be changed and that poverty is due to equity or wasting money arid less likely than lowerclass subjects to claim that the poor should not suffer. Lower class 17-year-olds were more likely than any other group to claim that the rich would resist social change. Blacks were less likely than whites to claim that poverty is due to bad luck or is fated. The findings are discussed in terms of cognitive-developmental trends, functionalist effects, and conflict theory.Numerous psychologists and sociologists from widely divergent perspectives have argued that social class has a considerable effect in the lives of individuals (Deutsch, Katz,

Adolescent representations of socio‐economic status

“…These findings are not at odds with Berti & Bombi's (1988) or Leahy's (1981Leahy's ( , 1983 cognitive developmental theories of the construction of economic knowledge. Berti & Bombi hold that the belief in an equitable relationship between work and money emerges at 8 to 9 years of age.…”

“…Several studies of children's conceptions of social inequality have found some slight class differences, but consistent patterns are rare probably because of the different ways in which social class has been operationalized, the different questions asked and the paucity of research in this area. In general, middle-class children seem to be more conscious of social differences (Burgard et aI., 1989;Emler & Dickinson, 1985;Himmelweit, Halsey & Oppenheim, 1952;Jahoda, 1959), more likely to support inequality (Emler & Dickinson, 1985;Leahy, 1983) and more likely to attribute inequality to equity considerations such as the degree of individual effort, qualifications, intelligence and responsibility (Emler & Dickinson, 1985;Leahy, 1983).…”

“…Berti & Bombi, 1988;Gunn, 1964;Leahy, 1981Leahy, , 1983Siegal, 1981) has led to links being made between understanding of inequality and cognitive developmental theory. Gunn (1964) related the tendency of 5-and 6-year-olds to explain occupational status in terms of what jobs meant to them personally to 'egocentric' thinking, and passive role.…”

The development of concepts of economic and social inequality

“…Categories were mutually exclusive, resulting in scorable responses for most subjects. Interjudge reliability was satisfactory (see Leahy, 1981 and1983a, for more details).…”

Children's representation of economic inequalities: The effects of social class

“…Firstly, it has generally supported the position advocated by functionalist theory, demonstrating that as they grow older children are increasingly likely to accept that inequalities in wealth are legitimate, a trend that does not appear to be affected appreciably by children's own relative positions in the socio-economic system (e.g. Connell, 1977;Leahy, 1983). Secondly, there appears to be a developmental trend towards preference for principles of distributive justice which support an unequal distribution of wealth in society (Hook & Cook, 1979): older children favour the allocation of wealth or resources according to considerations of equity.…”