Relative Deprivation, Satisfying Rationality, and Support for Redistribution

Shin, Jaeyoul

doi:10.1007/s11205-017-1769-z

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, negative feelings and emotional experiences will arise spontaneously. 35 Subsequently, some researchers expanded the origin of relative deprivation and pointed out that relative deprivation cannot be solely explained by the comparison with other reference objects, but also by the gap between value expectation and value capacity. 13 Sociologist Smith et al 36 systematically expounded relative deprivation as a subjective attitude towards deprivation compared to a horizontal or vertical referent.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the horizontal comparative model with other referents, underlining mechanism of the process of relative deprivation is a “relative” subjective perception, which is essentially negative subjective feelings of individuals’ horizontal comparison with reference standards. 34 When employees perceive the impairment of their relative interests, they will lose mental balance; 35 On the contrary, when comparison yields satisfaction, relative deprivation will decrease. This non-adaptive cognition is mainly decided by subjectively evaluating and judging the loss of self-interest based on referents, but has nothing to do with objective resources possession or benefits distribution.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 38 Subjective consciousness suffers loss and frustration due to inferiority to reference standards, then negative emotional process will be experienced. 35 In brief, horizontal relative deprivation is a negative evaluation caused by interpersonal comparison, 34 and the intensification of psychological stress and emotional quandaries evokes a more unstable mental state. 39 …”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Does Compulsory Citizenship Behavior Necessarily Reduce Employee’s Work Well-Being? The Role of Relative Deprivation and Resource Compensation Based on Compulsory Citizenship Behavior

Fu¹,

Wu²,

Pervaiz³

2022

PRBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose On the basis of previous research results, the opinion that compulsory citizenship behavior (CCB) leads to negative impacts over employees and organizations prevails. However, the latest researches negate the absence of rewards and favorable evaluation from organizational system for CCB. Instead, CCB is likely to be awarded by incentive allocation and recognitive affirmation. In the case of the resource compensation based on CCB, will the expected utility of CCB still show the consistence with the traditional CCB researches, imposing negative effects over employees and organizations? Methods This research explored the mechanism and boundary condition based on self-determination theory (SDT) and relative deprivation theory (RDT) to avert the negative effects of CCB, hoping to explain the above question. Time-lagged survey data from 227 employees tested the moderated mediation model, and the results verified the hypotheses. Results With resource compensation after the delivery of CCB, employees will not feel relative deprivation caused by reluctant false citizenship behaviors. In addition, relative deprivation expresses the gap between expectation and reality, low psychological discrepancy will not deeply undermine employees’ work well-being.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does Compulsory Citizenship Behavior Necessarily Reduce Employee’s Work Well-Being? The Role of Relative Deprivation and Resource Compensation Based on Compulsory Citizenship Behavior

Fu¹,

Wu²,

Pervaiz³

2022

PRBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Liu and Pan [ 38 ] found that Chinese rural-to-urban migrant workers’ subjective relative deprivation is negatively associated with life satisfaction. Perception of unfairness is an indicator of relative deprivation [ 39 ]. Thus, social security unfairness may result in relative deprivation, negatively affecting life satisfaction.…”

Section: Literature Review and Research Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

How Does Social Security Fairness Predict Trust in Government? The Serial Mediation Effects of Social Security Satisfaction and Life Satisfaction

Zhi

Tan

Chen

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several studies have found that trust in government is associated with social fairness, citizens’ satisfaction with public service, and life satisfaction. This study aimed to investigate the serial mediation effects of social security satisfaction and life satisfaction on the association between social security fairness and trust in government. We analyzed the data from the Chinese Social Survey in 2019 (n = 7403) to examine the serial mediation effects. The findings showed that the higher the level of government, the greater the trust it enjoyed from its citizens. The direct prediction of trust by social security fairness was stronger at the county and township levels than at the central government level. Both social security satisfaction and life satisfaction partially mediated the relationship between social security fairness and overall trust in government. Social security fairness indirectly positively predicted trust in local government at the county and township levels through social security satisfaction, life satisfaction, and their serial mediation. While social security fairness could only indirectly predict trust in central government through social security satisfaction, the prediction of trust in central government via life satisfaction (mediator) was not significant. We observed a serial mediation model in which social security fairness positively predicted trust in government directly and indirectly through social security satisfaction and life satisfaction. The finding that social security satisfaction partially mediates the relationship between perceptions of fairness in the social security system and trust in government has implications for improving policies and the functioning of the system at all levels of the government.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, research has shown that material self-interest is a stable and strong predictor of support for social policies (Doherty et al, 2006; Petersen et al, 2014; Weeden and Kurzban, 2017). For example, low income, lost income, or dissatisfaction with income has a positive effect on support for redistribution (Owens and Pedulla, 2014; Shin, 2018; Sumino, 2018). Similarly, the threat of unemployment has a positive effect on support for redistribution (Gingrich and Ansell, 2012; Levanon, 2018; Margalit, 2013; Naumann et al, 2016; Owens and Pedulla, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Support for social policies: Focusing on effects of group belonging

Sudo

2022

Rationality and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to elucidate the structure of support for social policies (redistribution and free competition), focusing on the role of community interests (especially demographic decline). To this end, Japan was selected as a case study because it has the highest proportion of the elderly population in the world. The author analyzed data from the National Survey of Social Stratification and Social Mobility in 2015 and the Population Census for the same year, employing ordered logit models. The results revealed that people living in demographically declining communities were more likely to support redistribution and less likely to endorse free competition, compared to individuals from other communities. Furthermore, compared to the underprivileged, wealthy individuals were more likely to consider community interests irrespective of individual benefits. This finding demonstrates that community interests may have a significant influence on individuals’ policy preferences.

show abstract

Relative Deprivation, Satisfying Rationality, and Support for Redistribution

Cited by 15 publications

References 52 publications

Does Compulsory Citizenship Behavior Necessarily Reduce Employee’s Work Well-Being? The Role of Relative Deprivation and Resource Compensation Based on Compulsory Citizenship Behavior

Does Compulsory Citizenship Behavior Necessarily Reduce Employee’s Work Well-Being? The Role of Relative Deprivation and Resource Compensation Based on Compulsory Citizenship Behavior

How Does Social Security Fairness Predict Trust in Government? The Serial Mediation Effects of Social Security Satisfaction and Life Satisfaction

Support for social policies: Focusing on effects of group belonging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About