Support for Economic Inequality Scale: Development and Adjudication

Wiwad, Dylan; Mercier, Brett Gregory; Aknin, Lara B.; Robinson, Angela R.

doi:10.31234/osf.io/58e76

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, even when higher inequality hurts everyone, we can still expect that those who are struggling to a higher extent will bear the burden of its negative consequences the most (Fournier, 2019). Additionally, the present findings could be influenced by other possible factors such as the participants' level of tolerance to inequality (Wiwad et al ., 2019). It may be the case that those with lower tolerance of income inequality have higher perceptions of suffering among low‐SES groups, and lower perceptions of the benefits enjoyed by high‐SES groups, whereas those with a greater tolerance of income inequality have lower perceptions of suffering among low‐SES groups and higher perceptions of the benefits enjoyed by high‐SES groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lacking socio‐economic status reduces subjective well‐being through perceptions of meta‐dehumanization

Sainz

Martínez

Moya

et al. 2020

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has identified that both low-and high-socioeconomic groups tend to be dehumanized. However, groups that have a deprived position are more willing to interiorize the negative perceptions that others have about them compared with affluent groups. In this project, we address the role of meta-(de)humanization (the perceived humanity one thinks is ascribed or denied to one's group) based on socioeconomic status differences and its influence in the perceived psychological well-being. We conducted two studies: In Study 1 (correlational, N = 990), we analysed the relationship between socioeconomic status, meta-dehumanization, and well-being. Results indicated that lower socioeconomic status positively predicted more meta-dehumanization and worse wellbeing. Moreover, meta-dehumanization mediated the relationship between socioeconomic status and well-being. In Study 2 (experimental, N = 354), we manipulated socioeconomic status (low-, middle-, and high-socioeconomic status conditions) to evaluate its influence on meta-dehumanization and well-being. Results indicated that individuals of low (vs. higher)-socioeconomic status perceived more meta-dehumanization and reported worse well-being. Finally, a multicategorical mediational analysis indicated that low (vs. middle or high)-socioeconomic status led to worse well-being through higher perceived meta-dehumanization. We discuss differences in perceived meta-(de)humanization based on groups' socioeconomic status and implications on the population's well-being. Differences in socioeconomic status (SES) between groups have been found to shape multiple psychological processes (Manstead, 2018). For instance, previous studies have identified that SES has an influence on the way people define themselves (Easterbrook,

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lacking socio‐economic status reduces subjective well‐being through perceptions of meta‐dehumanization

Sainz

Martínez

Moya

et al. 2020

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In two additional studies (studies S1 and S2), we examined the extent to which zero-sum thinking predicts attitudes about economic inequality and anti-immigration policies. In the first study, we measured, in a counterbalanced order, participants' tendency to view wealth as a zero-sum resource (14) and their attitudes regarding inequality using the Support for Economic Inequality Scale (32). As predicted, we found that zero-sum thinking was negatively related to the extent to which participants viewed economic inequality favorably [r(100) = −0.659, P < 0.0001].…”

Section: Downloaded Frommentioning

confidence: 90%

The politics of zero-sum thinking: The relationship between political ideology and the belief that life is a zero-sum game

Davidai

Ongis

2019

Sci. Adv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The tendency to see life as zero-sum exacerbates political conflicts. Six studies (N = 3223) examine the relationship between political ideology and zero-sum thinking: the belief that one party’s gains can only be obtained at the expense of another party’s losses. We find that both liberals and conservatives view life as zero-sum when it benefits them to do so. Whereas conservatives exhibit zero-sum thinking when the status quo is challenged, liberals do so when the status quo is being upheld. Consequently, conservatives view social inequalities—where the status quo is frequently challenged—as zero-sum, but liberals view economic inequalities—where the status quo has remained relatively unchallenged in past decades—as such. Overall, these findings suggest potentially important ideological differences in perceptions of conflict—differences that are likely to have implications for understanding political divides in the United States and the difficulty of reaching bipartisan legislation.

show abstract

“…At Time 1, participants reported their attributions for poverty ( Guimond, Begin, & Palmer, 1989 ) by reporting “how important you believe each of the following factors are in explaining unemployment and poverty in the United States.” Participants rated 12 different factors, which (following Guimond et al, 1989 ), we averaged into separate subscales for situational ( M = 4.43, SD = 1.28, α = 0.90) and dispositional attributions for poverty ( M = 3.30, SD = 1.61, α = 0.90). Next, participants indicated their support for economic inequality on the Support for Economic Inequality Scale ( Wiwad et al, 2019 ; M = 2.83, SD = 1.68, α = 0.95). Finally, participants reported their support for poverty and inequality oriented government intervention ( Pew Research Center, 2014 ) using a four-point scale ranging from 1 (“Nothing at all”) to 4 (“A Lot”).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognizing the Impact of COVID-19 on the Poor Alters Attitudes Towards Poverty and Inequality

Wiwad

Mercier

Piff

et al. 2021

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The novel Coronavirus that spread around the world in early 2020 triggered a global pandemic and economic downturn that affected nearly everyone. Yet the crisis had a disproportionate impact on the poor and revealed how easily working-class individuals' financial security can be destabilised by factors beyond personal control. In a pre-registered longitudinal study of Americans ( N = 233) spanning April 2019 to May 2020, we tested whether the pandemic altered beliefs about the extent to which poverty is caused by external forces and internal dispositions and support for economic inequality. Over this timespan, participants revealed a shift in their attributions for poverty, reporting that poverty is more strongly impacted by external-situational causes and less by internal-dispositional causes. However, we did not detect an overall mean-level change in opposition to inequality or support for government intervention. Instead, only for those who most strongly recognized the negative impact of COVID-19 did changes in poverty attributions translate to decreased support for inequality, and increased support for government intervention to help the poor.

show abstract

Support for Economic Inequality Scale: Development and Adjudication

Cited by 9 publications

References 26 publications

Lacking socio‐economic status reduces subjective well‐being through perceptions of meta‐dehumanization

Lacking socio‐economic status reduces subjective well‐being through perceptions of meta‐dehumanization

The politics of zero-sum thinking: The relationship between political ideology and the belief that life is a zero-sum game

Recognizing the Impact of COVID-19 on the Poor Alters Attitudes Towards Poverty and Inequality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About