The color of class politics: economic position, racial resentment, and attitudes about redistribution

Bloeser, Andrew J.; Williams, Tarah

doi:10.1080/21565503.2020.1773279

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One key driver of changes in views was losing position in the game; both the ending position and any gains in position were insignificant, suggesting that losing status provided stronger impetus towards altering views. This finding is interesting in light of other research showing that racial resentment has a large impact on views towards redistributive policy, particularly when those surveyed did not benefit directly (Bloeser & Williams, 2020). Conversely, individuals who benefit directly from redistributive policies were more supportive of them, which is somewhat similar to the results here.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Just over seventy percent of participants in the game were white, and the indicator for being white was a consistently significant factor in estimates of voting probabilities. These results are consistent with the work of Bloeser and Williams (2020), who find that racial resentment may drive whites to vote against redistribution, particularly if they do not view it as likely to help them directly. This interpretation is supported by the estimates; the indicator for being white remains significant even while controlling for party affiliation, group effects, and preferences over redistribution.…”

Section: Regression Analysis Of Voting Decisionssupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do Actions Speak Louder than Words?

Green

Humphrey²

2022

The American Economist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are preferences for redistribution based on self-interest, ideology, or identity? This paper describes an experiment where participants play a game that requires both luck and skill for cash payoffs. At the end of the game, participants vote on the distribution of payoffs. Options range from full equality to unequal payments based on final rank. These votes are then analyzed; results show that self-interest, ideology, and identity all impact how participants vote. Those who do well are much more likely to vote for an unequal payoff while those who do poorly are likely to vote for an equal payoff. The degree of acceptable inequality, however, is influenced both by ideology (stated preferences over redistribution) and identity (race and age). The experiment also led to some changes in perspective, with those who did poorly in the game in particular being highly likely to shift their views in favor of redistribution.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Regression Analysis Of Voting Decisionssupporting

confidence: 90%

Do Actions Speak Louder than Words?

Green

Humphrey²

2022

The American Economist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A more expansive definition may also help mitigate the association of racialized norms of means‐tested recipients and deservingness (Cassese & Barnes, 2019; Williamson, 2017). However, given the entrenched racialized discourse surrounding welfare policy in the United States, there may be limits to shifting White acknowledgement of social policy use even with such information treatments (Bloeser & Williams, 2022).…”

Section: Observable Implications Of Existing Explanationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The policy acknowledgement gap: Explaining (mis)perceptions of government social program use

SoRelle

Shanks

2023

Policy Studies Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nearly, all Americans have received social policy benefits, yet many do not acknowledge “using government social programs.” Why? Work on the submerged state proposes that people who receive social assistance through market mechanisms do not realize that the benefits they get are the result of government policy, and therefore, they do not acknowledge receiving government assistance. Others point to motivated reasoning or social desirability bias to explain the gap between acknowledging and using social programs. We classify the existing literature into three broad explanations—delivery, definition, and desirability—and propose that each may be responsible for people's inability to accurately report using government social programs. We test these mechanisms with original survey experiments. The results of this study provide support for the theory that multiple mechanisms are at work in shaping social policy acknowledgment, but they confirm that a partisan acknowledgement gap exists across a variety of conditions, and it persists despite treatments designed to minimize it. The study has significant implications for the conditions under which partisanship and policy usage coalesce to undermine support for government social expenditures, and it helps to explain the persistence of a “makers vs. takers” logic in American politics.

show abstract

Fear and Poverty

Moreland-Capuia

2021

The Trauma of Racism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The color of class politics: economic position, racial resentment, and attitudes about redistribution

Cited by 9 publications

References 46 publications

Do Actions Speak Louder than Words?

Do Actions Speak Louder than Words?

The policy acknowledgement gap: Explaining (mis)perceptions of government social program use

Fear and Poverty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About