The enemy between us: The psychological and social costs of inequality

Abstract

There is now substantial evidence that larger income differences in a society increase the prevalence of most of the health and social problems that tend to occur more frequently lower down the social ladder. The pathways through which human beings are sensitive to inequality are however less clear. This paper outlines the explanatory theory that we think best fits the growing but incomplete body of evidence available. Inequality appears to have its most fundamental effects on the quality of social relations—with implications affecting the prevalence of a number of psychopathologies. We suggest that human beings have two contrasting evolved social strategies: one that is adaptive to living in a dominance hierarchy and the other appropriate to more egalitarian societies based on reciprocity and cooperation. Although both strategies are used in all societies, we hypothesise that the balance between them changes with the extent of material inequality.

What has economics got to do with it? The impact of socioeconomic factors on mental health and the case for collective action

“…This sits alongside increased attention to public mental health, and the promotion of positive societal well-being (Wahlbeck, 2015;Rogers and Pilgrim, 2010;Hanlon and Carlisle, 2013). The role of psychosocial factors and chronic stress has also been emphasised in understanding health inequalities (Fisher and Baum, 2010;Wilkinson and Pickett, 2017). Furthermore, stigma (a ubiquitous component of mental health difficulties), has been recognised as a fundamental cause of health inequalities (Hatzenbuehler et al, 2013).…”

The role of right‐wing authoritarianism and political sophistication in shaping attitudes toward redistribution

“…In recent decades, almost every advanced industrial society has experienced a dramatic rise in social inequality (Morelli, Smeeding, & Thompson, 2015), and social inequality has been linked to a variety of societal problems (Stiglitz, 2012;Wilkinson & Pickett, 2017). Accordingly, a key dimension of contemporary political conflict is whether and the extent to which governments should take action to redistribute wealth (Carmines & D'Amico, 2015;Claggett & Shafer, 2010;Feldman & Johnston, 2014;Grande & Kriesi, 2012;Johnson & Tamney, 2001;Zumbrunnen & Gangl, 2008).…”

Contextual moderators of the link between national and European identity among European youth

“…Results suggested that the overall positive relationship between national and European identity is weaker if the context is distrustful of the EU or is characterized by greater social and economic inequalities. Because social inequality erodes social trust and cohesion (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2017) one key implication for policymakers would be to target these inequalities in order to make national and European identity more compatible for all young citizens of the EU. European identity were latent variables.…”

“…We also considered country-level characteristics at the macro-level. We assumed that European identity is eroded by worse living conditions in the country (Verhaegen, Hooghe, & Quintelier, 2014), and greater social inequalities (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2017). Inequalities can exist in relation to income and gender but also in relation to how countries deal with immigrants compared to natives.…”