Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Experimental research on pay inequality attitudes often provides information about pay inequality with the expectation that greater awareness of pay differences will increase the belief that pay inequality is unfair, thereby strengthening support for policies addressing pay inequality. Less explored is whether providing information about why pay inequality might be justified may lower support for addressing pay inequality or counteract the effect of providing information about such inequality. This paper finds that providing static information about pay differences across the income distribution generally does not affect support for policies addressing pay inequality. However, providing information about pay inequality followed by a labor economics argument in support of pay differences (priming structural fairness) generally decreases support for such policies. One mechanism through which this effect may operate is by increasing the belief that differences in pay are justified.

Keywords

public opinion inequality fairness redistribution survey research

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alesina

Glaeser

E. L. E. L.

Sacerdote

(2001). Why doesn’t the United States have a European welfare state? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2001(2), 187–277. https://doi.org/10.1353/eca.2001.0014

Ashok

Kuziemko

Washington

(2015). Support for redistribution in an age of rising inequality: New stylized facts and some tentative explanations Working paper 21529 (pp. 367–433). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Bartels

L. M.

(2016). Unequal democracy. Princeton University Press.

Becker

(2020). Mind the income gaps? Experimental evidence of information’s lasting effect on redistributive preferences. Social Justice Research, 33(2), 137–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-019-00343-7

Campbell

Converse

Miller

Stokes

(1980). The American voter. University of Chicago Press.

Ciani

Fréget

Manfredi

(2021). Learning about inequality and demand for redistribution: A meta-analysis of in-survey informational experiments. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Papers on Well-Being and Inequalities.

Cruces

Perez-Truglia

Tetaz

(2013). Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from a survey experiment. Journal of Public Economics, 98, 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2012.10.009

Department of Veterans Affairs . (2018). Veterans affairs job postings. https://www.va.gov/jobs/

Druckman

J. N.

(2004). Political preference formation: Competition, deliberation, and the (ir) relevance of framing effects. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 671–686. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055404041413

10.

Jost

J. T.

van der Toorn

(2011). System justification theory. Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, 2, 313–343. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222

11.

Kelley

Evans

M. D. R.

(1993). The legitimation of inequality: Occupational earnings in nine nations. American Journal of Sociology, 99(1), 75–125. https://doi.org/10.1086/230230

12.

Kuziemko

Norton

M. I.

Saez

Stantcheva

(2015). How elastic are preferences for redistribution? Evidence from randomized survey experiments. American Economic Review, 105(4), 1478–1508. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130360

13.

Lendway

(2021). The effect of informational and empathy-enhancing interventions on redistributive preferences. Yale Journal of International Affairs. https://www.yalejournal.org/publications/the-effect-of-informational-and-empathy-enhancing-interventions-on-redistributive-preferences.

14.

McCall

Burk

Laperrière

Richeson

J. A.

(2017). Exposure to rising inequality shapes Americans’ opportunity beliefs and policy support. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(36), 9593–9598. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706253114

15.

McCall

Chin

(2013). Does knowledge of inequality affect beliefs about inequality (p. 1114). Midwest Political Science Association.

16.

Norton

M. I.

Ariely

(2011). Building a better America—one wealth quintile at a time. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 6(1), 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393524

17.

Obama . (2013). Barrack obama twitter account. https://twitter.com/barackobama/status/301516739114590208?lang=en

18.

Roemer

J. E.

Trannoy

(2016). Equality of opportunity: Theory and measurement. Journal of Economic Literature, 54(4), 1288–1332. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20151206

19.

Saint Louis Federal Reserve . (2017). Real median personal income in the United States. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N

20.

Sanders . (2010). Senate floor speech. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2010/dec/10/bernie-sanders/bernie-sanders-viral-speech-says-top-1-percent-ear/

21.

Sands

M. L.

(2017). Exposure to inequality affects support for redistribution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(4), 663–668. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1615010113

22.

Seeking Alpha . (2017). United States income brackets and percentiles in 2017. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4109731-united-states-income-brackets-and-percentiles-in-2017

23.

Shaffner

Ansolabehere

Luke

(2018). Guide to the 2018 congressional cooperative election survey. Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/ZSBZ7K

24.

Starmans

Sheskin

Bloom

(2017). Why people prefer unequal societies. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(4), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0082

25.

Trump

K.-S.

(2018). Income inequality influences perceptions of legitimate income differences. British Journal of Political Science, 48(4), 929–952. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123416000326

26.

Trump

K.-S.

(2020). When and why is economic inequality seen as fair. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 46–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.12.001

27.

Walsh

K. C.

(2012). Putting inequality in its place: Rural consciousness and the power of perspective. American Political Science Review, 106(3), 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055412000305

28.

Zaller

(1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge University Press.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.33 MB