IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v104y2023i2p180-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Income inequality is unrelated to perceived inequality and support for redistribution

Author

Listed:
  • Kris‐Stella Trump

Abstract

Objectives This study aims to contribute to our understanding of the relationship between income inequality, perceptions of income inequality, and support for redistribution. In particular, it asks whether income inequality affects support for redistribution by influencing perceptions of inequality. Methods This study combines the pay ratio measures from the International Social Survey Project with income inequality measures from the Standardized World Income Inequality Database. The analysis proceeds in three steps, asking whether (1) inequality is related to perceived inequality, (2) perceived inequality is related to preferences for inequality, and (3) perceived inequality is related to support for redistribution. Results Income inequality is unrelated to perceptions of inequality. Perceptions of inequality strongly predict preferred inequality, reinforcing the prior conclusion that anchoring effects likely cause this close relationship. Perceptions of inequality also predict support for redistribution. However, because actual inequality is unrelated to perceived inequality, there is no link between actual inequality and either preferred inequality or support for redistribution. Conclusion The overall pattern of results is consistent with the interpretation that perceptions of income inequality may be politically co‐determined with support for inequality and redistribution, instead of perceptions being mental antecedents of these attitudes.

Suggested Citation

  • Kris‐Stella Trump, 2023. "Income inequality is unrelated to perceived inequality and support for redistribution," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 104(2), pages 180-188, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:104:y:2023:i:2:p:180-188
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13269
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13269?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Macdonald, 2020. "Class Attitudes, Political Knowledge, and Support for Redistribution in an Era of Inequality," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(2), pages 960-977, March.
    2. Trump, Kris-Stella, 2018. "Income Inequality Influences Perceptions of Legitimate Income Differences," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(4), pages 929-952, October.
    3. Engelhardt, Carina & Wagener, Andreas, 2014. "Biased Perceptions of Income Inequality and Redistribution," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100395, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Kuhn, Andreas, 2019. "The subversive nature of inequality: Subjective inequality perceptions and attitudes to social inequality," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 331-344.
    5. David Macdonald, 2019. "Labor Unions and Support for Redistribution in an Era of Inequality," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1197-1214, June.
    6. Nathan J. Kelly & Peter K. Enns, 2010. "Inequality and the Dynamics of Public Opinion: The Self‐Reinforcing Link Between Economic Inequality and Mass Preferences," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(4), pages 855-870, October.
    7. Lall, Ranjit, 2016. "How Multiple Imputation Makes a Difference," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 414-433.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Busemeyer, Marius R. & Giger, Nathalie & Wehl, Nadja, 2024. "Individual ideology and biased perceptions of income," Working Papers 21, University of Konstanz, Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality. Perceptions, Participation and Policies".

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andreas Kuhn, 2020. "The individual (mis-)perception of wage inequality: measurement, correlates and implications," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(5), pages 2039-2069, November.
    2. Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M. & Krozer, Alice & Ramírez-Álvarez, Aurora A. & de la Torre, Rodolfo & Velez-Grajales, Roberto, 2022. "Perceptions of inequality and social mobility in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Frederich Kirsten & Ilse Botha & Mduduzi Biyase & Marinda Pretorius, 2023. "Determinants of Subjective Social Status in South Africa," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Ziano, Ignazio & Lembregts, Christophe & Pandelaere, Mario, 2022. "People weigh salaries more than ratios in judgments of income inequality, fairness, and demands for redistribution," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Windsteiger, Lisa, 2022. "The redistributive consequences of segregation and misperceptions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Martín Brun & Conchita D'Ambrosio & Ada Ferrer-i-Carbonell & Xavier Ramos, 2023. "After you. Cognition and Health-Distribution Preferences," Working Papers 1392, Barcelona School of Economics.
    7. Summers, Kate & Accominotti, Fabien & Burchardt, Tania & Hecht, Katharina & Mann, Elizabeth & Mijs, Jonathan J.B, 2022. "Deliberating inequality: a blueprint for studying the social formation of beliefs about economic inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114591, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Knell, Markus & Stix, Helmut, 2020. "Perceptions of inequality," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    9. Gwangeun Choi, 2021. "Individuals’ socioeconomic position, inequality perceptions, and redistributive preferences in OECD countries," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(2), pages 239-264, June.
    10. Choi, Gwangeun, 2019. "Revisiting the redistribution hypothesis with perceived inequality and redistributive preferences," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 220-244.
    11. Kuhn, Andreas, 2019. "The subversive nature of inequality: Subjective inequality perceptions and attitudes to social inequality," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 331-344.
    12. Bohmann, Sandra & Kalleitner, Fabian, 2023. "Subjective Inequity Aversion: Unfair Inequality, Subjective Well-Being, and Preferences for Redistribution," SocArXiv g8arw, Center for Open Science.
    13. Yan, Alan Nigel, 2023. "The minimal effects of union membership on political attitudes," SocArXiv zabrq, Center for Open Science.
    14. Julia C. Morse & Bridget Coggins, 2024. "Your silence speaks volumes: Weak states and strategic absence in the UN General Assembly," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 515-544, September.
    15. Ivo Bischoff & Nataliya Kusa, 2019. "Should Wealth Transfers Be Taxed? Evidence from a Representative German Survey," Public Finance Review, , vol. 47(4), pages 635-661, July.
    16. Minakshi Nayak & Karen Wills & Megan Teychenne & Jo Salmon & Verity Cleland, 2021. "Patterns and Predictors of Sitting among Women from Disad-Vantaged Neighbourhoods over Time: A 5-Year Prospective Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-13, April.
    17. Peter Calcagno & Alexander Marsella & Yang Zhou, 2024. "Income inequality and party alternation: State‐level evidence from the United States," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(2), pages 355-374, April.
    18. Mijs, Jonathan Jan Benjamin, 2019. "The Paradox of Inequality: Income Inequality and Belief in Meritocracy go Hand in Hand," SocArXiv dcr9b, Center for Open Science.
    19. Ivo Bischoff & Nataliya Kusa, 2016. "Should wealth transfers be taxed? Citizens’ view on a fundamental question," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201636, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    20. Martínez-Mora, Francisco & Puy, M. Socorro, 2014. "The determinants and electoral consequences of asymmetric preferences," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 85-97.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:104:y:2023:i:2:p:180-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.