IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ratsoc/v36y2024i2p157-182.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does improved upward social mobility foster frustration and conflict? A large-scale online experiment testing Boudon’s model

Author

Listed:
  • Joël Berger
  • Andreas Diekmann
  • Stefan Wehrli

Abstract

The rise of populism has reignited scholarly interest in the paradox of societal advancement leading to frustration and social tension. Globalization and digitalization have increased social opportunities for parts of the population, but a substantial portion of society feels disadvantaged, resulting in discontent. This study, rooted in Boudon’s model of relative deprivation, examines the mechanisms that fuel this frustration. We conducted an online experiment involving 2114 US-based MTurk participants, in which we manipulated the availability of status positions to create varying degrees of upward social mobility. We also varied group sizes to ensure robustness. We assessed relative deprivation with structural, subjective, and behavioral measures. For example, frustration was measured using the “joy-of-destruction game,†in which subjects had to make the costly decision to destroy part of another player’s winnings. Contrary to the model’s prediction, we found that the proportion of individuals who were worse off, the losers, decreased consistently as mobility increased. This outcome can be attributed to overentry in conditions of low mobility and underentry in conditions of intermediate or high mobility. The losers displayed increased frustration and hostility towards noncompetitors and winners. Intriguingly, winners also exhibited heightened hostility. However, at the aggregate level, hostile behavior did not surge as conditions improved. In our exploratory analyses at the individual level, we identified several distinct patterns. Risk-tolerant individuals and women were more likely to enter competition. Conversely, those with advanced education levels showed a decreased inclination to competitiveness. Risk-tolerant individuals reported greater feelings of frustration and displayed increased hostility. This effect was also observed particularly among politically right-leaning individuals.

Suggested Citation

  • Joël Berger & Andreas Diekmann & Stefan Wehrli, 2024. "Does improved upward social mobility foster frustration and conflict? A large-scale online experiment testing Boudon’s model," Rationality and Society, , vol. 36(2), pages 157-182, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:36:y:2024:i:2:p:157-182
    DOI: 10.1177/10434631231225544
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10434631231225544
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10434631231225544?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. John C. Harsanyi & Reinhard Selten, 1988. "A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582384, December.
    2. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    3. Antonio A. Arechar & Simon Gächter & Lucas Molleman, 2018. "Conducting interactive experiments online," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 99-131, March.
    4. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2011. "Gender and Competition," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 601-630, September.
    5. Agenor, Pierre-Richard & Aizenman, Joshua, 1997. "Technological change, relative wages, and unemployment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 187-205, February.
    6. Belot, Michele & Duch, Raymond & Miller, Luis, 2015. "A comprehensive comparison of students and non-students in classic experimental games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 26-33.
    7. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    8. Van Reenen, John, 2011. "Wage inequality, technology and trade: 21st century evidence," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 730-741.
    9. Abbink, Klaus & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim, 2009. "The pleasure of being nasty," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 306-308, December.
    10. Prediger, Sebastian & Vollan, Björn & Herrmann, Benedikt, 2014. "Resource scarcity and antisocial behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-9.
    11. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Melissa S. Kearney, 2006. "The Polarization of the U.S. Labor Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 189-194, May.
    12. Loukas Balafoutas & Helena Fornwagner & Matthias Sutter, 2018. "Closing the gender gap in competitiveness through priming," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 9(1), pages 1-6, December.
    13. Joël Berger & Andreas Diekmann, 2015. "The Logic of Relative Frustration: Boudon’s Competition Model and Experimental Evidence," ETH Zurich Sociology Working Papers 10, ETH Zurich, Chair of Sociology.
    14. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2007. "Do Women Shy Away From Competition? Do Men Compete Too Much?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1067-1101.
    15. Krupnikov, Yanna & Levine, Adam Seth, 2014. "Cross-Sample Comparisons and External Validity," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 59-80, April.
    16. Peter Turchin, 2010. "Political instability may be a contributor in the coming decade," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7281), pages 608-608, February.
    17. Crosetto, Paolo & Weisel, Ori & Winter, Fabian, 2019. "A flexible z-Tree and oTree implementation of the Social Value Orientation Slider Measure," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 46-53.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Eber, Nicolas & François, Abel & Weill, Laurent, 2021. "Gender, age, and attitude toward competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 668-690.
    2. Kessel, Dany & Mollerstrom, Johanna & van Veldhuizen, Roel, 2021. "Can simple advice eliminate the gender gap in willingness to compete?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 138, pages 1-1.
    3. Thomas Buser, 2016. "The Impact of Losing in a Competition on the Willingness to Seek Further Challenges," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(12), pages 3439-3449, December.
    4. Halko, Marja-Liisa & Lappalainen, Olli & Sääksvuori, Lauri, 2021. "Do non-choice data reveal economic preferences? Evidence from biometric data and compensation-scheme choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 87-104.
    5. Bauer, Michal & Chytilová, Julie & Miguel, Edward, 2020. "Using survey questions to measure preferences: Lessons from an experimental validation in Kenya," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Brandts, Jordi & El Baroudi, Sabrine & Huber, Stefanie J. & Rott, Christina, 2021. "Gender differences in private and public goal setting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 222-247.
    7. Johnsen, Åshild A. & Finseraas, Henning & Hanson, Torbjørn & Kotsadam, Andreas, 2023. "The malleability of competitive preferences," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    8. Goodall, Amanda H. & Osterloh, Margit, 2015. "Women Have to Enter the Leadership Race to Win: Using Random Selection to Increase the Supply of Women into Senior Positions," IZA Discussion Papers 9331, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Buser, Thomas & Cappelen, Alexander & Tungodden, Bertil, 2021. "Fairness and Willingness to Compete," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 8/2021, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    10. Dato, Simon & Nieken, Petra, 2014. "Gender differences in competition and sabotage," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 64-80.
    11. Werner Bönte & Sandro Lombardo & Diemo Urbig, 2016. "Economics meets Psychology:Experimental and self-reported Measures of Individual Competitiveness," Schumpeter Discussion Papers SDP16006, Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal, University Library.
    12. Silvia Saccardo & Aniela Pietrasz & Uri Gneezy, 2018. "On the Size of the Gender Difference in Competitiveness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1541-1554, April.
    13. John Levendis & Aaron Lowen, 2023. "What Same-Sex Adoption Laws Can Tell Us About the Gender Wage Gap in the United States," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 473-489, June.
    14. Banker, Sachin & Bhanot, Syon P. & Deshpande, Aishwarya, 2020. "Poverty identity and preference for challenge: Evidence from the U.S. and India," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    15. Czibor, Eszter & Onderstal, Sander & Sloof, Randolph & van Praag, C. Mirjam, 2020. "Does relative grading help male students? Evidence from a field experiment in the classroom," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    16. Hoyer, Britta & van Huizen, Thomas & Keijzer, Linda & Rezaei, Sarah & Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Westbrock, Bastian, 2020. "Gender, competitiveness, and task difficulty: Evidence from the field," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    17. Schwieren, Christiane & Klonner, Stefan & Pal, Sumantra, 2020. "Equality of the Sexes and Gender Differences in Competition: Evidence from Three Traditional Societies," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224523, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    18. Britta Hoyer & T.M. van Huizen & L.M. Keijzer & T. Rezaei Khavas & S. Rosenkranz & B. Westbrock, 2016. "Do talented women shy away from competition?," Working Papers 16-06, Utrecht School of Economics.
    19. Barile, Lory & Drouvelis, Michalis, 2024. "Priming and the gender gap in competitiveness," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1490, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    20. Wladislaw Mill & John Morgan, 2022. "The cost of a divided America: an experimental study into destructive behavior," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 974-1001, June.

    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:sae:ratsoc:v:36:y:2024:i:2:p:157-182. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.