IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/somere/v50y2021i3p944-1005.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking Input Inequality and Outcome Inequality

Author

Listed:
  • Guillermina Jasso

Abstract

Inequality often appears in linked pairs of variables. Examples include schooling and income, income and consumption, and wealth and happiness. Consider the famous words of Veblen: “wealth confers honor.†Understanding inequality requires understanding input inequality, outcome inequality, and the relation between the two—in both inequality between persons and inequality between subgroups. This article contributes to the methodological toolkit for studying inequality by developing a framework that makes explicit both input inequality and outcome inequality and by addressing three main associated questions: (1) How do the mechanisms for generating and altering inequality differ across inputs and outcomes? (2) Which have more inequality—inputs or outcomes? (3) Under what conditions, and by what mechanisms, does input inequality affect outcome inequality? Results include the following: First, under specified conditions, distinctive mechanisms govern inequality in inputs and inequality in outcomes. Second, input inequality and outcome inequality can be the same or different; if different, whether inequality is greater among inputs or outcomes depends on the configuration of outcome function, types of inputs, distributional form of and inequality in cardinal inputs, and number of and associations among inputs. Third, the link between input inequality and outcome inequality is multiform; it can be nonexistent, linear, or nonlinear, and if nonlinear, it can be concave or convex. More deeply, this work signals the formidable empirical challenges in studying inequality, but also the fast growing toolbox. For example, even if the outcome distribution is difficult to derive, fundamental theorems on the variance make it possible to analyze the input–outcome inequality connection. Similarly, within specified distributions, the general inequality parameter makes it possible to express results in terms of both measures of overall inequality and measures of subgroup inequality.

Suggested Citation

  • Guillermina Jasso, 2021. "Linking Input Inequality and Outcome Inequality," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 50(3), pages 944-1005, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:somere:v:50:y:2021:i:3:p:944-1005
    DOI: 10.1177/00491241211014245
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00491241211014245
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00491241211014245?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. Guillermina Jasso, 2020. "Anything Lorenz Curves Can Do, Top Shares Can Do: Assessing the TopBot Family of Inequality Measures," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 49(4), pages 947-981, November.
    2. M. D. R. Evans & Jonathan Kelley & Clayton D. Peoples, 2010. "Justifications of Inequality: The Normative Basis of Pay Differentials in 31 Nations," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(s1), pages 1405-1431.
    3. Guillermina Jasso & Samuel Kotz, 2007. "A new continuous distribution and two new families of distributions based on the exponential," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 61(3), pages 305-328, August.
    4. Andreas Diekmann, 2004. "The Power of Reciprocity," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(4), pages 487-505, August.
    5. M. D. R. Evans & Jonathan Kelley & Clayton D. Peoples, 2010. "Justifications of Inequality: The Normative Basis of Pay Differentials in 31 Nations," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1405-1431, December.
    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. Wendelin Schnedler & Nina Lucia Stephan, 2020. "Revisiting a Remedy Against Chains of Unkindness," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(3), pages 347-364, July.
    2. Martin Korndörfer & Boris Egloff & Stefan C. Schmukle, 2015. "A Large Scale Test of the Effect of Social Class on Prosocial Behavior," Working Papers 1601, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    3. Larney, Andrea & Rotella, Amanda & Barclay, Pat, 2019. "Stake size effects in ultimatum game and dictator game offers: A meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 61-72.
    4. Emily Mutea & Stephan Rist & Johanna Jacobi, 2020. "Applying the Theory of Access to Food Security among Smallholder Family Farmers around North-West Mount Kenya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, February.
    5. Stefan Liebig & Carsten Sauer & Jürgen Schupp, 2009. "The Justice of Earnings in Dual-Earner Households," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 216, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    6. Mostafa Shahen & Koji Kotani & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2020. "How do individuals behave in the intergenerational sustainability dilemma? A strategy method experiment," Working Papers SDES-2020-1, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised May 2020.
    7. repec:grz:wpsses:2013-05 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Anita Manatschal & Markus Freitag, 2014. "Reciprocity and volunteering," Rationality and Society, , vol. 26(2), pages 208-235, May.
    9. Andreas Lange & Jan Schmitz & Claudia Schwirplies, 2022. "Inequality, role reversal and cooperation in multiple group membership settings," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 68-110, February.
    10. Bull, Joe, 2012. "Loads of green washing—can behavioural economics increase willingness-to-pay for efficient washing machines in the UK?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 242-252.
    11. Junichi Hirose & Koji Kotani & Yoshinori Nakagawa, 2021. "Is Climate Change Induced by Humans? The Impact of the Gap in Perceptions on Cooperation," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 391-413, October.
    12. Jasso, Guillermina, 2016. "(In)Equality and (In)Justice," IZA Discussion Papers 10125, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Guillermina Jasso, 2009. "A New Model of Wage Determination and Wage Inequality," Rationality and Society, , vol. 21(1), pages 113-168, February.
    14. Becker, Johannes & Hopp, Daniel & Süß, Karolin, 2020. "How altruistic is indirect reciprocity? - Evidence from gift-exchange games in the lab," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224592, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    15. Ivar Krumpal & Thomas Voss, 2020. "Sensitive Questions and Trust: Explaining Respondents’ Behavior in Randomized Response Surveys," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, July.
    16. Ben-Ner, Avner, 2013. "Preferences and organization structure: Toward behavioral economics micro-foundations of organizational analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 87-96.
    17. Servaes, Henri & Tamayo, Ane, 2017. "The role of social capital in corporations: a review," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 69209, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Guillermina Jasso & Samuel Kotz, 2008. "Two Types of Inequality," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 37(1), pages 31-74, August.
    19. Wendelin Schneder & Nina Lucia Stephan, 2018. "Revisiting a remedy against the chain of unkindness," Working Papers Dissertations 45, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    20. Hendrik Vollmer, 2013. "What kind of game is everyday interaction?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 25(3), pages 370-404, August.
    21. Yang, Zhiyong & Janakiraman, Narayan & Hossain, Mehdi T. & Grisaffe, Douglas B., 2020. "Differential effects of pay-it-forward and direct-reciprocity on prosocial behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 400-408.

    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:somere:v:50:y:2021:i:3:p:944-1005. 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.