[Longer Unemployment Insurance Benefits in Times of Crisis? Covid-19 and the Appropriate Maximum Benefit Duration].

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Kolner Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-12-06 DOI:10.1007/s11577-021-00806-3
Christopher Osiander, Monika Senghaas, Gesine Stephan, Olaf Struck
{"title":"[Longer Unemployment Insurance Benefits in Times of Crisis? Covid-19 and the Appropriate Maximum Benefit Duration].","authors":"Christopher Osiander, Monika Senghaas, Gesine Stephan, Olaf Struck","doi":"10.1007/s11577-021-00806-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article deals with the question of which unemployment benefit durations are considered fair for which groups. In addition, it examines the extent to which individuals consider longer unemployment insurance benefit durations to be appropriate in times of economic crisis, such as the current situation during the Covid-19 pandemic. Longer reference periods can stabilize the income situation of benefit recipients and can provide time to search for an adequate job and thus increase matching quality. However, they also initially reduce the pressure to look for a job, and they lengthen the period of unemployment in the longer term. Using survey data from two online surveys done in November 2019 and during the crisis in May 2020, we examine which unemployment benefit durations employees consider appropriate. For this purpose, we presented vignettes to the survey participants describing hypothetical unemployed people whose characteristics varied randomly. The results show that the same respondents considered similar reference periods to be appropriate at both dates. In addition, the respondents took into account criteria of contribution as well as neediness when assessing the appropriate duration of benefits for the unemployed. Characteristics such as the age of the unemployed and any existing culpability, life benefits, or contribution periods influenced the duration of the benefit receipt that respondents judged to be appropriate.</p>","PeriodicalId":46893,"journal":{"name":"Kolner Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8647966/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kolner Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-021-00806-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article deals with the question of which unemployment benefit durations are considered fair for which groups. In addition, it examines the extent to which individuals consider longer unemployment insurance benefit durations to be appropriate in times of economic crisis, such as the current situation during the Covid-19 pandemic. Longer reference periods can stabilize the income situation of benefit recipients and can provide time to search for an adequate job and thus increase matching quality. However, they also initially reduce the pressure to look for a job, and they lengthen the period of unemployment in the longer term. Using survey data from two online surveys done in November 2019 and during the crisis in May 2020, we examine which unemployment benefit durations employees consider appropriate. For this purpose, we presented vignettes to the survey participants describing hypothetical unemployed people whose characteristics varied randomly. The results show that the same respondents considered similar reference periods to be appropriate at both dates. In addition, the respondents took into account criteria of contribution as well as neediness when assessing the appropriate duration of benefits for the unemployed. Characteristics such as the age of the unemployed and any existing culpability, life benefits, or contribution periods influenced the duration of the benefit receipt that respondents judged to be appropriate.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[危机时期更长的失业保险福利?Covid-19 和适当的最长福利期限]。
本文探讨了哪些群体认为哪些失业救济金期限是公平的。此外,文章还探讨了在经济危机时期,如目前的 Covid-19 大流行期间,个人认为较长的失业保险福利期限在多大程度上是合适的。较长的参照期可以稳定福利领取者的收入状况,并提供时间寻找合适的工作,从而提高匹配质量。然而,较长的参照期也会在初期减轻求职压力,并在长期内延长失业期。利用 2019 年 11 月和 2020 年 5 月危机期间进行的两次在线调查的调查数据,我们研究了雇员认为哪些失业福利期限是合适的。为此,我们向调查参与者展示了一些小故事,描述了特征随机变化的假设失业者。结果显示,相同的受访者认为这两个日期的参考期限相似。此外,受访者在评估失业者领取福利的适当期限时,还考虑了贡献和需求标准。失业者的年龄、现有的罪责、终身福利或缴款期等特征影响着受访者认为适当的福利领取期限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.70%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The sociology journal Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (KZfSS) ("Cologne Journal of Sociology and Social Psychology") was founded in 1948 by the Cologne sociologist Leopold von Wiese as the Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie. His successor, René König, broadened the journal''s scope towards social psychological topics, including cultural sociology and qualitative social research, which gave the journal its current name. KZfSS is the most important sociological publication in the German-speaking world in terms of its scope and distribution. It publishes comprehensively on German sociological research in all disciplines and regularly communicates research results from many countries around the world. KZfSS follows the model of a universal sociology journal. In addition to more than 40 double-blind peer-reviewed original research articles per year, it publishes detailed literature reviews and book reviews of German and international literature in a comprehensive review section. The journal thus provides a forum for sociological research and open discussion. Special emphasis is placed on offering young colleagues an opportunity for their first publication. The journal is included in many renowned scientific Abstracting & Indexing databases such as the Social Science Citation Index. In addition to the four annual issues, a supplement coordinated by guest editors is published annually.
期刊最新文献
Social Background Effects on Educational Outcomes-New Insights from Modern Genetic Science. „Dazugehören“: Zugehörigkeitsempfindungen und demokratische Werte Religiöse Diversität, Islam und Integration in Westeuropa – Analyse symbolischer, sozialer und institutioneller Grenzdynamiken Thoughts on Integrating Evolutionary Analysis into Sociological Action Theory Discriminatory Residential Preferences in Germany—A Vignette Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1