Deliberating Inequality: A Blueprint for Studying the Social Formation of Beliefs about Economic Inequality.

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Social Justice Research Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-04-01 DOI:10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0
Kate Summers, Fabien Accominotti, Tania Burchardt, Katharina Hecht, Elizabeth Mann, Jonathan Mijs
{"title":"Deliberating Inequality: A Blueprint for Studying the Social Formation of Beliefs about Economic Inequality.","authors":"Kate Summers, Fabien Accominotti, Tania Burchardt, Katharina Hecht, Elizabeth Mann, Jonathan Mijs","doi":"10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In most contemporary societies, people underestimate the extent of economic inequality, resulting in lower support for taxation and redistribution than might be expressed by better informed citizens. We still know little, however, about how understandings of inequality arise, and therefore about where perceptions and misperceptions of it might come from. This methodological article takes one step toward filling this gap by developing a research design-a blueprint-to study how people's understandings of wealth and income inequality develop through social interaction. Our approach combines insights from recent scholarship highlighting the socially situated character of inequality beliefs with those of survey experimental work testing how information about inequality changes people's understandings of it. Specifically, we propose to use deliberative focus groups to approximate the interactional contexts in which individuals process information and form beliefs in social life. Leveraging an experimental methodology, our design then varies the social makeup of deliberative groups, as well as the information about inequality we share with participants, to explore how different types of social environments and information shape people's understandings of economic inequality. This should let us test, in particular, whether the low socioeconomic diversity of people's discussion and interaction networks relates to their tendency to underestimate inequality, and whether beliefs about opportunity explain people's lack of appetite for redistributive policies. In this exploratory article we motivate our methodological apparatus and describe its key features, before reflecting on the findings from a proof-of-concept study conducted in London in the fall of 2019.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0.</p>","PeriodicalId":47602,"journal":{"name":"Social Justice Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8972749/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Justice Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In most contemporary societies, people underestimate the extent of economic inequality, resulting in lower support for taxation and redistribution than might be expressed by better informed citizens. We still know little, however, about how understandings of inequality arise, and therefore about where perceptions and misperceptions of it might come from. This methodological article takes one step toward filling this gap by developing a research design-a blueprint-to study how people's understandings of wealth and income inequality develop through social interaction. Our approach combines insights from recent scholarship highlighting the socially situated character of inequality beliefs with those of survey experimental work testing how information about inequality changes people's understandings of it. Specifically, we propose to use deliberative focus groups to approximate the interactional contexts in which individuals process information and form beliefs in social life. Leveraging an experimental methodology, our design then varies the social makeup of deliberative groups, as well as the information about inequality we share with participants, to explore how different types of social environments and information shape people's understandings of economic inequality. This should let us test, in particular, whether the low socioeconomic diversity of people's discussion and interaction networks relates to their tendency to underestimate inequality, and whether beliefs about opportunity explain people's lack of appetite for redistributive policies. In this exploratory article we motivate our methodological apparatus and describe its key features, before reflecting on the findings from a proof-of-concept study conducted in London in the fall of 2019.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0.

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
对不平等的思考:研究经济不平等的社会信仰形成的蓝图
在大多数当代社会中,人们低估了经济不平等的程度,从而导致对税收和再分配的支持率低于更了解情况的公民。然而,我们对不平等的理解是如何产生的,因而对不平等的看法和误解又是如何产生的,仍然知之甚少。这篇文章从方法论角度出发,提出了一种研究设计--蓝图,研究人们对财富和收入不平等的理解是如何通过社会互动发展起来的。我们的研究方法结合了近期学术研究的见解,强调了不平等信念的社会情景特征,以及那些测试有关不平等的信息如何改变人们对不平等的理解的调查实验工作的见解。具体来说,我们建议使用商议焦点小组来模拟个人在社会生活中处理信息和形成信念的互动情境。利用实验方法,我们的设计会改变商议小组的社会构成,以及我们与参与者分享的有关不平等的信息,从而探索不同类型的社会环境和信息如何影响人们对经济不平等的理解。这可以让我们特别检验人们的讨论和互动网络中社会经济的低多样性是否与他们低估不平等的倾向有关,以及关于机会的信念是否可以解释人们对再分配政策缺乏兴趣。在这篇探索性文章中,我们首先介绍了我们的方法论装置并描述了其主要特点,然后对2019年秋季在伦敦开展的概念验证研究的结果进行了反思:在线版本包含补充材料,可查阅 10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0。
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
3.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Social Justice Research, is an international multidisciplinary forum for the publication of original papers that have broad implications for social scientists investigating the origins, structures, and consequences of justice in human affairs. The journal encompasses the justice-related work (using traditional and novel approaches) of all social scientists-psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, economists, policy scientists, political scientists, legal researchers, management scientists, and others. Its multidisciplinary approach furthers the integration of the various social science perspectives. In addition to original research papers - theoretical, empirical, and methodological - the journal also publishes book reviews and, from time to time, special thematic issues.
期刊最新文献
Same Same or Different? Pay Referents and Unfairness Perceptions in Two Employment Arrangements More Just for Me than Which Others? Personal Justice Ascendancy, Perceived Discrimination in Healthcare, and Personal Well-Being in African Americans When and How Information About Economic Inequality Affects Attitudes Towards Redistribution More Satisfaction, Less Equality: Distributive Effects of Transparent Needs in a Laboratory Experiment Is Organizational Justice Relevant for Enhancing Employee’s Commitment: An Empirical Analysis using Perceiver Supervisor Support as a Mediator
×
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