Pub Date : 2022-09-29DOI: 10.1177/10434631221131258
K. Rost, L. Stahel
Caused by perceived norm violations, online firestorms confront organizations with large volumes of hostile-emotional comments on public social media leading to a damage to reputation or the cancellation of products and projects. Relying on social norm theory we analyze how people express perceived norm violations in their online comments and how this relates to their use of hostile-emotional online sanctions. We distinguish negative externalities; propriety judgements; excess of zeal, which combines negative externalities with propriety judgements; and no justification, meaning no speculations about why norm violations occurred, as four types of motive for hostile verbal expression. Using hostile-emotional sanctioning is differently associated with these motives: (1) weak association with negative externalities to maintain credibility; (2) moderate association with propriety judgements as a result of altruistic punishments; (3) moderate association with no justification, triggered by arousal; and (4) strong association with an excess of zeal because norm enforcers believe that a latent group exists which rewards them with positive sanctions for working toward the common goal and punishes them with negative sanctions for shirking. We analyze one specific online protest signed by 305,122 people that led to a massive hostile-emotional firestorm against an organization. We find that 37% of the 44,173 individuals who additionally commented their protest participation were hostile and/or emotional. As predicted, we find that compared to the other motives, the excess of zeal is most likely to motivate hostile-emotional sanctions. Overall, our theory and findings explain why most online firestorms are hard to stop: with an excess of zeal, a latent group of norm enforcers must be appeased.
{"title":"Hostile-emotional excess of zeal in public social media: A case study of an online firestorm against an organization","authors":"K. Rost, L. Stahel","doi":"10.1177/10434631221131258","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221131258","url":null,"abstract":"Caused by perceived norm violations, online firestorms confront organizations with large volumes of hostile-emotional comments on public social media leading to a damage to reputation or the cancellation of products and projects. Relying on social norm theory we analyze how people express perceived norm violations in their online comments and how this relates to their use of hostile-emotional online sanctions. We distinguish negative externalities; propriety judgements; excess of zeal, which combines negative externalities with propriety judgements; and no justification, meaning no speculations about why norm violations occurred, as four types of motive for hostile verbal expression. Using hostile-emotional sanctioning is differently associated with these motives: (1) weak association with negative externalities to maintain credibility; (2) moderate association with propriety judgements as a result of altruistic punishments; (3) moderate association with no justification, triggered by arousal; and (4) strong association with an excess of zeal because norm enforcers believe that a latent group exists which rewards them with positive sanctions for working toward the common goal and punishes them with negative sanctions for shirking. We analyze one specific online protest signed by 305,122 people that led to a massive hostile-emotional firestorm against an organization. We find that 37% of the 44,173 individuals who additionally commented their protest participation were hostile and/or emotional. As predicted, we find that compared to the other motives, the excess of zeal is most likely to motivate hostile-emotional sanctions. Overall, our theory and findings explain why most online firestorms are hard to stop: with an excess of zeal, a latent group of norm enforcers must be appeased.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"469 - 500"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49525948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-26DOI: 10.1177/10434631221129056
M. Ekman
If welfare stigma depends upon social attitudes, only the neediest apply for welfare when they can more easily be seen to do so. Using GoogleMaps' ‘StreetView' feature, this article finds that the approval rate of applications for social assistance is higher in welfare offices with building characteristics that enhance the visibility of entry. A fitting explanation for this finding is that persons looking for social assistance dislike being thought of as ‘welfare cases', and apply more conservatively when others can see it. The effects decline in the rate of poverty, suggesting that the self-reliance norm weakens as poverty increases.
{"title":"Buildings and welfare","authors":"M. Ekman","doi":"10.1177/10434631221129056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221129056","url":null,"abstract":"If welfare stigma depends upon social attitudes, only the neediest apply for welfare when they can more easily be seen to do so. Using GoogleMaps' ‘StreetView' feature, this article finds that the approval rate of applications for social assistance is higher in welfare offices with building characteristics that enhance the visibility of entry. A fitting explanation for this finding is that persons looking for social assistance dislike being thought of as ‘welfare cases', and apply more conservatively when others can see it. The effects decline in the rate of poverty, suggesting that the self-reliance norm weakens as poverty increases.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"526 - 547"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47838408","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-09DOI: 10.1177/10434631221122977
David Willer, Pamela Emanuelson
This paper investigates two forms of property as a social phenomenon and finds the Property Right Paradigm of economics to be wrongly conceived. Introducing new formulations for property reveals that private and communal property are frequently found together. When they are, as the scope of one increases the scope of the other shrinks. We examine how property rights are embedded in social exchange experiments. Calling on game theory, we find that communal property relations and private property relations contain exactly the same social dilemma. Furthermore, absent enforced rights, no property exists. Property comes to exist through socially producing its rights and we show that production must be coercive. We link our new theory of property to Robѐ’s analysis of property and power in contemporary society.
{"title":"The social production of property","authors":"David Willer, Pamela Emanuelson","doi":"10.1177/10434631221122977","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221122977","url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates two forms of property as a social phenomenon and finds the Property Right Paradigm of economics to be wrongly conceived. Introducing new formulations for property reveals that private and communal property are frequently found together. When they are, as the scope of one increases the scope of the other shrinks. We examine how property rights are embedded in social exchange experiments. Calling on game theory, we find that communal property relations and private property relations contain exactly the same social dilemma. Furthermore, absent enforced rights, no property exists. Property comes to exist through socially producing its rights and we show that production must be coercive. We link our new theory of property to Robѐ’s analysis of property and power in contemporary society.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"421 - 445"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44501053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-10DOI: 10.1177/10434631221118648
Naoki Sudo
This study aims to elucidate the structure of support for social policies (redistribution and free competition), focusing on the role of community interests (especially demographic decline). To this end, Japan was selected as a case study because it has the highest proportion of the elderly population in the world. The author analyzed data from the National Survey of Social Stratification and Social Mobility in 2015 and the Population Census for the same year, employing ordered logit models. The results revealed that people living in demographically declining communities were more likely to support redistribution and less likely to endorse free competition, compared to individuals from other communities. Furthermore, compared to the underprivileged, wealthy individuals were more likely to consider community interests irrespective of individual benefits. This finding demonstrates that community interests may have a significant influence on individuals’ policy preferences.
{"title":"Support for social policies: Focusing on effects of group belonging","authors":"Naoki Sudo","doi":"10.1177/10434631221118648","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221118648","url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to elucidate the structure of support for social policies (redistribution and free competition), focusing on the role of community interests (especially demographic decline). To this end, Japan was selected as a case study because it has the highest proportion of the elderly population in the world. The author analyzed data from the National Survey of Social Stratification and Social Mobility in 2015 and the Population Census for the same year, employing ordered logit models. The results revealed that people living in demographically declining communities were more likely to support redistribution and less likely to endorse free competition, compared to individuals from other communities. Furthermore, compared to the underprivileged, wealthy individuals were more likely to consider community interests irrespective of individual benefits. This finding demonstrates that community interests may have a significant influence on individuals’ policy preferences.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"501 - 525"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44611928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-15DOI: 10.1177/10434631221113403
J. Joslyn
In a historical case study, this paper explores the mechanisms by which the rational interpretation of written text can produce divisiveness and splintering. The mechanisms of division are derived from theories of organizational rationality, cultural logics, organizational memory, and group conflict. The propositions are explored in an analysis of common sense rationality with a focus on the 19th century Stone-Campbell movement. When emotions are not adequately integrated into the culture of rational interpretation, group conflict can arise. The material characteristics of written text combined with a high-diffusion, low-hierarchy, highly recorded and publicized, and proactively contentious, emotionally triggering environment creates a breeding ground for division. The analysis paints a multi-dimensional picture of division and splintering from a sociomaterial standpoint.
{"title":"Divisiveness, splintering, and the rational interpretation of text","authors":"J. Joslyn","doi":"10.1177/10434631221113403","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221113403","url":null,"abstract":"In a historical case study, this paper explores the mechanisms by which the rational interpretation of written text can produce divisiveness and splintering. The mechanisms of division are derived from theories of organizational rationality, cultural logics, organizational memory, and group conflict. The propositions are explored in an analysis of common sense rationality with a focus on the 19th century Stone-Campbell movement. When emotions are not adequately integrated into the culture of rational interpretation, group conflict can arise. The material characteristics of written text combined with a high-diffusion, low-hierarchy, highly recorded and publicized, and proactively contentious, emotionally triggering environment creates a breeding ground for division. The analysis paints a multi-dimensional picture of division and splintering from a sociomaterial standpoint.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"395 - 418"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45656587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-30DOI: 10.1177/10434631221093746
Matthias Diermeier, Judith Niehues
The literature on immigration and the welfare state describes a trade-off between immigration and welfare support. We argue for a more nuanced view of welfare chauvinism that accounts for different motivational channels, specific welfare programs and particular population subgroups. First, we identify two separate characteristics of hostility towards immigrants that trigger welfare chauvinism: affective anti-migration sentiment that combines economic and cultural motives; and a ‘putative rational anti-migration sentiment’ that is driven by the fear that immigration could overburden the welfare state although immigrants themselves are not disliked or even appreciated. Second, running a program-specific analysis, we find that affective and ‘putative rational’ opposition to migration lower redistributive preferences towards the unemployed. On the contrary, affective anti-immigration sentiment even increases welfare affinity towards the elderly. We interpret this finding not as preferences for or against a specific welfare program but as implicit sympathy or antipathy for its recipients. Third, investigating the role of Populist Radical Right Parties (PRRPs) as the main source of welfare chauvinism, we find that PRRP supporters strongly prefer more redistribution towards a perceived native in-group: the elderly.
{"title":"Towards a nuanced understanding of anti-immigration sentiment in the welfare state – a program specific analysis of welfare preferences","authors":"Matthias Diermeier, Judith Niehues","doi":"10.1177/10434631221093746","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221093746","url":null,"abstract":"The literature on immigration and the welfare state describes a trade-off between immigration and welfare support. We argue for a more nuanced view of welfare chauvinism that accounts for different motivational channels, specific welfare programs and particular population subgroups. First, we identify two separate characteristics of hostility towards immigrants that trigger welfare chauvinism: affective anti-migration sentiment that combines economic and cultural motives; and a ‘putative rational anti-migration sentiment’ that is driven by the fear that immigration could overburden the welfare state although immigrants themselves are not disliked or even appreciated. Second, running a program-specific analysis, we find that affective and ‘putative rational’ opposition to migration lower redistributive preferences towards the unemployed. On the contrary, affective anti-immigration sentiment even increases welfare affinity towards the elderly. We interpret this finding not as preferences for or against a specific welfare program but as implicit sympathy or antipathy for its recipients. Third, investigating the role of Populist Radical Right Parties (PRRPs) as the main source of welfare chauvinism, we find that PRRP supporters strongly prefer more redistribution towards a perceived native in-group: the elderly.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"302 - 333"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48950851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-25DOI: 10.1177/10434631221094555
Zoe Adams, A. Ludwiczak, D. Sharma, Magda Osman
This study presents the first sociolinguistic examination of communication in a social dilemma. 90 participants (18 groups of 5) completed a modified public goods game with 2 rounds: an effort-based task and an unscripted online chat about the results. A linear regression shows that consensus-building language in the Round 1 chat affects cooperative behaviour in the Round 2 task. A qualitative analysis of 3 groups explores how participants use different recognisable styles of communication (registers) to strategically align with or disalign from one another (stancetaking). Each analysis is complemented with a quantitative visualisation of how (dis)alignment between participants unfolds in real-time. We found that successful groups employ registers associated with collective action, such as gameshow talk (‘ouch. £69 out of a possible £120’) to encourage, punish, and pledge allegiance to one another. Less successful groups use registers that risk evoking mistrust and reducing obligation, such as business talk (‘I approve’). We argue that a mixed methods approach to interaction and behaviour can reveal incremental shifts in consensus building that underpin quantitative outcomes.
{"title":"Verbal interaction in a social dilemma","authors":"Zoe Adams, A. Ludwiczak, D. Sharma, Magda Osman","doi":"10.1177/10434631221094555","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221094555","url":null,"abstract":"This study presents the first sociolinguistic examination of communication in a social dilemma. 90 participants (18 groups of 5) completed a modified public goods game with 2 rounds: an effort-based task and an unscripted online chat about the results. A linear regression shows that consensus-building language in the Round 1 chat affects cooperative behaviour in the Round 2 task. A qualitative analysis of 3 groups explores how participants use different recognisable styles of communication (registers) to strategically align with or disalign from one another (stancetaking). Each analysis is complemented with a quantitative visualisation of how (dis)alignment between participants unfolds in real-time. We found that successful groups employ registers associated with collective action, such as gameshow talk (‘ouch. £69 out of a possible £120’) to encourage, punish, and pledge allegiance to one another. Less successful groups use registers that risk evoking mistrust and reducing obligation, such as business talk (‘I approve’). We argue that a mixed methods approach to interaction and behaviour can reveal incremental shifts in consensus building that underpin quantitative outcomes.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"334 - 367"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43460068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-25DOI: 10.1177/10434631221093741
Daphne Truijens
Behavioral policies Nudge and Boost are often advocated as good candidates for evidence-based policy. Nudges present or “frame” options in a way that trigger people’s decision-making flaws and steer into the direction of better choices. Nudge aims to do this without changing the options themselves. Boosts also present choices in alternative ways without changing options. However, rather than steering, Boosts are aimed to increase people’s competences. Nudge and Boost originated in extensive research programs: the “heuristics-and-biases program” and the “fast-and-frugal heuristics program,” respectively. How exactly do Nudge and Boost policies relate to the theories they originated from in the first place? Grüne-Yanoff and Hertwig labeled this a question of “theory-policy coherence” and propose to use it for determining the evidence-base of Nudge and Boost. I explore the question: “In how far is theory-policy coherence in Nudge and Boost relevant for evidence-based policymaking?.” I argue that the implications of (weaker or stronger) theory-policy coherence are relevant in two ways. First, Grüne-Yanoff and Hertwig show that theory-policy coherence between Nudge and Boost and the research programs is not as strong as often assumed. It is crucial for the evidence-based policymaker to realize this. Assuming theory-policy coherence while it does not exist or is weaker than assumed can lead to an incorrect assessment of evidence. Ultimately it can even lead to adoption of policies on false grounds. Second, the concept of theory-policy coherence may assist the policymaker in the search and evaluation of (mechanistic) evidence. However, in order to do so, it is important to consider the limitations of theory-policy coherence. It can neither be employed as the (sole) criterion with which to determine how well-grounded a policy is in theory, nor be the (sole) basis for making comparative evaluations between policies.
{"title":"Coherence between theory and policy in Nudge and Boost: Is it relevant for evidence-based policy-making?","authors":"Daphne Truijens","doi":"10.1177/10434631221093741","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221093741","url":null,"abstract":"Behavioral policies Nudge and Boost are often advocated as good candidates for evidence-based policy. Nudges present or “frame” options in a way that trigger people’s decision-making flaws and steer into the direction of better choices. Nudge aims to do this without changing the options themselves. Boosts also present choices in alternative ways without changing options. However, rather than steering, Boosts are aimed to increase people’s competences. Nudge and Boost originated in extensive research programs: the “heuristics-and-biases program” and the “fast-and-frugal heuristics program,” respectively. How exactly do Nudge and Boost policies relate to the theories they originated from in the first place? Grüne-Yanoff and Hertwig labeled this a question of “theory-policy coherence” and propose to use it for determining the evidence-base of Nudge and Boost. I explore the question: “In how far is theory-policy coherence in Nudge and Boost relevant for evidence-based policymaking?.” I argue that the implications of (weaker or stronger) theory-policy coherence are relevant in two ways. First, Grüne-Yanoff and Hertwig show that theory-policy coherence between Nudge and Boost and the research programs is not as strong as often assumed. It is crucial for the evidence-based policymaker to realize this. Assuming theory-policy coherence while it does not exist or is weaker than assumed can lead to an incorrect assessment of evidence. Ultimately it can even lead to adoption of policies on false grounds. Second, the concept of theory-policy coherence may assist the policymaker in the search and evaluation of (mechanistic) evidence. However, in order to do so, it is important to consider the limitations of theory-policy coherence. It can neither be employed as the (sole) criterion with which to determine how well-grounded a policy is in theory, nor be the (sole) basis for making comparative evaluations between policies.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"368 - 394"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48353362","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-11DOI: 10.1177/10434631221092758
D. Dolejší
Craft guilds were created as a response to certain problems associated with raising royal revenues and securing basic public services in Prague during the medieval and early modern periods. The theory consistent with historical evidence predicts that the rise, spread, and fall of guilds was a result of mutually beneficial bargaining between local craftsmen and their feudal rulers. Guilds enabled craftsmen to utilize the benefits of collusion by offering their capacities to sovereign authorities in exchange for exclusive market privileges. Nevertheless, they created social distortions within their industries in the process.
{"title":"Feudal bargain in Prague: The rise, spread, and fall of craft guilds","authors":"D. Dolejší","doi":"10.1177/10434631221092758","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221092758","url":null,"abstract":"Craft guilds were created as a response to certain problems associated with raising royal revenues and securing basic public services in Prague during the medieval and early modern periods. The theory consistent with historical evidence predicts that the rise, spread, and fall of guilds was a result of mutually beneficial bargaining between local craftsmen and their feudal rulers. Guilds enabled craftsmen to utilize the benefits of collusion by offering their capacities to sovereign authorities in exchange for exclusive market privileges. Nevertheless, they created social distortions within their industries in the process.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"237 - 267"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49335350","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-08DOI: 10.1177/10434631221091225
Dirk Witteveen, Paul A. Attewell
Despite similar educational aspirations, black students persist in higher education at much lower rates than white undergraduates. This paper advances a theoretical explanation for the racial gap in persistence by examining whether the differential attrition in college reflects contrasting incentives for educational persistence. To account for the highly unequal hurdles faced by black men and women in college and in the labor market, we propose a method that addresses race-gender-specific opportunity structures in both institutions simultaneously. This approach is based on forward-looking estimates of outcomes where students draw information from their race-gender reference group ahead of them. The model estimates the earnings payoffs of persistence separately for each race-gender group at three consecutive educational decision nodes: at high school graduation, college entry, and after one year in college. We subsequently apply one version of this model to data from the American Community Surveys (2001–2017), calculating the absolute and relative incentives for educational persistence across racial groups. In addition to large dollar earnings differentials, the analyses reveal striking racial gaps of the relative incentives to stay enrolled: “incentive inequality.” This incentive race gap is largest at the earliest stages of the higher education career—high school graduation and college entry—where the black undergraduate dropout rate is highest. Our findings have substantive and methodological implications for situations where returns to investments are unequal across groups affected by discrimination.
{"title":"Black-White incentive inequality for college persistence","authors":"Dirk Witteveen, Paul A. Attewell","doi":"10.1177/10434631221091225","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631221091225","url":null,"abstract":"Despite similar educational aspirations, black students persist in higher education at much lower rates than white undergraduates. This paper advances a theoretical explanation for the racial gap in persistence by examining whether the differential attrition in college reflects contrasting incentives for educational persistence. To account for the highly unequal hurdles faced by black men and women in college and in the labor market, we propose a method that addresses race-gender-specific opportunity structures in both institutions simultaneously. This approach is based on forward-looking estimates of outcomes where students draw information from their race-gender reference group ahead of them. The model estimates the earnings payoffs of persistence separately for each race-gender group at three consecutive educational decision nodes: at high school graduation, college entry, and after one year in college. We subsequently apply one version of this model to data from the American Community Surveys (2001–2017), calculating the absolute and relative incentives for educational persistence across racial groups. In addition to large dollar earnings differentials, the analyses reveal striking racial gaps of the relative incentives to stay enrolled: “incentive inequality.” This incentive race gap is largest at the earliest stages of the higher education career—high school graduation and college entry—where the black undergraduate dropout rate is highest. Our findings have substantive and methodological implications for situations where returns to investments are unequal across groups affected by discrimination.","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"155 - 184"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43907613","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：