the politics of inequality and the inequality of politics

Symposia Session S-A10

THE POLITICS OF INEQUALITY AND THE INEQUALITY OF POLITICS Friday, February 27, 2015, 9:45 am - 11:00 am, Room 203ABC Chair: Jazmin Brown-Iannuzzi, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Co-Chair: B. Keith Payne, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Economic inequality is at historic highs. The wealthiest 1% own 40% of the nation’s wealth. This staggering inequality raises the question, what are the psychological causes and effects of inequality? This symposium presents four talks on how subjective construals of inequality and status shape political motivations, beliefs, and behaviors.

ABSTRACTS

SUBJECTIVE SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS SHAPES POLITICAL PREFERENCES Jazmin Lati Brown-Iannuzzi1, B. Keith Payne2

1University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, 2University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Economic inequality in America is at historically high levels, yet redistributive policies aimed at reducing inequality are frequently unpopular. Traditional accounts posit that attitudes toward redistribution are driven by economic self-interest or ideological principles. From a social psychological perspective, however, we expected that subjective comparisons to others may be a more relevant form of self-interest than material wealth. We hypothesized that participants would support redistribution more when they felt low in subjective status than when they felt high, even when actual self-interest was held constant. In three studies we found correlational (study 1) and experimental (studies 2-4) evidence that subjective status may motivate shifts in support for redistributive policies. Moreover, when people shifted their attitudes toward redistribution, they also shifted ideological positions. They reported being more conservative or liberal, and believing that the economic system was more or less just, presumably to justify their (new) attitudes toward redistribution.

THE UNDERVALUED SELF: SOCIAL CLASS RANK AND POLITICAL ACTION Michael W. Kraus1, Cameron Anderson2, Laura Howland2, Bennett Callaghan3

1University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 2University of California at Berkeley, 3University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

In this research we use correlational and experimental evidence to test the prediction that perceptions of low status in the social class hierarchy decrease political self-efficacy and engagement in political action. In Study 1, university students who reported lower perceptions of social class rank tended to vote less in university elections. In Studies 2 and 3, participants exposed to a manipulation of lower social class rank reported reduced political influence and intentions to join a union of online survey workers relative to participants manipulated to think of themselves as higher in social class. In Study 4, the association between lower social class rank and reduced political action was mediated by perceptions of political self-efficacy. Together, these findings highlight the fundamental role that self-evaluative processes play in leading low status members of society to withdraw from the political system and fight less for their own social and economic interests.

LACK OF AWARENESS OF INEQUALITY LEADS TO PUNISHMENT OF THE POOR Oliver Hauser1, Gordon Kraft-Todd2, Martin Nowak3, Michael Norton1 1Harvard Business School, 2Yale University, 3Harvard University

Many societies have seen income inequality rise in recent years, yet research shows that people are largely unaware of this increase. We examine the effects of high income inequality in public goods games, in which players are assigned to ranks in an income distribution and decide how much to contribute to a common pool – with the option to punish those who contribute less. When the income distribution is publicly known, players tend to punish the rich more than the poor. If income is not publicly known, however, we find a perverse effect: the poor are punished most – despite their limited means to contribute more given their low income. Lack of awareness of the current level of income inequality may lead people to punish poorer individuals for their relatively smaller contributions to the public good (such as taxes paid), due to a lack of awareness of their limited means.

THE TOLERANCE OF INEQUALITY: PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS FOR CONTROL AND SOCIAL HIERARCHIES Justin P. Friesen1, Aaron C. Kay2, Richard Eibach3, Adam Galinsky4

1York University, 2Duke University, 3University of Waterloo, 4Columbia University Business School

Individuals often espouse egalitarian ideals, yet social hierarchies and their inherent inequality are ubiquitous in human societies. We propose that one reason this occurs is because hierarchies can fulfill psychological needs for structure and order that are elicited when personal control is low (Kay et al., 2008)—even for subordinate positions that lack power or status. In 4 studies we demonstrate that hierarchical inequality can compensate for low personal control via the structure it provides. After personal control threats, participants preferred more hierarchy in their own workplaces and found hierarchy-enhancing occupations more appealing. We also show that hierarchies are control-restoring: Being in a hierarchical workplace was associated with increased occupational certainty and self-efficacy. These effects occurred even for individuals in lower positions in the hierarchy. We discuss how disadvantaged individuals may be unwilling to question social hierarchies that justify inequality if those hierarchies are serving unmet psychological needs for structure.