Search

Although economic inequality has increased over the last few decades, support for redistributive policies is not widely accepted by the public. In this paper, we examine whether attitudes towards redistribution are a product of both perceptions of, and beliefs about, inequality. Specifically, we argue that the association between perceived inequality and support for redistribution varies by beliefs that justify inequality. We investigated this hypothesis in a cross‐cultural/country sample (N = 56,021 from 41 countries) using two different operationalizations of support for redistribution and two distinct beliefs that justify inequality. As hypothesized, the perceived size of the income gap correlated positively with believing that it is the government's responsibility to reduce inequality among those who rejected beliefs that justify inequality, whereas there was no association for those who endorsed these beliefs. Similarly, perceived economic inequality correlated positively with support for progressive taxation, but this association was weaker among those who endorsed meritocratic and equal opportunity beliefs. Together, these results demonstrate that ideologies influence the relationship between perceived inequality and attitudes towards redistribution, and that support for redistribution varies by how the policy is framed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differences between groups in socio‐economic status (SES) are becoming more salient nowadays. In this context, we examined the animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization that both low and high‐SES groups may experience respectively by conducting three studies. In study 1, we manipulated the SES of two fictitious groups (low vs. high‐SES) and measured the humanity ascribed to them. Results showed that the low‐SES group was animalized in comparison with the high‐SES group, which was mechanized. In study 2, we manipulated the humanity of two fictitious groups by describing them as animals or machines and measured the perceived SES of the groups. Participants tended to attribute lower SES to the group described as animals and higher SES to the group described as machines. Finally, in study 3, we used an Implicit Association Test to replicate the results of studies 1 and 2. Taken together, these studies show that low‐SES groups are considered as animal‐like whereas high‐SES groups are seen as robot‐like. We discuss the implications of these findings in relation to the justification of income inequality within our society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Expressing anger can engender desired change, but it can also backfire. In the present research we examined how power shapes the expression of anger. In Study 1, we found that powerless individuals were less inclined to express their anger directly but more inclined to express it indirectly by sharing it with others. Powerless participants' reluctance to express anger directly was mediated by negative social appraisals. In Study 2, we replicated the effect of power on direct anger expression in a situation in which participants had actual power (or not). Anger was evoked in the laboratory using an ecologically valid procedure, and participants were given an opportunity to express anger. Study 3 showed that powerless participants expected direct anger expression to arouse more anger than fear in the target, whereas the opposite was true for indirect anger expression. Powerful participants always expected to elicit more fear than anger in the target. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has shown that economic inequality influences how people are related with others. In this article, we suggest that perceived economic inequality influences self‐construal. Specifically, we propose that higher economic inequality leads to an independent self‐construal, whereas lower economic inequality leads to an interdependent self‐construal. Correlational data from Studies 1a and 1b revealed that people who perceive lower levels of economic inequality tend to show higher levels of interdependent self‐construal, even after controlling for social class. In Study 2, using an experimental design, we found that perceived high economic inequality leads to a more independent and less interdependent self‐construal compared to the low economic inequality condition. These results expand the literature bridging the gap between a macro‐social factor, such as economic inequality, and a micro‐social factor, such as self‐construal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Members of dehumanized groups are somehow accepted in a variety of menial roles. Three studies verified when and why people might approach members of animalistically and mechanistically dehumanized groups. In Studies 1 and 2, participants showed a greater intention to interact with (Study 1) and attributed higher ratings of success (Study 2) to members of an animalistically dehumanized group in a social context. On the contrary, participants expected that members of a mechanistically dehumanized group would be more successful and were preferred to interact with in a professional context. In Study 3, the psychological process underlying these preferences was investigated. Interestingly, results showed that the objectification of dehumanized group members led participants to interact with them. Taken together these studies show that people approach dehumanized others not because they are liked, but because they are objectified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Individuals spontaneously categorise other people on the basis of their gender, ethnicity and age. But what about the emotions they express? In two studies we tested the hypothesis that facial expressions are similar to other social categories in that they can function as contextual cues to control attention. In Experiment 1 we associated expressions of anger and happiness with specific proportions of congruent/incongruent flanker trials. We also created consistent and inconsistent category members within each of these two general contexts. The results demonstrated that participants exhibited a larger congruency effect when presented with faces in the emotional group associated with a high proportion of congruent trials. Notably, this effect transferred to inconsistent members of the group. In Experiment 2 we replicated the effects with faces depicting true and false smiles. Together these findings provide consistent evidence that individuals spontaneously utilise emotions to categorise others and that such categories determine the allocation of attentional control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to The Ambivalent Sexism Theory (Glick y Fiske, 1996) there are distinct stereotypes of women that men express different attitudes. Among them, the housewife, sexi women and executive women are the clearest ones. One hundred people participated in the present study in order to test the relationship between the female stereotypes, their level of influence and prestige and the level of preference for a commercial product (described in female and male terms). The results showed that sexi women is more associated with the masculine description, whereas the executive women is more associated to the feminine product description, and in both cases the housewife is the least associated with the two different descriptions. It was also found that the influence and the women prestige mediated the relationship between the stereotypes and the preference shown for the product described in feminine terms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Power can be defined as control over other people's outcomes. Using this definition, we explored the impact of power on attentional processes involved in impression formation. Because powerful individuals may want to maintain and justify their position, powerful participants should pay particular attention to negative stereotype-consistent information about their subordinates. In contrast, powerless participants should devote their attention to stereotype-inconsistent information in an attempt to increase their control over the social context. Study 1 directly manipulated control by assigning participants to the role of leader or subordinate in a task group. Results showed that, compared to subordinates, leaders devoted more attention to negative stereotypic attributes. Study 2 manipulated the legitimacy of power and replicated the pattern found in Study 1 but only when power was illegitimate. Our findings suggest that the experience of power can be associated with feelings of threat, especially when power is illegitimate, thereby orienting impression-formation processes toward information likely to maintain the existing social structure. We discuss our results in the context of current work on motivated social cognition, social identity, and legitimisation. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Economic inequality is one of the main issues of modern societies, and one of the ways to reduce it is through decreasing inequality tolerance and increasing support for economic redistribution. However, there are no consistent results in previous research about the relationship between perceived economic inequality, tolerance to inequality, and support for redistributive policies. In this paper, we argue that rather than measuring the effects of abstract perceived inequality (e.g., measured at the country level), it is important to consider Perceived Economic Inequality in Everyday Life (PEIEL) and close relationships. In one correlational study (N = 207) we found that a PEIEL scale predicts intolerance toward inequality controlling for the common measures of perceived inequality. Moreover, we developed a novel manipulation which was validated in a pilot study (N = 293), and in four experimental studies (N = 261; N = 373; N = 289, N = 289), we found that PEIEL decreases tolerance to inequality. Furthermore, we found a preliminary indirect effect of PEIEL on attitudes toward redistribution through intolerance to inequality. A mini meta-analysis using political ideology, social class, sex, and age as covariates, corroborated these results. All studies were preregistered. In short, these results highlight the importance of perceived inequality in everyday life as an additional tool when considering the psychosocial effects of economic inequality. • A manipulation of perceived economic inequality in everyday life is presented. • Perceived Inequality in Everyday Life (PEIEL) increases intolerance to inequality. • PEIEL predicts intolerance controlling for other measures of perceived inequality. • A mini meta-analysis corroborated these results. • PEIEL may be a useful tool to understand the consequences of economic inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]