Economic inequality reduces sense of control and increases the acceptability of self-interested unethical behavior.

Societies worldwide are witnessing higher levels of economic inequality. While prior work has examined ethical judgments toward inequality itself (e.g., "is inequality unethical?"), less is known about how inequality shapes judgments of unethical behavior (e.g., "is unethical behavior more acceptable?"). In two correlational studies, we find that higher objective (Study 1; n = 127,953) and subjective (Study 2; n = 806) inequality is associated with greater acceptability of self-interested unethical behavior. In Studies 3a-6b (total N = 4,851; preregistered), we manipulated perceived inequality and test several mediating pathways. Results point toward the importance of sense of control as a mechanism: Under conditions of high inequality, individuals report a lower sense of control, which increases the acceptability of self-interested unethical behaviors. As a supplement, we also explore associations regarding why high inequality reduces sense of control (reduced perceptions of social mobility) and why sense of control is associated with greater acceptability of unethical behavior (greater situational attributions). Overall, our results suggest inequality changes ethical standards by reducing one's sense of control, providing evidence for another pathway through which inequality harms societies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Recognizing the Impact of COVID-19 on the Poor Alters Attitudes Towards Poverty and Inequality.

The novel Coronavirus that spread around the world in early 2020 triggered a global pandemic and economic downturn that affected nearly everyone. Yet the crisis had a disproportionate impact on the poor and revealed how easily working-class individuals' financial security can be destabilised by factors beyond personal control. In a pre-registered longitudinal study of Americans (N = 233) spanning April 2019 to May 2020, we tested whether the pandemic altered beliefs about the extent to which poverty is caused by external forces and internal dispositions and support for economic inequality. Over this timespan, participants revealed a shift in their attributions for poverty, reporting that poverty is more strongly impacted by external-situational causes and less by internal-dispositional causes. However, we did not detect an overall mean-level change in opposition to inequality or support for government intervention. Instead, only for those who most strongly recognized the negative impact of COVID-19 did changes in poverty attributions translate to decreased support for inequality, and increased support for government intervention to help the poor.

Shifting attributions for poverty motivates opposition to inequality and enhances egalitarianism.

Amidst rising economic inequality and mounting evidence of its pernicious social effects, what motivates opposition to inequality? Five studies (n = 34,442) show that attributing poverty to situational forces is associated with greater concern about inequality, preference for egalitarian policies and inequality-reducing behaviour. In Study 1, situational attributions for poverty were associated with reduced support for inequality across 34 countries. Study 2 replicated these findings with a nationally representative sample of Americans. Three experiments then tested whether situational attributions for poverty are malleable and motivate egalitarianism. Bolstering situational attributions for poverty through a writing exercise (Study 3) and a computer-based poverty simulation (Studies 4a and b) increased egalitarian action and reduced support for inequality immediately (Studies 3 and 4b), 1 d later and 155 d post-intervention (Study 4b). Causal attributions for poverty offer one accessible means of shaping inequality-reducing attitudes and actions. Situational attributions may be a potent psychological lever for lessening societal inequality.

The Support for Economic Inequality Scale: Development and adjudication.

Past research has documented myriad pernicious psychological effects of high economic inequality, prompting interest into how people perceive, evaluate, and react to inequality. Here we propose, refine, and validate the Support for Economic Inequality Scale (SEIS)-a novel measure of attitudes towards economic inequality. In Study 1, we distill eighteen items down to five, providing evidence for unidimensionality and reliability. In Study 2, we replicate the scale's unidimensionality and reliability and demonstrate its validity. In Study 3, we evaluate a United States version of the SEIS. Finally, in Studies 4-5, we demonstrate the SEIS's convergent and predictive validity, as well as evidence for the SEIS being distinct from other conceptually similar measures. The SEIS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing perceptions of and reactions to economic inequality and provides a useful tool for researchers investigating the psychological underpinnings of economic inequality.

Income Mobility Breeds Tolerance for Income Inequality: Cross-National and Experimental Evidence.

American politicians often justify income inequality by referencing the opportunities people have to move between economic stations. Though past research has shown associations between income mobility and resistance to wealth redistribution policies, no experimental work has tested whether perceptions of mobility influence tolerance for inequality. In this article, we present a cross-national comparison showing that income mobility is associated with tolerance for inequality and experimental work demonstrating that perceptions of higher mobility directly affect attitudes toward inequality. We find support for both the prospect of upward mobility and the view that peoples' economic station is the product of their own efforts, as mediating mechanisms.