Cited by 37Income, Poverty, and InequalitySocial Policy and Reform StudiesExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

Mind the income gaps? Experimental evidence of information's lasting effect on redistributive preferences

Open access
Becker, Bastian·2020·Social Justice Research

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11211-019-00343-7

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Becker, B.
Affiliations
University of Bremen (DE)
Corresponding author
Becker, Bastian
Venue
Social Justice Research
Published
2019-09-04
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
137-194
ISSN
  • 0885-7466 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6725
OpenAlex
W2971717129
Cited by
37
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
6.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Justice Research (publishedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Central European University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
income gap, redistribution preferences, information effects, perceived inequality, inequality of opportunity, structural inequality, sex inequality, racial inequality, family background, political attitudes, survey experiment, long-term effects

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review