Why has the COVID-19 pandemic increased support for universal basic income?
Open accessAbstract
Abstract The onset of the 2020 global COVID-19 pandemic led to a marked increase in positive discussion of Universal Basic Income (UBI) in political and media circles. However, we do not know whether there was a corresponding increase in support for the policy in the public at large, or why. Here, we present three studies carried out during 2020 in UK and US samples. In study 1 (n = 802, April 2020), people expressed much stronger support for a UBI policy for the times of the pandemic and its aftermath than for normal times. This was largely explained by the increased importance they attached, in the pandemic context, to a system that is simple and efficient to administer, and that reduces stress and anxiety in society. In study 2 (n = 400, May 2020), we pitted UBI against a conditional targeted social transfer system. Preferences for UBI were stronger for pandemic times than for normal times. This was partially explained by a number of perceived advantages, such as simplicity of administration and suitability for a changing world. In study 3 (n = 397, September 2020), we found that the headline results of studies 1 and 2 persisted six months after the onset of the pandemic, albeit with attenuated effect sizes. Our results illustrate how a changing social and economic situation can bring about markedly different policy preferences, through changes in citizens’ perceptions of what is currently important.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The Nettle et al. sample has sufficient variation in characteristics like age, gender, material position, and ideology to allow comparison with UK respondents in the ESS survey data on UBI.
“However, the sample has sufficient variation in terms of characteristics like age, gender, material position, and ideology, and as I detail below, the association of these variables with UBI support seems to allow comparison with UK respondents in the ESS survey data on UBI.”
From COVID-19 and welfare state support: the case of universal basic income (2022) · cites this paper as Nettle et al., 2021
The General discussion (page unavailable) describes the samples as fairly diverse in age, subjective socioeconomic status and political orientation, and says their associations with UBI support resembled expected population patterns. The Methods also report gender-balanced samples. The paper does not establish comparability with UK respondents in the ESS survey; the citing sentence presents that as its author's own inference. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredUBI support among UK respondents increased when primed for the pandemic compared to a hypothetical scenario in normal times.
“As Figure 4 depicts, UBI support among UK respondents did indeed increase when primed for the pandemic as compared to UBI support in a hypothetical scenario in “normal times.””
From COVID-19 and welfare state support: the case of universal basic income (2022) · cites this paper as Nettle et al., 2021
Despite a possible increase in UBI support in the context of the pandemic, the author's empirical analysis shows that support remains fragmented between different groups.
“Despite a possible increase in UBI support in the context of the pandemic (Nettle et al., 2021), my empirical analysis shows that support remains fragmented between different groups.”
From COVID-19 and welfare state support: the case of universal basic income (2022) · cites this paper as Nettle et al., 2021
There are two key differences in the measurement of the UBI item: the ESS mentions that UBI replaces "many other social benefits" and ESS respondents are told that the "scheme is paid for by taxes."
“There are two key differences in the measurement of the UBI item: First, the ESS mentions that UBI replaces “many (Nettle et al., 2021).other social benefits” and second, ESS respondents are told that the “scheme is paid for by taxes.””
From COVID-19 and welfare state support: the case of universal basic income (2022) · cites this paper as Nettle et al., 2021
The Introduction discusses how mentioning higher taxation or the loss of existing welfare benefits affects support for UBI. It does not identify the ESS item or give its wording. Searches for the quoted phrases and for ESS question wording found no passage verifying either stated feature of the ESS measure. (LLM, conf=0.73)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,706 · see citing works
van Oorschot, W. (2006) · Journal of European Social Policy · doi:10.1177/0958928706059829 · Cited by 1,327 · see citing works
Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy
Van Parijs, P., & Vanderborght, Y. (2017) · doi:10.4159/9780674978072 · Cited by 612 · see citing works
Subjective social status: reliability and predictive utility for global health
Operario, D., Adler, N. E., & Williams, D. R. (2004) · Psychology and Health · doi:10.1080/08870440310001638098 · Cited by 581 · see citing works
Stone, D. A. (1984) · doi:10.1007/978-1-349-17753-0 · Cited by 528 · see citing works
Stone, D. A. (1983) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 478 · see citing works
Basic Income: A Radical Proposal for a Free Society and a Sane Economy
PARIJS, P. V., & Vanderborght, Y. (2019) · Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) · Cited by 414 · see citing works
Standing, G. (2017) · Yale University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctv1bvnf53 · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Aarøe, L., & Petersen, M. B. (2014) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1017/s002238161400019x · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Basic Income: And How We Can Make It Happen
Standing, G. (2017) · SOAS Research Online (SOAS University of London) · Cited by 165 · see citing works
Shifting attributions for poverty motivates opposition to inequality and enhances egalitarianism
Piff, P. K., Wiwad, D., Robinson, A. R., Aknin, L. B., Mercier, B., & Shariff, A. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0835-8 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Roosma, F., & van Oorschot, W. (2020) · Journal of European Social Policy · doi:10.1177/0958928719882827 · Cited by 115 · cited 5× · see citing works
“Indeed, past research has found that those who hold a more favourable view of UBI often also hold favourable views of conditional social transfer schemes (Roosma and van Oorschot, 2019).”
BackgroundInfluentialThe dual evolutionary foundations of political ideology
Claessens, S., Fischer, K., Chaudhuri, A., Sibley, C., & Atkinson, Q. (2019) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0850-9 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Covid-19, unemployment, and health: time for deeper solutions?
Hensher, M. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m3687 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
War and Welfare Policy in Japan
Kasza, G. J. (2002) · The Journal of Asian Studies · doi:10.2307/2700296 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
Preferences for redistribution are sensitive to perceived luck, social homogeneity, war and scarcity
Nettle, D., & Saxe, R. R. (2020) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104234 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Self-citationOn the Economics of a Universal Basic Income
Straubhaar, T. (2017) · Intereconomics · doi:10.1007/s10272-017-0649-8 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Gibson, M., Hearty, W., & Craig, P. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32083-x · Cited by 38 · see citing works
World war and welfare legislation in western countries
Obinger, H., & Schmitt, C. (2019) · Journal of European Social Policy · doi:10.1177/0958928719892852 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Johnson, E., Johnson, M., & Webber, L. (2020) · Evidence & Policy · doi:10.1332/174426420x15820274674068 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Self-citationShifting Attributions for Poverty Motivates Opposition to Inequality and Enhances Egalitarianism
Wiwad, D., Piff, P. K., Robinson, A. R., et al. (2020) · Academy of Management Proceedings · doi:10.5465/ambpp.2020.12925abstract · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
COVID-19 and welfare state support: the case of universal basic income
Weisstanner, D. (2022) · Policy and Society · doi:10.1093/polsoc/puab015 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nettle, D., Johnson, E., Johnson, M., & Saxe, R.
- Affiliations
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Lancaster University (GB)
- McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nettle, Daniel
- Venue
- Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
- Published
- 2021-03-17
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2055-1045 (ISSN-L)
- 2662-9992
- OpenAlex
- W3081902051
- Cited by
- 99
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 5
- FWCI
- 62.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (acceptedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Employment and Welfare Studies
- Keywords
- universal basic income, COVID-19 pandemic, public support for policy, policy preferences, social safety nets, United States and United Kingdom comparison
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
