Cited by 99Social Policy and Reform StudiesIncome, Poverty, and InequalityElectoral Systems and Political Participation

The Structure of Inequality and Americans' Attitudes toward Redistribution

Luttig, M.·2013·Public Opinion Quarterly

Abstract

Income inequality has been rising substantially over the past few decades in the United States, making it the most unequal of advanced industrialized democracies. This transformation has had enor-mous social and political consequences. In this research note, I assess the influence of both income inequality and the changing structure of income inequality on Americans ’ public policy mood. Numerous politi-cal theorists suggest that rising inequality and the shift in the distribu-tion of income to those at the top should lead to increasing support for liberal policies. But recent evidence contradicts these theories. I empiri-cally evaluate a number of competing theoretical predictions about the relationship between inequality and public preferences. In general, the evidence supports the claim that rising inequality has been a force pro-moting conservatism in the American public. The distribution of income in America has shifted toward the very wealthy over the past thirty years (Piketty and Saez 2003), making it the most unequal of advanced democracies (Piketty and Saez 2006).1 Some have even labeled the contemporary economic distribution a “new Gilded Age ” (Bartels 2008). How is the public likely to respond to rising inequality? In this research note, I evaluate competing expectations about this relationship stemming from rational models of public opinion (Meltzer and Richard 1981; Bénabou 2000), models of public opinion rooted in theories of social affinity (Lupu 1. There is…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/poq/nft025

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 decline in Republican support for governmental regulation of the economy reflects economic system justification, that is, the conservative defence of increasing inequality as fair and legitimate under the neoliberal regime.

    “Presumably, this reflects economic system justification, that is, the conservative defence of increasing inequality as fair and legitimate under the neoliberal regime101,107,176–181.”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 24 · Cited by 99

Authors
Luttig, M.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Luttig, M.
Venue
Public Opinion Quarterly
Published
2013-09-01
Volume
77
Issue
3
Pages
811-821
ISSN
  • 0033-362X (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5331
OpenAlex
W2096927579
Cited by
99
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10
FWCI
35.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Public Opinion Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Keywords
income inequality, redistribution, public opinion, political attitudes, conservatism, top income shares, rational choice, social affinity, income distribution, United States

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