Cited by 108Income, Poverty, and InequalitySocial Policy and Reform StudiesExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

Social Positions and Fairness Views on Inequality

Hvidberg, Kristoffer B, Kreiner, Claus T, Stantcheva, Stefanie·2023·Review of Economic Studies

Abstract

We link survey data on Danish people’s perceived income positions and fairness views on inequality within various reference groups to administrative records on their reference groups, income histories, and life events. People are, on average, well-informed about the income levels of their reference groups. Yet, lower-ranked respondents in all groups tend to overestimate their own position among others because they believe others’ incomes are lower than they actually are, whereas the opposite holds true for higher-ranked respondents. Misperceptions of positions in reference groups relate to proximity to other individuals, transparency norms, and visible signals of income. People view inequalities within their co-workers and education groups as significantly more unfair than overall inequality, yet underestimate inequality the most exactly within these groups. Views on the fairness of inequalities are strongly correlated with an individual’s current position, move with shocks like unemployment or promotions, and change when experimentally informing people about their actual positions. However, the higher perceived unfairness of income differences within co-workers and education groups stays unchanged. The theoretical framework shows that this can have important implications for redistribution policy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/restud/rdad019

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Attrition and response rates in the survey are comparable to those in previous Danish surveys.

    “The attrition and response rates in our survey are comparable to those obtained in previous Danish surveys (Hvidberg, Kreiner and Stantcheva, 2023).”

    From Still Waters, Rapid Currents: Early Labor Market Transformation under Generative AI (2025) · cites this paper as Hvidberg, Kreiner and Stantcheva, 2023

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hvidberg, K. B., Kreiner, C. T., & Stantcheva, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Center for Economic and Policy Research (US)
Corresponding author
Hvidberg, Kristoffer B
Venue
Review of Economic Studies
Published
2023-03-13
Volume
90
Issue
6
Pages
3083-3118
ISSN
  • 0034-6527 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-937X
OpenAlex
W4320855144
Cited by
108
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 10 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
44.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Review of Economic Studies (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
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
perceived fairness, income inequality, reference groups, life events, redistributive policy

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