CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 585Income, Poverty, and InequalityIntergenerational and Educational Inequality StudiesSocial Policy and Reform Studies

The paradox of inequality: income inequality and belief in meritocracy go hand in hand

Open access
Mijs, Jonathan J B·2021·Socio-Economic Review
DOI 10.1093/ser/mwy051

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Inequality is on the rise: gains have been concentrated with a small elite, while most have seen their fortunes stagnate or fall. Despite what scholars and journalists consider a worrying trend, there is no evidence of growing popular concern about inequality. In fact, research suggests that citizens in unequal societies are less concerned than those in more egalitarian societies. How to make sense of this paradox? I argue that citizens’ consent to inequality is explained by their growing conviction that societal success is reflective of a meritocratic process. Drawing on 25 years of International Social Survey Program data, I show that rising inequality is legitimated by the popular belief that the income gap is meritocratically deserved: the more unequal a society, the more likely its citizens are to explain success in meritocratic terms, and the less important they deem nonmeritocratic factors such as a person’s family wealth and connections.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ser/mwy051

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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.”

    From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [181]

    Section 2.2 (p. 7) describes beliefs that legitimate inequality and says neoliberal policies have arguably reinforced the view that market outcomes reflect individual merit. The Conclusions (p. 32) likewise link consent to inequality to belief in a fair meritocratic process. The paper does not establish that declining Republican support for economic regulation reflects this process, or identify the defence as specifically conservative. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Alesina, A. and Glaeser, E. (2004) Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe: A World of Difference , London, Oxford University Press.
  2. Alesina, A., Stantcheva, S. and Teso, E. (2018) 'Intergenerational Mobility and Preferences for Redistribution', American Economic Review , 108 , 521-554.
  3. Atkinson, A. B., Piketty, T. and Saez, E. (2011) 'Top Incomes in the Long Run of History', Journal of Economic Literature , 49 , 3-71.
  4. Bénabou, R. and Tirole, J. (2006) 'Belief in a Just World and Redistributive Politics', The Quarterly Journal of Economics , 121 , 699-746.
  5. Breen, R. and Jonsson, J. O. (2005) 'Inequality of Opportunity in Comparative Perspective: Recent Research on Educational Attainment and Social Mobility', Annual Review of Sociology , 31 , 223-243.
  6. Brooks, C. and Manza, J. (2013) 'A Broken Public? Americans' Responses to the Great Recession', American Sociological Review , 78 , 727-748.
  7. Bryan, M. L. and Jenkins, S. P. (2016) 'Multilevel Modelling of Country Effects: A Cautionary Tale', European Sociological Review , 32 , 3-22.
  8. Corak, M. (2004) Generational Income Mobility in North America and Europe , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  9. Cruces, G., Perez-Truglia, R. and Tetaz, M. (2013) 'Biased Perceptions of Income Distribution and Preferences for Redistribution: Evidence from a Survey Experiment', Journal of Public Economics , 98 , 100-112.
  10. Dallinger, U. (2010) 'Public Support for Redistribution: What Explains Cross-National Differences?', Journal of European Social Policy , 20 , 333-349.
  11. Duru-Bellat, M. and Tenret, E. (2012) 'Who's for Meritocracy? Individual and Contextual Variations in the Faith', Comparative Education Review , 56 , 223-247.
  12. Hall, P. and Lamont, M. (2013) Social Resilience In The Neoliberal Era , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  13. Hochschild, J. L. (1996) Facing Up to the American Dream: Race, Class, and the Soul of the Nation , Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.
  14. Hunt, M. O. (2002) 'Religion, Race/Ethnicity, and Beliefs about Poverty', Social Science Quarterly , 83 , 810-831.
  15. Iversen, T. and Goplerud, M. (2018) 'Redistribution Without a Median Voter: Models of Multidimensional Politics', Annual Review of Political Science , 21 , 295-317.
  16. Jæger, M. M. (2013) 'The Effect of Macroeconomic and Social Conditions on the Demand for Redistribution: A Pseudo Panel Approach', Journal of European Social Policy , 23 , 149163.
  17. Janmaat, J. G. (2013) 'Subjective Inequality: A Review of International Comparative Studies on People's Views about Inequality', European Journal of Sociology , 54 , 357-89.
  18. Kelly, N. J. and Enns, P. K. (2010) 'Inequality and the Dynamics of Public Opinion: The SelfReinforcing Link Between Economic Inequality and Mass Preferences', American Journal of Political Science , 54 , 855-870.
  19. Kenworthy, L. and McCall, L. (2008) 'Inequality, Public Opinion and Redistribution', SocioEconomic Review , 6 , 35-68.
  20. Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D. and Rich, R. F. (2000) 'Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship', The Journal of Politics , 62 , 790-816.
  21. Kuziemko, I., Norton, M. I., Saez, E. and Stantcheva, S. (2015) 'How Elastic Are Preferences for Redistribution? Evidence from Randomized Survey Experiments', American Economic Review , 105 , 1478-1508.
  22. Lamont, M. (1992) Money, Morals, and Manners: The Culture of the French and the American Upper-Middle Class , Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.
  23. Lamont, M., Beljean, S. and Clair, M. (2014) 'What Is Missing? Cultural Processes and Causal Pathways to Inequality', Socio-Economic Review , 12 , 573-608.
  24. Lockwood, D. (1966) 'Sources of Variation in Working Class Images of Society', The Sociological Review , 14 , 249-267.
  25. Lübker, M. (2007) 'Inequality and the Demand for Redistribution: Are the Assumptions of the New Growth Theory Valid?', Socio-Economic Review , 5 , 117-148.
  26. MacLeod, L., Montero, D. and Speer, A. (1999) 'America's Changing Attitudes toward Welfare and Welfare Recipients, 1938-1995', Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare , 26 , 175.
  27. Massey, D. S. and Tannen, J. (2016) 'Segregation, Race, and the Social Worlds of Rich and Poor'. In Kirsch, I. and Braun, H. (eds) The Dynamics of Opportunity in America. Evidence and Perspectives , Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 13-34.
  28. McCall, L. (2013) The Undeserving Rich. American Beliefs about Inequality, Opportunity, and Redistribution , New York, Cambridge University Press.
  29. McCall, L. and Percheski, C. (2010) 'Income Inequality: New Trends and Research Directions', Annual Review of Sociology , 36 , 329-347.
  30. McCarty, N. and Pontusson, J. (2011) 'The Political Economy of Inequality and Redistribution'. In Salverda, W., Nolan, B., and Smeeding, T. M. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Economic Inequality , Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 665-92.
  31. McCoy, S. K. and Major, B. (2007) 'Priming Meritocracy and the Psychological Justification of Inequality', Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 43 , 341-351.
  32. Milanovic, B. (2000) 'The Median-Voter Hypothesis, Income Inequality, and Income Redistribution: An Empirical Test with the Required Data', European Journal of Political Economy , 16 , 367-410.
  33. Mills, C. W. (1959) The Sociological Imagination , London, Oxford University Press.
  34. Morris, M. and Western, B. (1999) 'Inequality in Earnings at the Close of the Twentieth Century', Annual Review of Sociology , 25 , 623-657.
  35. Musterd, S. (2005) 'Social and Ethnic Segregation in Europe: Levels, Causes, and Effects', Journal of Urban Affairs , 27 , 331-348.
  36. Nair, G. (2018) 'Misperceptions of Relative Affluence and Support for International Redistribution', The Journal of Politics , 80 , 815-830.
  37. Neckerman, K. M. and Torche, F. (2007) 'Inequality: Causes and Consequences', Annual Review of Sociology , 33 , 335-357.
  38. Newman, B. J. (2014) 'My Poor Friend: Financial Distress in One's Social Network, the Perceived Power of the Rich, and Support for Redistribution', The Journal of Politics , 76 , 126-138.
  39. Newman, B. J., Johnston, C. D. and Lown, P. L. (2015) 'False Consciousness or Class Awareness? Local Income Inequality, Personal Economic Position, and Belief in American Meritocracy', American Journal of Political Science , 59 , 326-340.
  40. Newman, K. S. (1999) Falling from Grace: Downward Mobility in the Age of Affluence , Berkeley, CA, University of California Press.
  41. Osberg, L. and Smeeding, T. (2006) ''Fair' Inequality? Attitudes toward Pay Differentials: The United States in Comparative Perspective', American Sociological Review , 71 , 450-473.
  42. Owens, A. (2016) 'Inequality in Children's Contexts Income Segregation of Households with and without Children', American Sociological Review , 81 , 549-574.
  43. Piketty, T. and Saez, E. (2003) 'Income Inequality in the United States, 1913-1998', The Quarterly Journal of Economics , 118 , 1-41.
  44. Reardon, S. F. and Bischoff, K. (2011) 'Income Inequality and Income Segregation', American Journal of Sociology , 116 , 1092-1153.
  45. Reardon, S. F. and Owens, A. (2014) '60 Years After Brown: Trends and Consequences of School Segregation', Annual Review of Sociology , 40 , 199-218.
  46. Roex, K. L., Huijts, T. and Sieben, I. (2018) 'Attitudes towards Income Inequality: 'Winners' versus 'Losers' of the Perceived Meritocracy', Acta Sociologica , forthcoming. Roth, C. and Wohlfart, J. (2017) Experienced Inequality and Preferences for Redistribution , SSRN Scholarly Paper, Rochester, NY, Social Science Research Network. Runciman, W. G. (1966) Relative Deprivation and Social Justice: A Study of Attitudes to Social Inequality in Twentieth-Century England , Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. Sachweh, P. (2012) 'The Moral Economy of Inequality: Popular Views on Income Differentiation, Poverty and Wealth', Socio-Economic Review , 10 , 419-445. Schmidt-Catran, A. W. (2016) 'Economic Inequality and Public Demand for Redistribution: Combining Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Evidence', Socio-Economic Review , 14 , 119-140. Schmidt-Catran, A. W. and Fairbrother, M. (2016) 'The Random Effects in Multilevel Models: Getting Them Wrong and Getting Them Right', European Sociological Review , 32 , 2338. Schröder, M. (2017) 'Is Income Inequality Related to Tolerance for Inequality?', Social Justice Research , 30 , 23-47. Shedd, C. (2015) Unequal City. Race, Schools, and Perceptions of Injustice , New York, Russell Sage Foundation. Smeeding, T. M. (2005) 'Public Policy, Economic Inequality, and Poverty: The United States in Comparative Perspective', Social Science Quarterly , 86 , 955-983. Snijders, T. A. B. and Bosker, R. J. (2012) Multilevel Analysis: An Introduction to Basic and Advanced Multilevel Modeling , Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. Somers, M. R. and Block, F. (2005) 'From Poverty to Perversity: Ideas, Markets, and Institutions over 200 Years of Welfare Debate', American Sociological Review , 70 , 260-287. Svallfors, S. (2011) 'A Bedrock of Support? Trends in Welfare State Attitudes in Sweden, 19812010', Social Policy & Administration , 45 , 806-825. Tammaru, T., Marczinczak, S., van Ham, M. and Musterd, S. (eds) (2016) Socio-Economic Segregation in European Capital Cities , New York, Routledge. Tropp, L. R. and Pettigrew, T. F. (2005) 'Relationships between Intergroup Contact and Prejudice among Minority and Majority Status Groups', Psychological Science , 16 , 951957. Trump, K.-S. (2017) 'Income Inequality Influences Perceptions of Legitimate Income Differences', British Journal of Political Science , 48 , 929-952. VanHeuvelen, T. (2017) 'Unequal Views of Inequality: Cross-National Support for Redistribution 1985-2011', Social Science Research , 64 , 43-66. Watson, T. (2009) 'Inequality and the Measurement of Residential Segregation by Income in American Neighborhoods', Review of Income and Wealth , 55 , 820-844. Weaver, R. K., Shapiro, R. Y. and Jacobs, L. R. (1995) 'Polls Trends: Welfare', Public Opinion Quarterly , 59 , 606-627. Whyte, M. (2011) 'Myth of the Social Volcano: Popular Responses to Rising Inequality in China'. In The People's Republic of China at 60. , Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Asia Center. Wietzke, F.-B. (2016) 'Kicking Away the Ladder? Poverty Reduction and Public Support for Redistribution in Emerging Economies', Socio-Economic Review , 14 , 419-442. Wu, A. M. and Chou, K.-L. (2017) 'Public Attitudes towards Income Redistribution: Evidence from Hong Kong', Social Policy & Administration , 51 , 738-754.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mijs, J. J. B.
Affiliations
Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Mijs, Jonathan J B
ORCID
Mijs, Jonathan J B
Venue
Socio-Economic Review
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2019-01-23
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
7-35
ISSN
  • 1475-1461 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-147X
DOI
10.1093/ser/mwy051
OpenAlex
W2914274646
Cited by
585
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 85 · 2025: 146 · 2024: 106 · 2023: 84 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1
FWCI
55.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Socio-Economic Review (publishedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
  • OpenBU (Boston University) (acceptedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion)
  • SocArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • SocArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
Keywords
income inequality, meritocracy, public attitudes toward inequality, legitimacy of inequality, social mobility, family wealth, social connectedness, public opinion on inequality

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