How Unequal Is the United States? Adolescents’ Images of Social Stratification
Abstract
This study highlights the use of pictorial images to understand adolescents’ views on social stratification. A continuum of five visual images of social stratification were presented to a diverse sample of five hundred ninety-eight 8th–12th graders (14–18 years old). Adolescents selected which image best represented the United States (today, in 20 years, how it ought to be). Images ranged from inequitable to egalitarian. Results supported reference group and possible selves theories. Adolescents in higher status families chose a more egalitarian image for how the United States is today and how it ought to be. African Americans considered the United States today more unequal. Differences in adolescents’ commitment to an egalitarian ideal depended on their reactions to inequality and their beliefs about government responsiveness, bolstering the measure's validity.
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.
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
Building a Better America—One Wealth Quintile at a Time
Norton, M. I., & Ariely, D. (2011) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691610393524 · Cited by 1,119 · see citing works
Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2006) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.188 · Cited by 852 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour
Manstead, A. S. R. (2018) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjso.12251 · Cited by 831 · see citing works
- Authors
- Flanagan, C. A., & Kornbluh, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
- California State University, Chico (US)
- Corresponding author
- Flanagan, Constance A
- Venue
- Child Development
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2019-04-30
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 957-969
- ISSN
- 0009-3920 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8624
- OpenAlex
- W2754469960
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4
- FWCI
- 5.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Child Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- WT Grant Foundation
- William T. Grant Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
- Keywords
- social stratification, inequality, adolescents, pictorial images, egalitarianism, reference groups, possible selves, family socioeconomic status, African American adolescents, government responsiveness, social ideals, United States
- MeSH terms
- Data Visualization, Adolescent, Black or African American, Female, Humans, Male, Social Class, Social Perception, Socioeconomic Factors, 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
