Cited by 234Social and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status DynamicsSocial Policy and Reform Studies

Subjective Status Shapes Political Preferences

Brown-Iannuzzi, Jazmin L., Lundberg, Kristjen B., Kay, Aaron C., Payne, B. Keith·2015·Psychological Science

Abstract

Economic inequality in America is at historically high levels. Although most Americans indicate that they would prefer greater equality, redistributive policies aimed at reducing inequality are frequently unpopular. Traditional accounts posit that attitudes toward redistribution are driven by economic self-interest or ideological principles. From a social psychological perspective, however, we expected that subjective comparisons with other people may be a more relevant basis for self-interest than is material wealth. We hypothesized that participants would support redistribution more when they felt low than when they felt high in subjective status, even when actual resources and self-interest were held constant. Moreover, we predicted that people would legitimize these shifts in policy attitudes by appealing selectively to ideological principles concerning fairness. In four studies, we found correlational (Study 1) and experimental (Studies 2–4) evidence that subjective status motivates shifts in support for redistributive policies along with the ideological principles that justify them.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797614553947

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown-Iannuzzi, J. L., Lundberg, K. B., Kay, A. C., & Payne, B. K.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2014-11-21
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
15-26
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2098662075
Cited by
234
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 4
FWCI
36.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Russell Sage Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
Keywords
subjective social status, redistribution, economic inequality, political preferences, self-interest, ideology, fairness, social comparison, policy attitudes
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude, Female, Humans, Male, Politics, Public Policy, Social Class, 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