Building a More Mobile America—One Income Quintile at a Time
Abstract
A core tenet of the American ethos is that there is considerable economic mobility. Americans seem willing to accept vast financial inequalities as long as they believe that everyone has the opportunity to succeed. We examined whether people’s beliefs about the amount of economic mobility in the contemporary United States conform to reality. We found that (a) people believe there is more upward mobility than downward mobility; (b) people overestimate the amount of upward mobility and underestimate the amount of downward mobility; (c) poorer individuals believe there is more mobility than richer individuals; and (d) political affiliation influences perceptions of economic mobility, with conservatives believing that the economic system is more dynamic—with more people moving both up and down the income distribution—than liberals do. We discuss how these findings can shed light on the intensity and nature of political debate in the United States on economic inequality and opportunity.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
American participants overestimate the degree of social mobility in the United States.
“American participants have been found to overestimate the degree of social mobility in the United States (Davidai & Gilovich, 2015; Kraus & Tan, 2015)”
From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Davidai & Gilovich, 2015
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 61 · Cited by 220
- Authors
- Davidai, S., & Gilovich, T.
- Affiliations
- Cornell University (US)
- Venue
- Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 60-71
- ISSN
- 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6924
- OpenAlex
- W1963500368
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 61
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 59.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- economic mobility, upward mobility, downward mobility, income inequality, political affiliation, income quintiles, economic opportunities
- MeSH terms
- Culture, Humans, Income, Politics, Socioeconomic Factors, Thinking, 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