Income Mobility Breeds Tolerance for Income Inequality: Cross-National and Experimental Evidence
Abstract
American politicians often justify income inequality by referencing the opportunities people have to move between economic stations. Though past research has shown associations between income mobility and resistance to wealth redistribution policies, no experimental work has tested whether perceptions of mobility influence tolerance for inequality. In this article, we present a cross-national comparison showing that income mobility is associated with tolerance for inequality and experimental work demonstrating that perceptions of higher mobility directly affect attitudes toward inequality. We find support for both the prospect of upward mobility and the view that peoples’ economic station is the product of their own efforts, as mediating mechanisms.
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?
The effect of the manipulation of perceived income mobility on tolerance for inequality was mediated by the expectation that respondents' children would be upwardly mobile and by perceptions of the degree to which someone's economic standing was the result of effort rather than luck.
“the effect of their manipulation of perceived income mobility on tolerance for inequality was mediated by two factors: the expectation that respondents’ children would be upwardly mobile; and perceptions of the degree to which someone's economic standing was the result of effort, rather than luck.”
From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Shariff, Wiwad, and Aknin (2016)
Higher perceived mobility leads to greater acceptance of income inequality.
“higher perceived mobility leads to greater acceptance of income inequality.”
From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Shariff, Wiwad, and Aknin (2016)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 31 · Cited by 202
- Authors
- Shariff, A. F., Wiwad, D., & Aknin, L. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Oregon (US)
- Simon Fraser University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Shariff, Azim F.
- Venue
- Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-05
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 373-380
- ISSN
- 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2401836676
- Cited by
- 202
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 51.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Income, Poverty, and Inequality
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
- Keywords
- income mobility, income inequality, upward mobility, attitudes toward inequality, wealth redistribution, cross-national comparison, political attitudes
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Income, Personal Satisfaction, Social Mobility, Social Perception, 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