The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Preferences for Redistribution
Open accessAbstract
This paper discusses what determines the preferences of individuals for redistribution. We review the theoretical literature and provide a framework to incorporate various effects previously studied separately in the literature. We then examine empirical evidence for the US, using the General Social Survey, and for a large set of countries, using the World Values Survey. The paper reviews previously found results and provides several new ones. We emphasize, in particular, the role of historical experiences, cultural factors and personal history as determinants of preferences for equality or tolerance for inequality.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Citations
Cites
A Rational Theory of the Size of Government
Meltzer, A. H., & Richard, S. F. (1981) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/261013 · Cited by 5,485
Cited by
The Two Facets of Social Policy Preferences
Cavaillé, C., & Trump, K.-S. (2015) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/678312 · Cited by 241
Exposure to television and individual beliefs: Evidence from a natural experiment
Hennighausen, T. (2015) · Journal of Comparative Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jce.2015.03.005 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Alesina, A. F., & Giuliano, P.
- Venue
- SSRN Electronic Journal
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009
- ISSN
- 1556-5068 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2100303397
- Cited by
- 368
- References
- 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Preferences for Redistribution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2139/ssrn.1333762
- The paper
- Alesina, A. F., & Giuliano, P. (2009). Preferences for Redistribution. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1333762
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
