The Support for Economic Inequality Scale: Development and Adjudication

Past research has documented myriad pernicious psychological effects of high economic inequality, prompting interest into how people perceive, evaluate, and react to inequality. Here we propose, refine, and validate the Support for Economic Inequality Scale (SEIS)–a novel measure of attitudes towards economic inequality. In Study 1, we distill eighteen items down to five, providing evidence for unidimensionality and reliability. In Study 2, we replicate the scale’s unidimensionality and reliability and demonstrate its validity. In Study 3, we evaluate a United States version of the SEIS. Finally, in Studies 4–5, we demonstrate the SEIS’s convergent and predictive validity, as well as evidence for the SEIS being distinct from other conceptually similar measures. The SEIS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing perceptions of and reactions to economic inequality and provides a useful tool for researchers investigating the psychological underpinnings of economic inequality

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

A Many-analysts Approach to the Relation Between Religiosity and Well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N = 10, 535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

The luck of the draw: How attributions for poverty shape support for economic inequality

Despite growing economic inequality the American population remains relatively un-motivated to tackle this issue--why? In six studies (n = 34,198), I aimed to answer this question by exploring the link between both dispositional and situational attributions for poverty and support for economic inequality. In Study 1 I used cross-national data from 34 countries to examine the relationship between attributions for poverty and support for economic inequality. I found that people demonstrated less support for economic inequality in countries where the majority of respondents provided situational (as opposed to dispositional) attributions for poverty. In Study 2a I had participants complete an immersive online poverty simulation or play Monopoly. I found that relative to Monopoly, the poverty simulation led to an increase in situational attributions for poverty and turn diminished support for economic inequality and increased support for redistribution. In Study 2b I conducted a high-powered pre-registered replication and extension of these results. In Study 3a, I presented participants with evidence counter to the stereotype that the poor are lazy by having them interact with a low-status (versus average-status) status confederate. I found that the cross-status interaction led to a decrease in dispositional attributions for poverty which in turn decreased support for economic inequality. In Study 3b I conducted a high-powered pre-registered replication which strengthened the design of the previous study and largely replicated these results. Lastly, in Study 4, in order to determine the specificity of relationship between causal attributions and support for economic inequality I conducted a field quasi-experiment in undergraduates enrolled in various introductory psychology classes. I compared attributions for poverty and support for economic inequality over the course of a semester in students who were taking a class that explicitly highlights the situational causes of behaviour versus a series of classes without this explicit framing. I found that taking a course centred around demonstrating the impact situational factors have in influencing behaviour did not shift support for economic inequality relative to students in various control classes. Overall, this dissertation presents the first experiments showing how attributions for poverty can shape broader economic attitudes, such as support for economic inequality and how various simple and low-cost interventions can be leveraged to promote greater social equality

The rags-to-riches story of income mobility and its impact on emotional well-being

Recent research has demonstrated that people believe they are more likely to climb the income ladder than they actually are. However, no one has explored the downstream psychological consequences of these unrealistically optimistic perceptions, particularly their impact on emotional well-being. Across four studies I explored the correlational and causal relationship between perceptions of one’s own income mobility and emotional well-being. In Studies 1 and 2, I measure and assess the relationship between perceptions of income mobility and emotional well-being. I found that most participants see themselves as having high income mobility, and these perceptions of upward mobility are related to higher levels of happiness. In Study 3, I randomly assigned participants to read an article depicting income mobility as high, moderate, or low. Participants led to believe income mobility is high reported higher happiness relative to those led to believe income mobility is low. Lastly, in Study 4, utilizing a more diverse and generalizable sample from a National Panel Survey, I replicated the findings of Study 3. In sum, the present research demonstrates that people tend to be optimistic about their own chances of climbing the income ladder, and this sustained optimism translates into positive downstream emotional consequences

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N = 10, 535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported beta = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported beta = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates