Subjective Status Shapes Political Preferences

TLDR

Economic inequality is at historically high levels in America, yet redistributive policies remain unpopular despite widespread support for equality, prompting a shift from traditional self‑interest or ideological explanations toward a focus on subjective status comparisons. The study tests whether feeling low subjective status increases support for redistribution and whether such shifts are justified through selective appeals to fairness principles. Across four studies, subjective status was found to drive changes in support for redistributive policies and the ideological arguments used to justify them.

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.