How perceptions of autonomy relate to beliefs about inequality and fairness.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Aldama A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7806156 | biostudies-literature | 2021
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
How perceptions of autonomy relate to beliefs about inequality and fairness.
Aldama Abraham A Bicchieri Cristina C Freundt Jana J Mellers Barbara B Peters Ellen E
PloS one 20210113 1
Although inequality in the US has increased since the 1960s, several studies show that Americans underestimate it. Reasons include overreliance on one's local perspective and ideologically-motivated cognition. We propose a novel mechanism to account for the misperceptions of income inequality. We hypothesize that compared to those who feel less autonomy, the people who believe they are autonomous and have control over their lives also believe that (1) income inequality is lower and (2) income in ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:People differ in intelligence, cognitive ability, personality traits, motivation, and similar valued and, to a large degree, inherited characteristics that determine success and achievements. When does individual heterogeneity lead to a fair distribution of rewards and outcomes? Here, we develop this question theoretically and then test it experimentally for a set of structural conditions in a specific interaction situation. We first catalogue the functional relationship between individual endowments and outcomes to distinguish between fairness concepts such as meritocracy, equality of opportunity, equality of outcomes, and Rawl's theory of justice. We then use an online experiment to study which of these fairness patterns emerge when differently endowed individuals can share their resources with others, depending on whether information about others' endowments and outcomes is available. We find that while visible outcomes lessen inequality by decreasing the statistical dispersion of outcomes across the group, endowments need to be visible for better equality of opportunity for the most disadvantaged.
| S-EPMC9621428 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this study, we aim at clarifying the role of economic inequality on the subjective well-being of individuals. For this purpose, we use more than 180,000 individuals from 51 countries in the most recent five waves (1990-2014) of the World Values Survey. We observe a significant tradeoff between life satisfaction, happiness and the Gini coefficient. Also, inequality is negatively associated with life satisfaction and happiness for lower-income groups as well as higher-income groups. Interestingly, our data also shows large scale embracement of inequality in self-reported attitudes as even almost half (49%) of the lower-income group support the statement that some inequality is necessary for sustaining individual effort. Perceived freedom, and perceived social mobility partially mediates the relationship between the Gini coefficient and subjective wellbeing indicators. Yet, there remains a substantial negative effect of inequality on subjective well-being. Nevertheless, when individuals' perception of fairness is included, the effect of inequality disappears for both higher-income and lower-income groups. Overall, our findings suggest that people are bothered by inequality primarily due to fairness concerns.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11205-021-02711-w.
| S-EPMC8122217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Children tend to view equal resource distributions as more fair than unequal ones, but will sometimes view even unequal distributions as fair. However, less is known about how children form judgments about inequality when different procedures are used. In the present study, we investigated children's consideration of procedures (i.e., resource-distributing processes), outcomes (i.e., the distributions themselves), and emotions (i.e., the emotional reactions of those receiving the resources) when judging the fairness of unequal resource distributions. Participants (N = 130, 3- to 8-year-olds) were introduced to a Fair Coin (different color on each side) and an Unfair Coin (same color on both sides). In two between-subjects conditions, they watched a researcher flip either the Fair or Unfair Coin in order to distribute resources unequally between two child recipients. Participants then rated the fairness of this event, provided verbal justifications for their ratings (coded for references to procedures and/or outcomes), and rated the emotional state of each recipient (from which an Emotion Difference Score was computed). Results revealed that participants rated the event as more fair in the Fair Coin than the Unfair Coin condition. References to the outcome in children's justifications predicted lower fairness ratings, while references to the procedure only predicted lower ratings in the Unfair Coin condition. Greater Emotion Difference Scores predicted lower fairness ratings, and this effect increased with age. Together, these results show that children consider procedures, outcomes, and emotions when judging the fairness of inequality. Moreover, results suggest age-related increases in consideration of recipients' emotions makes inequality seem less fair, even when fair procedures are used. Implications for the development of fairness are discussed.
| S-EPMC8927918 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Physicians in the United States are now less likely to practice in smaller, more traditional, solo practices, and more likely to practice in larger group practices. Though older theory predicts conflict between bureaucracy and professional autonomy, studies have shown that professions in general, and physicians in particular, have adapted to organizational constraints. However, much work remains in clarifying the nature of this relationship and how exactly physicians have adapted to various organizational settings. To this end, the present study examines physicians' autonomy experiences in different decision types between organization sizes. Specifically, I ask: In what kinds of decisions do doctors perceive autonomous control? How does this vary by organizational size? Using stacked "spell" data constructed from the Community Tracking Study (CTS) Physician Survey (1996-2005) (n = 16,519) I examine how physicians' perceptions of autonomy vary between solo/two physician practices, small group practices with three to ten physicians, and large practices with ten or more physicians, in two kinds of decisions: logistic-based and knowledge-based decisions. Capitalizing on the longitudinal nature of the data I estimate how changes in practice size are associated with perceptions of autonomy, accounting for previous reports of autonomy. I also test whether managed care involvement, practice ownership, and salaried employment help explain part of this relationship. I find that while physicians practicing in larger group practices reported lower levels of autonomy in logistic-based decisions, physicians in solo/two physician practices reported lower levels of autonomy in knowledge-based decisions. Managed care involvement and ownership explain some, but not all, of the associations. These findings suggest that professional adaptation to various organizational settings can lead to varying levels of perceived autonomy across different kinds of decisions.
| S-EPMC3898537 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In most contemporary societies, people underestimate the extent of economic inequality, resulting in lower support for taxation and redistribution than might be expressed by better informed citizens. We still know little, however, about how understandings of inequality arise, and therefore about where perceptions and misperceptions of it might come from. This methodological article takes one step toward filling this gap by developing a research design-a blueprint-to study how people's understandings of wealth and income inequality develop through social interaction. Our approach combines insights from recent scholarship highlighting the socially situated character of inequality beliefs with those of survey experimental work testing how information about inequality changes people's understandings of it. Specifically, we propose to use deliberative focus groups to approximate the interactional contexts in which individuals process information and form beliefs in social life. Leveraging an experimental methodology, our design then varies the social makeup of deliberative groups, as well as the information about inequality we share with participants, to explore how different types of social environments and information shape people's understandings of economic inequality. This should let us test, in particular, whether the low socioeconomic diversity of people's discussion and interaction networks relates to their tendency to underestimate inequality, and whether beliefs about opportunity explain people's lack of appetite for redistributive policies. In this exploratory article we motivate our methodological apparatus and describe its key features, before reflecting on the findings from a proof-of-concept study conducted in London in the fall of 2019.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0.
| S-EPMC8972749 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Previous literature demonstrates that beliefs about the determinants of income inequality play a major role in individual support for income redistribution. This study investigates how people form beliefs regarding the extent to which work versus luck determines income inequality. Specifically, I examine whether people form self-serving beliefs to justify supporting personally advantageous redistributive policies. I use a laboratory experiment where I directly measure beliefs and manipulate the incentives to engage in self-deception. I first replicate earlier results demonstrating that (1) people attribute income inequality to work when they receive a high income and to luck when they receive a low income and (2) their beliefs about the source of income inequality influence their preferences over redistributive policies. However, I do not find that people's beliefs about the causes of income inequality are further influenced by self-serving motivations based on a desire to justify favorable redistributive policies. I conclude that, in my experiment, self-serving beliefs about the causes of income inequality are driven primarily by overconfidence and self-image concerns and not to justify favorable redistributive policies.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10683-021-09733-8.
| S-EPMC9165271 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sustained attentional control is critical for everyday tasks and success in school and employment. Understanding gender differences in sustained attentional control, and their potential sources, is an important goal of psychology and neuroscience and of great relevance to society. We used a large web-based sample (n = 21,484, from testmybrain.org) to examine gender differences in sustained attentional control. Our sample included participants from 41 countries, allowing us to examine how gender differences in each country relate to national indices of gender equality. We found significant gender differences in certain aspects of sustained attentional control. Using indices of gender equality, we found that overall sustained attentional control performance was lower in countries with less equality and that there were greater gender differences in performance in countries with less equality. These findings suggest that creating sociocultural conditions which value women and men equally can improve a component of sustained attention and reduce gender disparities in cognition.
| S-EPMC5089545 | biostudies-literature
Project description:During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we collected over 12,000 responses from a survey of scientists, who were asked to express their opinions on immunity certificates (also called "immunity passports") as a potential instrument to lessen the impact of the crisis. Overall, we find that scientists perceive immunity certificates as favorable for public health (50.2%) and the state of the economy (54.4%) while one-fifth (19.1%) and one-sixth (15.4%) disagree. Scientists stipulate some concerns about fairness (36.5%) and inequality (22.4%) arising from implementation of immunity certification. We find some smaller differences among scientific fields, particularly between health scientists and social scientists, with the latter being slightly more positive about the effect of immunity certification. Scholars in the United States, including health scientists, are more likely to view the immunity certificates favorably and mention fewer concerns about this policy's effect on fairness and inequality. Female scholars are significantly less in favor of immunity certificates, while scientists with more conservative political views hold more favorable opinions. Our results reveal that given the uncertainties during an early phase of a pandemic, scientists see scope for immunity certification to lessen the general societal impacts of the crisis.
| S-EPMC8263576 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A puzzle has emerged amidst rising inequality: why do people profess high levels of belief in meritocracy even as income gains are increasingly concentrated at the top? In light of contradictory theories and evidence, we undertake the first assessment of the relationship between local income inequality and meritocratic beliefs outside the United States, using data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study. We find that the positive relationship between country-level income inequality and meritocratic beliefs identified in the recent literature does not translate straightforwardly below country level: there is no robust relationship between local income inequality and meritocratic beliefs in England. However, there is a robust-and somewhat paradoxical-positive association between high local income inequality and meritocratic beliefs among those with the lowest incomes. On average, respondents with annual household incomes of £10,000 are five points more likely (on a 100-point scale) to believe their hard work will pay off if they live in the most rather than the least unequal places in England. We also show that this applies beyond the specific case of meritocratic beliefs: low-income respondents in unequal places are also notably more satisfied with their own (low) income than similar respondents in more equal localities. In line with system justification theory, we argue that belief in meritocracy serves as an important tool of psychological resilience for low-income individuals who regularly come into contact with others more economically fortunate than themselves: though it legitimates their current position at the bottom of the status hierarchy, this belief also offers the promise of future advancement. While this reduces concern about the psychological effects of growing local income inequality on the most economically vulnerable, it also suggests that there is little prospect of demand for systemic economic change emerging from what might have been considered the most likely places.
| S-EPMC9314027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLike all health care consumers, pregnant women have the right to make autonomous decisions about their medical care. However, this right has created confusion for a number of maternity care stakeholders, particularly in situations when a woman's decision may lead to increased risk of harm to the fetus. Little is known about care providers' perceptions of this situation, or of their legal accountability for outcomes experienced in pregnancy and birth. This paper examined maternity care providers' attitudes and beliefs towards women's right to make autonomous decisions during pregnancy and birth, and the legal responsibility of professionals for maternal and fetal outcomes.MethodsAttitudes and beliefs around women's autonomy and health professionals' legal accountability were measured in a sample of 336 midwives and doctors from both public and private health sectors in Queensland, Australia, using a questionnaire available online and in paper format. Student's t-test was used to compare midwives' and doctors' responses.ResultsBoth maternity care professionals demonstrated a poor understanding of their own legal accountability, and the rights of the woman and her fetus. Midwives and doctors believed the final decision should rest with the woman; however, each also believed that the needs of the woman may be overridden for the safety of the fetus. Doctors believed themselves to be ultimately legally accountable for outcomes experienced in pregnancy and birth, despite the legal position that all health care professionals are responsible only for adverse outcomes caused by their own negligent actions. Interprofessional differences were evident, with midwives and doctors significantly differing in their responses on five of the six items.ConclusionsMaternity care professionals inconsistently supported women's right to autonomous decision making during pregnancy and birth. This finding is further complicated by care providers' poor understanding of legal accountability for outcomes experienced in pregnancy and birth. The findings of this study support the need for guidelines on decision making in pregnancy and birth for maternity care professionals, and for recognition of interprofessional differences in beliefs around the rights of the woman, her fetus and health professionals in order to facilitate collaborative practice.
| S-EPMC3668159 | biostudies-literature