Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35261026›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of sociology2022

The paradox of local inequality: Meritocratic beliefs in unequal localities.

Katy Morris, Felix Bühlmann, Nicolas Sommet, Leen Vandecasteele

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of sociology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Katy MorrisLIVES Centre, Swiss Centre of Expertise in Life Course Research, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6541-8067
Felix BühlmannLIVES Centre, Swiss Centre of Expertise in Life Course Research, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Nicolas SommetLIVES Centre, Swiss Centre of Expertise in Life Course Research, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Leen VandecasteeleLIVES Centre, Swiss Centre of Expertise in Life Course Research, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung 51NF40-185901Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung NCCR LIVESSwiss National Science Foundation 51NF40-185901
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

IncomePovertyHumansLongitudinal StudiesPersonal SatisfactionSocioeconomic FactorsUnited StatesEnglandlocal inequalitymeritocracymeritocratic beliefs | income inequality

Identifiers

PMID35261026
PMCPMC9314027

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.