IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v8y2018i2p2158244018774106.html

A Bayesian Analysis of Income Distribution Image

Author

Listed:
  • Atsushi Ishida

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate people’s image of income distribution and its difference by social position from data collected during a 2015 Japanese survey (SSP 2015) by applying Bayesian statistical analytical models. The income distribution image denotes the perceived and estimated income distribution of the individual and is supposed to be a basis of subjective belief on the features of society, including societal average income. In this study, the latent income distribution images were estimated from the observed variable of average income image. Furthermore, differences in income distribution image by social position were analyzed using Bayesian hierarchical models. The differences in income distribution image by age cohort and household income class were examined in terms of the mean (expected value) and the Gini inequality coefficient of the distribution image. It was found that although the distribution image tends to underestimate the average income level and overestimate inequality, the income distribution image could be an incomplete reflection of the income distribution characteristics of the reference group.

Suggested Citation

  • Atsushi Ishida, 2018. "A Bayesian Analysis of Income Distribution Image," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:2:p:2158244018774106
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244018774106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244018774106
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244018774106?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amiel,Yoram & Cowell,Frank, 1999. "Thinking about Inequality," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521466967, Enero-Abr.
    2. Pestieau, Pierre & Possen, Uri M, 1979. "A Model of Wealth Distribution," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 761-772, May.
    3. Richard Breen & Cecilia Garcia-Penalosa, 2002. "Bayesian Learning and Gender Segregation," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(4), pages 899-922, October.
    4. F. Clementi & M. Gallegati, 2005. "Pareto's Law of Income Distribution: Evidence for Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," Papers physics/0504217, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2006.
    5. Richard Breen, 1999. "Beliefs, Rational Choice And Bayesian Learning," Rationality and Society, , vol. 11(4), pages 463-479, November.
    6. Cruces, Guillermo & Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Tetaz, Martin, 2013. "Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 100-112.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dominik Becker, 2013. "The impact of teachers’ expectations on students’ educational opportunities in the life course: An empirical test of a subjective expected utility explanation," Rationality and Society, , vol. 25(4), pages 422-469, November.
    2. Erik Schokkaert & Benoît Tarroux, 2021. "Empirical research on ethical preferences: how popular is prioritarianism?," Working Papers 2104, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Etienne (GATE Lyon St-Etienne), Université de Lyon.
    3. Reyes,German Jeremias & Gasparini,Leonardo Carlos, 2017. "Perceptions of distributive justice in Latin America during a period of falling inequality," Policy Research Working Paper Series 8072, The World Bank.
    4. Aboozar Hadavand, 2017. "Misperceptions and mismeasurements: An analysis of subjective economic inequality," Working Papers 449, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    5. Anders Hjorth-Trolle, 2018. "Beliefs, parental investments, and intergenerational persistence: A formal model," Rationality and Society, , vol. 30(1), pages 108-154, February.
    6. Germán Reyes & Leonardo Gasparini, 2022. "Are fairness perceptions shaped by income inequality? evidence from Latin America," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 20(4), pages 893-913, December.
    7. Sällström, Susanna & Sjogren, Anna, 2002. "Trapped, Delayed and Handicapped," CEPR Discussion Papers 3335, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    9. Collewet, Marion & Fairley, Kim & Kessels, Roselinde & Knoef, Marike & van Vliet, Olaf, 2024. "The design of welfare: unraveling taxpayers' preferences," OSF Preprints 4am7e, Center for Open Science.
    10. Manuel Bagues & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2025. "Gender Segregation in Childhood Friendships and the Gender-Equality Paradox," RFBerlin Discussion Paper Series 2538, ROCKWOOL Foundation Berlin (RFBerlin).
    11. König, Tobias & Schmacker, Renke, 2025. "Preferences regarding behavioral policy: Attitudes toward sugary beverage taxes in the US," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2025-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    12. Andrea F.M. Martinangeli & Lisa Windsteiger, 2019. "Immigration vs. Poverty: Causal Impact on Demand for Redistribution in a Survey Experiment," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2019-13, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    13. Xiaogeng Xu & Satu Metsälampi & Michael Kirchler & Kaisa Kotakorpi & Peter Hans Matthews & Topi Miettinen, 2023. "Which income comparisons matter to people, and how? Evidence from a large field experiment," Working Papers 10, Finnish Centre of Excellence in Tax Systems Research.
    14. Frank Cowell & Marc Fleurbaey & Bertil Tungodden, 2015. "The tyranny puzzle in social preferences: an empirical investigation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 765-792, December.
    15. Joshua Greenstein, 2020. "The Precariat Class Structure and Income Inequality among US Workers: 1980–2018," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 52(3), pages 447-469, September.
    16. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Rozo, Sandra, 2021. "How Does it Feel to Be Part of the Minority?: Impacts of Perspective Taking on Prosocial Behavior," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 11599, Inter-American Development Bank.
    17. Cattaneo, Maria & Lergetporer, Philipp & Schwerdt, Guido & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger & Wolter, Stefan C., 2020. "Information provision and preferences for education spending: Evidence from representative survey experiments in three countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    18. Shenghao Zhu, 2019. "A Becker–Tomes model with investment risk," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(4), pages 951-981, June.
    19. Fabio Fiorillo & Agnese Sacchi, 2012. "The Political Economy of the Standard Level of Services: The Role of Income Distribution," CESifo Working Paper Series 3696, CESifo.
    20. Faravelli, Marco, 2007. "How context matters: A survey based experiment on distributive justice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1399-1422, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:2:p:2158244018774106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.