IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v54y2022i45p5209-5222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relatively accurate but absolutely off: U.S. residents’ estimates of relative and absolute economic mobility

Author

Listed:
  • Jared Barton
  • Xiaofei Pan

Abstract

Using results from two treatment arms of a larger nationwide survey experiment in the United States, we add evidence on how Americans perceive social mobility. In one arm, respondents estimate both upward and downward relative economic mobility, while in the other, respondents estimate the absolute economic mobility (that is, do children out-earn their parents?) for each quintile of the parental income distribution. This latter question has been overlooked in the literature. We find respondentsʻ average estimates of relative downward mobility to be remarkably close to reality. The average estimate of relative upward mobility is also close, though both estimates underestimate relative mobility. There are small partisan differences in accuracy on relative mobility, with Republican-leaning respondents providing the most accurate estimates, but respondentsʻ perception of absolute mobility significantly underestimate (overestimate) mobility for the poorest (highest-income) children irrespective of partisan affiliation. Our results provide important insights on the implementation of redistribution policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jared Barton & Xiaofei Pan, 2022. "Relatively accurate but absolutely off: U.S. residents’ estimates of relative and absolute economic mobility," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(45), pages 5209-5222, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:54:y:2022:i:45:p:5209-5222
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2022.2041181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2022.2041181
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2022.2041181?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:taf:applec:v:54:y:2022:i:45:p:5209-5222. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.