IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/comdev/v57y2026i1p23-44.html

Values outweigh political ideology when forming beliefs about gentrification: A study of the U.S. general public

Author

Listed:
  • Lauren E. Mullenbach
  • Nick A. D. Pitas
  • Ben Hickerson

Abstract

Gentrification has challenged cities across the U.S., mostly harming low-income and communities of color. As municipalities consider different ways to handle gentrification – either encouraging its progress or constraining its harm – they may consider public opinion on the issue when making decisions. However, information regarding public opinion on gentrification remains in short supply, especially on a large, nationwide scale. This study sought to close this gap through a national-scale online survey analyzed using structural equation modeling. We found that three politically influential values – conservatism, self-enhancement, and self-transcendence – were significantly related to the general public’s beliefs about gentrification. We found that more conservative respondents were more strongly in favor of development, and that self-transcendent respondents (those who look out for others) were in favor of integrating residents of different backgrounds and incomes in city neighborhoods – indicating progressive ideals. These findings bolster Schwartz values theory and illustrate potential voters’ beliefs about gentrification.

Suggested Citation

  • Lauren E. Mullenbach & Nick A. D. Pitas & Ben Hickerson, 2026. "Values outweigh political ideology when forming beliefs about gentrification: A study of the U.S. general public," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 23-44, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:comdev:v:57:y:2026:i:1:p:23-44
    DOI: 10.1080/15575330.2025.2473072
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/15575330.2025.2473072
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/15575330.2025.2473072?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

    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:comdev:v:57:y:2026:i:1:p:23-44. 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/RCOD20 .

    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.