IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/erp/euirsc/p0347.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Racial Cues and Attitudes toward Redistribution: A Comparative Experimental Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Shanto Iyengar

Abstract

Support for welfare in the US is heavily influenced by citizens’ racial attitudes, especially citizens’ attitudes toward Blacks. Indeed, the fact that many Americans think of welfare recipients as poor Blacks (and especially poor Black women) is a common explanation for Americans’ comparatively low support for redistribution cross-nationally. In this study, we extend existing work on how racialized portrayals of recipients affect attitudes toward redistribution. The data for the analysis are drawn from a new and unique online survey experiment, implemented by YouGov with representative samples (n=1200) in each of the US, UK and Canada. Relying on a series of survey vignettes, we manipulate program type (welfare vs. unemployment insurance) as well as the ethno-racial background of recipients (through morphed photos and common ethnicized names). In doing so, we seek to make three specific contributions. First, we test whether support for a means-tested program like welfare is lower than support for contribution-based program like unemployment insurance. Second, we extend the American literature to explore whether there is an anti-Black bias in other countries. Third, we examine whether citizens respond to other minority groups (Asians and Southeast Asians) in a similar manner. Parallel survey designs allows for an unprecedented comparative analysis of the underlying political-psychological sources of support (or lack of support) for redistributive policies across Anglo-Saxon democracies. The paper concludes by considering the implications of this study in light of growing immigrant-driven diversity in North America and Europe.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanto Iyengar, 2013. "Racial Cues and Attitudes toward Redistribution: A Comparative Experimental Approach," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 59, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
  • Handle: RePEc:erp:euirsc:p0347
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1814/27700
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/27700/RSCAS_2013_59.pdf?sequence=1
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erzo F. P. Luttmer, 2001. "Group Loyalty and the Taste for Redistribution," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 109(3), pages 500-528, June.
    2. Johnston, Richard & Banting, Keith & Kymlicka, Will & Soroka, Stuart, 2010. "National Identity and Support for the Welfare State," SULCIS Working Papers 2010:11, Stockholm University, Linnaeus Center for Integration Studies - SULCIS.
    3. Papadakis, Elim & Bean, Clive, 1993. "Popular Support for the Welfare State: A Comparison Between Institutional Regimes," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(03), pages 227-254, July.
    4. Allison Harell, 2010. "Political Tolerance, Racist Speech, and the Influence of Social Networks," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(3), pages 724-740.
    5. Allison Harell & Stuart Soroka, 2010. "Race of Recipient and Support for Welfare in Canada," CIRANO Working Papers 2010s-42, CIRANO.
    6. Gilliam, Franklin D. Jr. & Valentino, Nicholas A. & Beckman, Matthew N., 2002. "Where You Live and What You Watch: The Impact of Racial Proximity and Local Television News on Attitudes about Race and Crime," Institute for Social Science Research, Working Paper Series qt7g05r6s4, Institute for Social Science Research, UCLA.
    7. Dietlind Stolle & Stuart Soroka & Richard Johnston, 2008. "When Does Diversity Erode Trust? Neighborhood Diversity, Interpersonal Trust and the Mediating Effect of Social Interactions," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56, pages 57-75, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    public opinion;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:erp:euirsc:p0347. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Valerio PAPPALARDO). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.