IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp16905.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gini Who? The Relationship between Inequality Perceptions and Life Satisfaction

Author

Listed:
  • Marchesi, Daniele

    (University of Groningen)

  • Nikolova, Milena

    (University of Groningen)

  • Angelini, Viola

    (University of Groningen)

Abstract

Research on the consequences of income inequality on subjective well-being has yielded mixed results, including a lack of a statistically significant correlation. We propose that this inconsistency may arise from the failure to differentiate between perceived and actual income inequality. Perceptions of inequality matter because individuals often do not know the actual level of inequality in their country. Leveraging data from the 2016 Life in Transition Survey, which includes unique information on individuals' inequality perceptions, we find a positive association between these perceptions and life satisfaction across 33 countries. Individuals who believe that inequality has increased in the previous 4 years are on average 8% less satisfied with their life (on a 1-5 scale) compared to respondents who perceive no increase in inequality. The magnitude of the estimate is sizeable, being twice as large as the influence of unemployment. Taking actual inequality levels and changes into account does not alter the conclusions, suggesting that inequality perception matters for life satisfaction above and beyond actual inequality. Our findings survive a battery of robustness checks, including an instrumental variables approach and addressing common method variance bias. We also find that mobility expectations and fairness perceptions cushion but do not fully offset the negative association between perceived inequality increases and life satisfaction. Our findings imply that understanding the role of inequality perceptions can be key to improving social cohesion and individual and societal well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Marchesi, Daniele & Nikolova, Milena & Angelini, Viola, 2024. "Gini Who? The Relationship between Inequality Perceptions and Life Satisfaction," IZA Discussion Papers 16905, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp16905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp16905.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roland Benabou & Efe A. Ok, 2001. "Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: The Poum Hypothesis," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 447-487.
    2. Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos, 2005. "Fairness and Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 960-980, September.
    3. Bjørnskov, Christian & Dreher, Axel & Fischer, Justina A.V. & Schnellenbach, Jan & Gehring, Kai, 2013. "Inequality and happiness: When perceived social mobility and economic reality do not match," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 75-92.
    4. Vladimir Otrachshenko & Milena Nikolova & Olga Popova, 2023. "Double-edged sword: persistent effects of Communist regime affiliations on well-being and preferences," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 36(3), pages 1139-1185, July.
    5. Emily Oster, 2019. "Unobservable Selection and Coefficient Stability: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 187-204, April.
    6. Bjornskov, Christian & Dreher, Axel & Fischer, Justina AV & Schnellenbach, Jan, 2009. "On the relation between income inequality and happiness: Do fairness perceptions matter?," MPRA Paper 19494, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Vladimir Gimpelson & Daniel Treisman, 2018. "Misperceiving inequality," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 27-54, March.
    8. Michael Weber & Francesco D'Acunto & Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Olivier Coibion, 2022. "The Subjective Inflation Expectations of Households and Firms: Measurement, Determinants, and Implications," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 157-184, Summer.
    9. Kaiser, Caspar & Vendrik, Maarten C. M., 2019. "How threatening are transformations of reported happiness to subjective wellbeing research?," SocArXiv gzt7a, Center for Open Science.
    10. Italo Colantone & Piero Stanig, 2019. "The Surge of Economic Nationalism in Western Europe," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 128-151, Fall.
    11. Robert J. Blendon, 1997. "Bridging the Gap between the Public's and Economists' Views of the Economy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 105-118, Summer.
    12. 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.
    13. Hainmueller, Jens & Xu, Yiqing, 2013. "ebalance: A Stata Package for Entropy Balancing," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 54(i07).
    14. Banerjee, Abhijit V & Duflo, Esther, 2003. "Inequality and Growth: What Can the Data Say?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 267-299, September.
    15. Rafael Di Tella & Robert MacCulloch, 2006. "Some Uses of Happiness Data in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(1), pages 25-46, Winter.
    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. Colagrossi, Marco & Karagiannis, Stelios & Raab, Roman, 2019. "The Median Voter Takes it All: Preferences for Redistribution and Income Inequality in the EU-28," Working Papers 2019-06, Joint Research Centre, European Commission.
    2. Mu, Ren, 2022. "Perceived relative income, fairness, and the role of government: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Windsteiger, Lisa, 2022. "The redistributive consequences of segregation and misperceptions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    4. Andreoli, Francesco & Olivera, Javier, 2020. "Preferences for redistribution and exposure to tax-benefit schemes in Europe," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Antonino Callea & Dalila De Rosa & Giovanni Ferri & Francesca Lipari & Marco Costanzi, 2022. "Can Emotional Intelligence promote Individual Wellbeing and protect from perceptions' traps?," CERBE Working Papers wpC39, CERBE Center for Relationship Banking and Economics.
    6. Lin Yang, 2018. "The net effect of housing-related costs and advantages on the relationship between inequality and poverty," CASE Papers /211, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    7. Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M. & Krozer, Alice & Ramírez-Álvarez, Aurora A. & de la Torre, Rodolfo & Velez-Grajales, Roberto, 2022. "Perceptions of inequality and social mobility in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    8. Lin Yang, 2018. "The relationship between poverty and inequality: Resource constraint mechanisms," CASE Papers /212, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    9. Nina Weber, 2023. "Experience of Social Mobility and Support for Redistribution: Accepting or Blaming the System?," ifo Working Paper Series 397, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    10. Gimpelson, V. & Chernina, E., 2020. "How we perceive our place in income distribution and how the perceptions deviate from reality," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 46(2), pages 30-56.
    11. Kuhn, Andreas, 2019. "The subversive nature of inequality: Subjective inequality perceptions and attitudes to social inequality," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 331-344.
    12. Yang, Lin, 2018. "The relationship between poverty and inequality: resource constraint mechanisms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103463, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Guenther, Isabel & Tetteh-Baah, Samuel Kofi, 2019. "The impact of discrimination on redistributive preferences and productivity: experimental evidence from the United States," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203652, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. 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.
    15. JaeYoul Shin, 2018. "Relative Deprivation, Satisfying Rationality, and Support for Redistribution," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 35-56, November.
    16. Laméris, Maite D. & Garretsen, Harry & Jong-A-Pin, Richard, 2020. "Political ideology and the intragenerational prospect of upward mobility," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    17. Barton, Jared & Pan, Xiaofei, 2022. "Movin’ on up? A survey experiment on mobility enhancing policies," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    18. Díez-Alonso, Daniel, 2020. "Taxpayer Bias in Perceived Income Distributions," MPRA Paper 116775, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Jan 2021.
    19. Kristoffer B Hvidberg & Claus T Kreiner & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "Social Positions and Fairness Views on Inequality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(6), pages 3083-3118.
    20. Andreas Kuhn, 2016. "The Subversive Nature of Inequality: Subjective Inequality Perceptions and Attitudes to Social Inequality," CESifo Working Paper Series 6023, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    inequality; perceptions; life satisfaction; subjective well-being;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • E31 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Price Level; Inflation; Deflation
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being

    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:iza:izadps:dp16905. 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: Holger Hinte (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaade.html .

    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.