IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp18066.html

Top vs. Bottom: Experimental Evidence on Priming, Information, and Redistribution Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Bellani, Luna

    (Ulm University)

  • Bledow, Nona

Abstract

This paper examines how priming and information about inequality affect support for redistribution. Using a large-scale randomized survey experiment in Germany, we vary both the focus (top vs. bottom of the income distribution) and the delivery (subtle priming vs. factual information) of inequality cues. We document three key findings. First, simply directing respondents' attention to different ends of the distribution shifts redistributive preferences—especially when focusing on the rich. Second, information about top incomes has a larger effect than equivalent information about the poor, revealing asymmetric responses. Third, while both priming and information temporarily influence attitudes, these effects fade within one year. Our findings help reconcile mixed results in the literature and underscore the importance of framing, informational content, and message durability in shaping redistribution preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Bellani, Luna & Bledow, Nona, 2025. "Top vs. Bottom: Experimental Evidence on Priming, Information, and Redistribution Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 18066, IZA Network @ LISER.
    • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp18066
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp18066.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chong, Dennis & Druckman, James N., 2007. "Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 637-655, November.
    2. Ilyana Kuziemko & Michael I. Norton & Emmanuel Saez & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2015. "How Elastic Are Preferences for Redistribution? Evidence from Randomized Survey Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1478-1508, April.
    3. Meltzer, Allan H & Richard, Scott F, 1981. "A Rational Theory of the Size of Government," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 914-927, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2021. "Understanding Tax Policy: How do People Reason?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2309-2369.
    6. Aboozar Hadavand, 2018. "Misperceptions: An Analysis of Subjective Economic Inequality," Research on Economic Inequality, in: Inequality, Taxation and Intergenerational Transmission, volume 26, pages 247-281, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sandra Bohmann & Lars Felder & Peter Haan & Merve Kucuk, 2026. "Information, Justice and Public Support for Carbon Tax-and-Divided Policies: Experimental Evidence from Germany," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 2164, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    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. Blesse, Sebastian & Lergetporer, Philipp & Pache, Clara-Marie & Zeidler, Helen, 2026. "Do People Support Information Campaigns about Inequality?," IZA Discussion Papers 18694, IZA Network @ LISER.
    2. Sebastian Blesse & Philipp Lergetporer & Clara-Marie Pache & Helen Zeidler, 2026. "Do People Support Information Campaigns About Inequality?," CESifo Working Paper Series 12708, CESifo.
    3. Günther, Isabel & Martorano, Bruno, 2025. "Inequality, social mobility and redistributive preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    4. Sebastian Blesse & Philipp Lergetporer & Clara-Maria Pache & Helen Zeidler, 2026. "Do People Support Information Campaigns about Inequality?," Munich Papers in Political Economy 49, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    5. Zakharov, Alexei, 2024. "Overestimation of social security payments reduces preferences for spending on social policy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    6. Raymundo M. Campos-Vazquez & Samuel D. Restrepo-Oyola, 2025. "A randomized intervention to gauge preferred tax rates and progressivity," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 32(3), pages 782-804, June.
    7. Jeffrey, Karen & Matakos, Konstantinos, 2024. "Automation anxiety, fairness perceptions, and redistribution: Past experiences condition the response to future job loss," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 174-190.
    8. Martin Brun & Xavier Ramos, 2025. "Attitudes to income inequality and redistribution," Working Papers 33, Finnish Centre of Excellence in Tax Systems Research.
    9. Hope, David & Limberg, Julian & Weber, Nina, 2023. "Why do (some) ordinary Americans support tax cuts for the rich? Evidence from a randomised survey experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    10. Jeffrey, Karen, 2021. "Automation and the future of work: How rhetoric shapes the response in policy preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 417-433.
    11. 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.
    12. Bonnet, Julien & Ciani, Emanuele & Grimalda, Gianluca & Murtin, Fabrice & Pipke, David, 2025. "What explains preferences for redistribution? Evidence from an international survey," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    13. Roberto Brunetti & Gianluca Grimalda & Maria Marino, 2025. "Trickle-Down Economics, Merit, and Redistribution: An Experiment with the Poorest and Richest US Americans," IREA Working Papers 202518, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics.
    14. Elisa Castagno & Francesco Figari & Mariacristina Rossi, 2026. "Understanding Income Misperception Among Older Adults: Evidence from Belgium, Italy, and Spain," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 181(2), pages 1-27, January.
    15. Kishishita, Daiki & Matsumoto, Tomoko, 2024. "Self-benefits, fiscal risk, and political support for the public healthcare system," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. 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).
    17. 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.
    18. Keefer, Philip & Scartascini, Carlos & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2022. "Demand-side determinants of public spending allocations: Voter trust, risk and time preferences," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    19. Bellani, Luna & Berriochoa, Kattalina & Kapteina, Mark & Schwerdt, Guido, 2024. "Information Provision and Support for Inheritance Taxation: Evidence from a Representative Survey Experiment in Germany," IZA Discussion Papers 17099, IZA Network @ LISER.
    20. Tsvetkova, Milena & Olsson, Henrik & Galesic, Mirta, 2024. "Social networks affect redistribution decisions and polarization," OSF Preprints bw7ux_v1, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments

    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:iza:izadps:dp18066. 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: Mark Fallak (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaalu.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.