5. Stratification Beliefs

2020 ◽  
pp. 88-116
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan A Smith ◽  
Matthew O Hunt

Abstract This study examines the racial stratification beliefs of white Americans who have decision-making power at work (managers and supervisors) and of those (subordinates) who lack such power. We focus on whether these groups vary in overall levels of support for, and in determinants of, beliefs about racial inequality. Pooled cross-sectional analyses of data from the 1977 to 2014 General Social Surveys (GSS) reveal that, among both white supervisors and subordinates, support is greatest for a motivation-based explanation of black disadvantage, followed by (in order) explanations focusing on blacks’ lesser educational chances, discrimination against blacks, and finally, blacks’ supposed lesser ability. In line with Group Position Theory, our multivariate analyses reveal few differences across the supervisory divide in levels of support for, or in the determinants of, whites’ beliefs about black disadvantage. Differences that do exist align with alternative perspectives including Social Dominance Theory, a Group Self-Interest Model, and Intergroup Contact Theory. We conclude by discussing the theoretical and methodological implications of our findings for future research pertaining to what does and does not work to ameliorate racial inequality in the workplace.


2017 ◽  
pp. 247-274
Author(s):  
James R. Kluegel ◽  
Eliot R. Smith

1976 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan J. Stern ◽  
Donald D. Searing

Tocqueville described the eventual progress of equality as inevitable; today its prospects seem less assured. The main engines of equality's modest advance are to be found in contemporary welfare states, where politics concerns who gets what and why. Governments are deeply concerned with these matters even when beguiling themselves, as well as the rest of us, into overlooking the cumulative results of their actions. By shoring up and gradually reshaping stratification systems, they help provide frameworks within which we live and plan our futures. Ordinary citizens are more attuned to the facts of inequality than to speculations about its origins. This essay investigates when and how citizens learn about stratification in England and the United States.


Author(s):  
Matthew O. Hunt ◽  
Heather E. Bullock

This article examines ideologies and beliefs about poverty. In 1981, Kluegel and Smith provided the first comprehensive summary and critique of scholarly research on beliefs about social stratification. Focusing primarily on the United States and Great Britain, they reviewed research on public beliefs in three primary areas: opportunity, the distributive process, and social class. In so doing, they identified four key questions that continue to define research in this area: What is believed about social inequality? What principles organize thought around social inequality? What determines what is believed? What are the consequences of these beliefs? This article considers what Americans (and to a lesser extent, the British) perceive and believe about social inequality; the nature of ideologies and other social psychological processes governing the intrapersonal organization of beliefs; selected factors that shape patterns of belief; and selected consequences that stratification beliefs hold for the person and for politics.


2021 ◽  
pp. 233264922110010
Author(s):  
Kasey Henricks ◽  
Ruben Ortiz

How do members of racial and ethnic groups explain the origins of unpaid legal debt from monetary sanctions, and how do such attributions undergird group differences in support for policy responses that escalate punishment? Using data from the Chicago Area Finances Survey, 2019, we apply an attributional typology of stratification beliefs to account for why legal debt from fines, fees, and tickets goes unpaid. We find differences in attribution types along key measures of socio-demographics and political values, and we identify racial differences in these attributions when other measures are held constant. How people understand why legal debt goes unpaid shapes their policy preferences as well, and they explain a small but significant fraction of racial and ethnic differences in the desire for punitive recourse.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document