Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Ideology selectively shapes attention to inequality.
Waldfogel, Hannah B; Sheehy-Skeffington, Jennifer; Hauser, Oliver P; Ho, Arnold K; Kteily, Nour S.
Affiliation
  • Waldfogel HB; Department of Management and Organizations, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208; hannah.waldfogel@kellogg.northwestern.edu n-kteily@kellogg.northwestern.edu.
  • Sheehy-Skeffington J; Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, United Kingdom.
  • Hauser OP; Department of Economics, University of Exeter Business School, Exeter EX4 4PU, United Kingdom.
  • Ho AK; Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109.
  • Kteily NS; Department of Management and Organizations, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208; hannah.waldfogel@kellogg.northwestern.edu n-kteily@kellogg.northwestern.edu.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 118(14)2021 04 06.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33795517
Contemporary debates about addressing inequality require a common, accurate understanding of the scope of the issue at hand. Yet little is known about who notices inequality in the world around them and when. Across five studies (N = 8,779) employing various paradigms, we consider the role of ideological beliefs about the desirability of social equality in shaping individuals' attention to-and accuracy in detecting-inequality across the class, gender, and racial domains. In Study 1, individuals higher (versus lower) on social egalitarianism were more likely to naturalistically remark on inequality when shown photographs of urban scenes. In Study 2, social egalitarians were more accurate at differentiating between equal versus unequal distributions of resources between men and women on a basic cognitive task. In Study 3, social egalitarians were faster to notice inequality-relevant changes in images in a change detection paradigm indexing basic attentional processes. In Studies 4 and 5, we varied whether unequal treatment adversely affected groups at the top or bottom of society. In Study 4, social egalitarians were, on an incentivized task, more accurate at detecting inequality in speaking time in a panel discussion that disadvantaged women but not when inequality disadvantaged men. In Study 5, social egalitarians were more likely to naturalistically point out bias in a pattern detection hiring task when the employer was biased against minorities but not when majority group members faced equivalent bias. Our results reveal the nuances in how our ideological beliefs shape whether we accurately notice inequality, with implications for prospects for addressing it.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Politics / Socioeconomic Factors / Social Discrimination / Attentional Bias Type of study: Qualitative_research Aspects: Determinantes_sociais_saude / Equity_inequality Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Year: 2021 Document type: Article Country of publication: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Politics / Socioeconomic Factors / Social Discrimination / Attentional Bias Type of study: Qualitative_research Aspects: Determinantes_sociais_saude / Equity_inequality Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Year: 2021 Document type: Article Country of publication: United States