6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The Effect of Egocentric Taste Judgments on Stereotyping of Welfare Recipients and Attitudes Toward Welfare Policy

      ,
      Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
      SAGE Publications

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Despite the centrality of purchasing behavior and choice to the welfare debate, research has generally understood attitudes toward welfare at a broader level and as a function of rational or deliberative processes (e.g., self-interest, ideology). This project identifies the effect of egocentrism on welfare attitudes, finding that a welfare recipient’s purchase of an item that the participant personally values less (vs. more) leads to increased stereotyping of welfare recipients (e.g., irresponsibility, impulsivity) and favorable attitudes toward policy that would restrict that purchase. This effect is illustrated for both chronic and situational preferences and across a number of products commonly debated in welfare policy. The authors find that egocentrism is robust to debiasing; therefore, tests of boundary conditions involved countering the stereotype of irresponsibility rather than the bias itself. For example, the effects do not emerge in the context of healthy foods and necessities, nor when information suggests that the target consumer is otherwise responsible (e.g., budgeting, clipping coupons). Implications for policy and welfare advocacy are discussed. In general, these findings establish how personal preferences may shape attitudes toward marginalized consumers and related policy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes.

          In the present research, consisting of 2 correlational studies (N = 616) including a representative U.S. sample and 2 experiments (N = 350), the authors investigated how stereotypes and emotions shape behavioral tendencies toward groups, offering convergent support for the behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes (BIAS) map framework. Warmth stereotypes determine active behavioral tendencies, attenuating active harm (harassing) and eliciting active facilitation (helping). Competence stereotypes determine passive behavioral tendencies, attenuating passive harm (neglecting) and eliciting passive facilitation (associating). Admired groups (warm, competent) elicit both facilitation tendencies; hated groups (cold, incompetent) elicit both harm tendencies. Envied groups (competent, cold) elicit passive facilitation but active harm; pitied groups (warm, incompetent) elicit active facilitation but passive harm. Emotions predict behavioral tendencies more strongly than stereotypes do and usually mediate stereotype-to-behavioral-tendency links.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification.

            Many have suggested that complementary gender stereotypes of men as agentic (but not communal) and women as communal (but not agentic) serve to increase system justification, but direct experimental support has been lacking. The authors exposed people to specific types of gender-related beliefs and subsequently asked them to complete measures of gender-specific or diffuse system justification. In Studies 1 and 2, activating (a) communal or complementary (communal + agentic) gender stereotypes or (b) benevolent or complementary (benevolent + hostile) sexist items increased support for the status quo among women. In Study 3, activating stereotypes of men as agentic also increased system justification among men and women, but only when women's characteristics were associated with higher status. Results suggest that complementary stereotypes psychologically offset the one-sided advantage of any single group and contribute to an image of society in which everyone benefits through a balanced dispersion of benefits. ((c) 2005 APA, all rights reserved).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment.

              The authors propose that people adopt others' perspectives by serially adjusting from their own. As predicted, estimates of others' perceptions were consistent with one's own but differed in a manner consistent with serial adjustment (Study 1). Participants were slower to indicate that another's perception would be different from--rather than similar to--their own (Study 2). Egocentric biases increased under time pressure (Study 2) and decreased with accuracy incentives (Study 3). Egocentric biases also increased when participants were more inclined to accept plausible values encountered early in the adjustment process than when inclined to reject them (Study 4). Finally, adjustments tend to be insufficient, in part, because people stop adjusting once a plausible estimate is reached (Study 5). ((c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
                Journal of Public Policy & Marketing
                SAGE Publications
                0743-9156
                1547-7207
                January 2020
                May 10 2019
                January 2020
                : 39
                : 1
                : 1-14
                Article
                10.1177/0743915618820925
                e57ad618-6c2d-4bfa-b733-7f0863c44371
                © 2020

                http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article