4.4 Article

The Misperception of Racial Economic Inequality

期刊

PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE
卷 14, 期 6, 页码 899-921

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1745691619863049

关键词

Economic inequality; racism; intergroup relations; social cognition; race; ethnicity

资金

  1. Department of Psychology at Yale University
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) predoctoral training grant
  3. NSF [BCS 15552879]
  4. NSF Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences Postdoctoral Research Fellowship [1809370]
  5. School of Management
  6. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie
  7. SBE Off Of Multidisciplinary Activities [1809370] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Racial economic inequality is a foundational feature of the United States, yet many Americans appear oblivious to it. In the present work we consider the psychology underlying this collective willful ignorance. Drawing on prior research and new evidence from a nationally representative sample of adults (N = 1,008), we offer compelling evidence that Americans vastly underestimate racial economic inequality, especially the racial wealth gap. In particular, respondents thought that the Black-White wealth gap was smaller, by around 40 percentage points in 1963 and around 80 percentage points in 2016, than its actual size. We then consider the motivational, cognitive, and structural factors that are likely to contribute to these misperceptions and suggest directions for future research to test these ideas. Importantly, we highlight the implications of our collective ignorance of racial economic inequality and the challenge of creating greater accuracy in perceptions of these racial economic disparities, as well as outline the steps policymakers might take to create messages on this topic that effectively promote equity-enhancing policies. We close with an appeal to psychological science to at least consider, if not center, the racial patterning of these profound economic gaps.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据