The subjective social status is the perception that individuals have regarding their position in the social hierarchy. The evidence in sociology and social psychology of inequality has shown that there are objective and subjective factors that affect the perception of social status. In this framework, our research subject is to determine the effect of objective and subjective characteristics of social status are associated with subjective social status, measured through income, educational attainment, EGP Class scheme and family subjective social status. It is possible to show a bias towards the mean of the distribution of social status, finding cases of sub and overestimation of subjective status. Using linear regression models for each country and country fixed effects for the complete sample (n = 2365) it is possible to show significant effects of income and higher education for Chile and Argentina, effect that is maintained for the three countries. Belonging to the agricultural self-employment (IVc) and agricultural work (VIIb) classes has a significant difference in contrast to the Services Class (I + II). However, this difference loses significance when controlled by the unobserved heterogeneity of the country. The family subjective social status is the most relevant characteristic in predicting the individual subjective social status, the positive effect maintains its significance in all the specifications of the models. We conclude that subjective characteristics of social status, in contrast to objective ones, are more relevant in predicting subjective social status.

Meritocracy is understood as a system of distribution based on individual effort and talent. It has been widely questioned for its role in legitimizing social inequalities, given that it would lead to attributing personal success or failure to individual factors over social determinants. This research focuses on how some notions of meritocracy are learned during the school stage, considering the possible influence of socializing agents such as the family and the school. Using data from students and their families in 3 regions of Chile (N= 1,635 students from 64 schools), we analyze the extent to which parents' meritocratic perceptions are associated with their children, as well as the influence of the school experience of justice on grades. The results partially demonstrate that meritocratic perceptions are transmitted intergenerationally. Nevertheless, we find little evidence that this relationship is affected by the experience of distributive justice at school.

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted social interactions and coexistence around the globe in dimensions that go far beyond health issues. In the case of the Global South, the pandemic has developed along with growing South-South migratory movements, becoming another key factor that might reinforce social conflict in increasingly multicultural areas as migrants have historically served as “scapegoats” for unexpected crises as a way to control and manage diversity. Chile is one of the main destination countries for migrants from the Latin American and Caribbean region, and COVID-19 outbreaks in migrant housing have intensified discrimination. In such a context, there is a need for understanding how the pandemic has potentially changed the way non-migrants perceive and interact with migrant neighbors. Drawing on the national social cohesion panel survey study ELSOC (2016–2021, N = 2,927) the aim is to analyze the changes in non-migrants' attitudes toward migrants—related to dimensions of social cohesion—over the last years and their relation with individual status and territorial factors. We argue that social cohesion in increasingly multicultural societies is partially threatened in times of crisis. The results indicate that after the pandemic, convivial attitudes toward Latin American migrants decreased. Chileans started perceiving them more negatively, particularly those respondents with lower educational levels and who live in increasingly multicultural neighborhoods with higher rates of migrant residents.

Economic and social inequalities have generated growing concerns and crises across contemporary societies. One of the mechanisms proposed by social sciences to explain the persistence of inequality is the belief in meritocracy, which would legitimize economic disparities based on differences in effort and talent. Despite its wide use as a concept, empirical research on meritocracy is relatively novel and characterized by diverse conceptualizations and measures that make the findings and their interpretation rather inconsistent. Most of the studies in the area have relied upon secondary data to operationalize meritocracy, with a wide variation in the use and interpretation of the same survey items. Taking into account the extant literature that uses measures of meritocracy, this article identifies a series of drawbacks and inconsistencies within and between studies regarding the conceptualization and operationalization of meritocracy beliefs. Based on this critical analysis, we propose a conceptual framework for measuring perceptions and preferences for meritocracy and non-meritocracy, which is then tested through confirmatory analysis using ISSP (International Social Survey Programme) data as well as a novel scale designed with this purpose (N=2,141). Our results support the conceptual framework and its operationalizarion, although with a better fit for the proposed scale than for the ISSP survey. Our discussion highlights the importance of considering different dimensions in order to advance in the study of meritocracy.

This study analyzes the effect of information about economic inequality on the justification of wage inequality. Using a representative sample of the metropolitan area of Santiago, Chile (n=732), we implemented an experimental survey design to replicate the results reported by Kriss-Stella Trump (2017) for the context of Sweden and the United States about wage gap justification. Our results show that factual wage information does not impact the overall wage gap justification. However, we evidenced that information about wage inequality increases the justification of wage gaps according to high and low-status occupations, which is enhanced by the joint exposure to the condition that seeks to motivate the social system justification. The study's methodological limitations are discussed, along with the implications of the evidence for the substantive analysis of attitudes toward inequality and economic redistribution.