2020
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.191232
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A registered report on how implicit pro-rich bias is shaped by the perceiver's gender and socioeconomic status

Abstract: Although high status is often considered a desirable quality, this may not always be the case. Different factors may moderate the value of high status along a dimension such as wealth (e.g. gender, perceiver income/education). For example, studies suggest men may value wealth and control over resources more than women. This may be especially true for high-income men who already have control over substantial resources. Other work suggests that low-income men and women may have different experiences in education… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 148 publications
(237 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Subjective socioeconomic status (SES) was assessed using the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status 91 . The MacArthur scale presents participants with a ladder comprising rungs labeled 1 to 10 in ascending order, where a 1 represents the rank of people who have the lowest standing amongst the general population in the U.S. and a 10 represents the rank of people who have the highest standing among the general population of the U.S.…”
Section: Experiments 1 Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subjective socioeconomic status (SES) was assessed using the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status 91 . The MacArthur scale presents participants with a ladder comprising rungs labeled 1 to 10 in ascending order, where a 1 represents the rank of people who have the lowest standing amongst the general population in the U.S. and a 10 represents the rank of people who have the highest standing among the general population of the U.S.…”
Section: Experiments 1 Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%