Lay Explanations of Wealth: Attributions for Economic Success¹

Abstract

The explanations people give for wealth, or financial success, are not only of considerable political importance, but also offer an opportunity to assess some of the implications of attribution theory in a real‐lie setting. In the present study, 324 subjects from all walks of life and a variety of socioeconomic and demographic backgrounds were asked to anonymously complete an extensive questionnaire assessing their (a) free response explanations of the most common sources of wealth, (b) estimates of necessary income levels for “wealth” and “a decent life,” and (c) attribution judgments for likely causes of wealth in five target categories of people. The target categories were manipulated in terms of social class and ethnicity, to include native born and migrant, and middle‐ and working‐class characters, as well as attributions to an unspecified other. Results showed that judges used four major attributional categories in explaining wealth (external‐social, internal/individual, family background, and luck‐risk factors), and that both the target persons' class and ethnicity significantly influenced the attribution strategies used. In addition, the judges' socioeconomic background, demographic position, and voting preferences also significantly affected preferred attributions and estimates of income levels. These results are discussed in terms of the role of social, political, and ideological factors in everyday explanations, and their implications for some assumptions of attribution research are considered.

Conservative Ideology, Economic Conservatism, and Causal Attributions for Poverty and Wealth

“…Conservative voters (or right-wing individuals) were generally more likely to explain wealth and poverty in individualistic terms, while left-wing individuals supported explanations in wide societal terms (for example, tax system, economic opportunities) (Furnham 1982;Forgas et al 1982;Furnham 1983, Furnham andBond 1986;Kluegel and Smith 1986). These studies showed the existence of an association between internal causal attribution and liberal political attitudes versus conservative political attitudes, and liberal attitudes versus authoritarian ones.…”

“…Males scored higher on internal explanations than females (for example, Furnham and Bond 1986;Hunt 2004); younger and better educated people were generally less likely to explain wealth in terms of individual ability and effort (for example, Forgas et al 1982); a lower income level decreased the support for individualistic explanations Hunt 2004).…”

Judgments of social justice: Compromises between equality and efficiency.

“…Forgas, Morris, & Furnham, 1982;Furnham, 1986;Heaven, 1990;Iyengar, 1989;Lewis & Furnham, 1986;Verba & Orren, 1985). Liberals and conservatives may subscribe to differing lay theories about economic incentives and their impact on equality and efficiency, lay theories that, in turn, imply radically different political and economic policies.…”

Effects of status and outcome on attributions and just-world beliefs: How the social distribution of success and failure may be rationalized

“…Cozzarelli, Wilkinson, & Tagler, 2001;Feagin, 1972;Forgas, Morris, & Furnham, 1982). So far, research has established the justificatory function of attributions for the outcomes of social groups holding asymmetrical positions by pointing to systematic differences in the use of 4 internal vs. external attributions (e.g.…”