Poverty in developing nations: a cross-cultural attributional analysis

Abstract

A survey of anti-poverty activists and non-activists in Canada and the Philippines was conducted to assess their beliefs about the causes of poverty in developing nations. Principal components analysis revealed that the respondents' poverty attributions could be distinguished along ®ve main dimensions: exploitation, characterological weaknesses of the poor, natural causes, con¯ict, and poor government. Group breakdowns revealed several signi®cant dierences related to respondents' countries of residence and social ideologies. A path analysis suggested that attributions fully mediated the relationship between social ideology and participation in anti-poverty activism.According to a recent Oxfam report (Watson, 1995), one-quarter of the world's population lives in absolute poverty, 35 000 children die each day from malnutrition and preventable diseases, and the gap between rich and poor both within and across nations continues to grow at unprecedented rates. Despite these alarming statistics, the majority of individuals living in auence do little to help the poor in developing nations. This study adopts an attributional perspective in an eort to better understand the cognitive factors that underlie this disturbing trend of neglect and marginalisation of the poor. Three main questions are addressed. What are the main dimensions used by individuals to explain poverty in developing nations? How do these perceptions vary as function of respondents' country of residence and social ideology? And, most importantly, what role, if any, do poverty attributions play in encouraging or discouraging involvement in anti-poverty activism?

Poverty attributions in Guyana: Between self-interest, resentment, and ideology

“…Most statements of the social structure, economic structure, and social fate attributions are supported by almost 80% of respondents, which illustrates the overwhelming support for these explanations. This is in line with the strong support for the system blaming perspective in many of the previously investigated developing countries (Payne and Furnham, 1985; Hunt, 1996; Hine and Montiel, 1999; Davids and Gouws, 2013). In the case of Guyana, the popularity of social explanations might be related to the precarious economic situation and high poverty rate, as bad economic conditions seem to strengthen the belief that poverty is not self-inflicted.…”

Onset and Offset Deservingness: The Case of Home Foreclosures

“…The predicted hesitancy to provide personal assistance by people who endorse conservatism, however, will be primarily driven by differences in perceived controllability. This suggestion is consistent with past work that has found direct paths from conservatism to government aid when controlling for attributional differences (Skitka, 1999; Sniderman, Hagen, Tetlock, & Brady, 1986; Zucker & Weiner, 1993) but no direct paths when considering personal helping decisions (Hine & Montiel, 1999; Zucker & Weiner, 1993). This hypothesis is illustrated in Figure 1.…”

Does Subjective Class Predict the Causal Attribution for Poverty?

“…persons directly involved who are poor themselves are more likely to externalize blame on the system. This finding is consonant with the theory of cultural variation and causal attribution presented by Hine and Montiel [17] , who argue that individuals outside the Western hemisphere will tend to attribute poverty to external factors because of a general support for the poor and grievance against societal inequities and structural deficiencies. Hine and Montiel [17] found that structuralist attributions were higher in the Canadian sample among their Filipino counterparts.…”

“…This finding is consonant with the theory of cultural variation and causal attribution presented by Hine and Montiel [17] , who argue that individuals outside the Western hemisphere will tend to attribute poverty to external factors because of a general support for the poor and grievance against societal inequities and structural deficiencies. Hine and Montiel [17] found that structuralist attributions were higher in the Canadian sample among their Filipino counterparts. With a robust social base and a strong public services in terms of health, education, and social welfare system in shaping the sociopolitical landscape among Australians and Canadians impacts the way individuals make attributions for poverty.…”