Relative deprivation and revolt: current and future directions

Power, Séamus A.; Madsen, Thomas; Morton, Thomas A.

doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.06.010

Cited by 39 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This heuristic might be strengthened by social class stereotypes, in which the poor see those with higher income as untrustworthy because of their competence to enact their self-serving or exploitative intents (Fiske et al, 2012). These class stereotypes are more likely to appear in highly unequal and segregated contexts, like the Chilean one, in which feelings of undeserved deprivations in comparison to others reinforce grievances and motivate collective action (Power et al, 2020). Indeed, these collective grievances have brought about different large-scale social movements, protests and unrest since 2006 in Chile, a period characterized as 'the social awakening' of Chilean civil society (Garcés, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expectations of trustworthiness in cross-status interactions

Salgado¹,

Núñez²,

Mackenna³

2021

Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the literature on trust is vast, little is known about the attributes that trigger or inhibit trusting others we do not know. Using a vignette version of the trust game, we addressed the role that social standing plays in estimating trustworthiness of strangers in cross-status interactions in Chile, a non-WEIRD context also characterized by high inequality and social segregation. We found no relationship between the socioeconomic status of trustors and trusting behavior. However, trustees' income was the most important attribute for trustors to decide how much to trust. We also found that higher-income trustees are less trusted in general, particularly by lower-status trustors. Finally, the results revealed that the influence of income differences on trust was higher for lowerstatus participants: they are more trustful of others of similar status. We did not observe a similar effect of ingroup favoritism on trust among higher-status participants. These results suggest that income differences are decisive in the trust decisions of lower-status individuals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expectations of trustworthiness in cross-status interactions

Salgado¹,

Núñez²,

Mackenna³

2021

Social Science Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although we did not measure the mediating effect of emotions between subjective status and retaliatory defection, our results suggest that the way individuals perceive their position in the status hierarchy has a greater impact on retaliatory defection than their objective status. The effect of subjective status on antisocial behavior might be strengthened in highly unequal and segregated contexts, like the Chilean one, in which feelings of undeserved deprivations in comparison to others reinforce grievances and motivate collective action (Power et al, 2020). Indeed, these collective grievances have brought about different large-scale social movements, protests, and unrest in Chile since 2006.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Status Differences in Altruism, Fairness and Retaliatory Defection in an Unequal Country

Salgado¹,

Núñez²,

Mackenna³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has claimed that higher-status individuals tend to be less prosocial than lower-status individuals, especially under conditions of inequality. It is also argued that lower-status individuals have more hostile reactions and more retaliatory defection to non-cooperators. Thus, low-status individuals are expected to be both prosocial and antisocial. Using simple behavioral games, we study the relationship of the objective and subjective socioeconomic status of individuals with altruism, fairness, and retaliatory defection in Chile, a country characterized by deeply entrenched socioeconomic inequality and segregation. Study 1 shows that under manipulated economic inequality conditions, higher objective status participants are more altruistic when enjoying a slight financial advantage. In contrast, lower objective status participants did not condition their altruistic behavior to their relative economic rank. Study 2 shows that manipulated economic inequality did not moderate the relationship between social status (either objective or subjective) and fairness. Finally, Study 3 indicates that participants of lower subjective status retaliated more strongly against non-cooperative peers. These results qualify the allegedly negative effect of social status on prosocial and antisocial behavior under conditions of socioeconomic inequality.

show abstract

“…According to relative depri vation theory (Crosby, 1976), people do not make judgements of fairness in absolute terms in the social context but by their perception of how they are treated and what they are entitled to in comparison to other people or groups. Consequently, people can experience relative deprivation in various contexts that cause people to feel unfairly disadvantaged (Power, Madsen, & Morton, 2020). For example, Power (2018) documented how relative deprivation that rose from an experienced inequality in the recovery of different households in Ireland after the economic crisis fuelled large-scale protests after an announced water tax.…”

Section: Relative Deprivation and Populist Attitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bottom-up populism: How relative deprivation and populist attitudes mobilize leaderless anti-government protest

Lueders¹,

Urbanska²,

Wollast³

et al. 2021

J. Soc. Polit. Psych.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present research focuses on populism as a bottom-up phenomenon that emerges from shared perceptions of relative deprivation. We predict that by serving as a shared ideological basis, populist attitudes can mobilize leaderless anti-government protest across ideological boundaries. We test this prediction in the context of the French Yellow Vests movement. Using a sample of French citizens (N = 562), we compare the effects of different indicators of relative deprivation on Yellow Vest protest participation and the extent to which populist attitudes account for these relationships. Results indicate that protests were fuelled by indicators of relative deprivation at the individual and group levels. Populist attitudes were best predicted by vertical comparisons between “the people” and “the elite” and fully accounted for the relationship between this type of group relative deprivation and protesting. Conversely, populist attitudes only partially accounted for the relationships between protesting and traditional measures of relative deprivation that either contrast natives with immigrants or individuals with fellow citizens. The findings strengthen the understanding of populism as a “thin centred” belief set that can unite and mobilize those who feel unfairly disadvantaged compared to a socio-political elite.

show abstract

Relative deprivation and revolt: current and future directions

Cited by 39 publications

References 40 publications

Expectations of trustworthiness in cross-status interactions

Expectations of trustworthiness in cross-status interactions

Social Status Differences in Altruism, Fairness and Retaliatory Defection in an Unequal Country

Bottom-up populism: How relative deprivation and populist attitudes mobilize leaderless anti-government protest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About