Neuroscience
How much money do you think you would have to make each year to land yourself in the infamous One Per Cent of salary earners?
According to a new study, your answer is very likely to be wrong. Research conducted by John Chambers of St. Louis University and colleagues at the University of Florida reveals that – at least where Americans are concerned – people are actually significantly likely to overestimate how much money is earned by the richest people.
This finding directly contradicts recent research coming from other labs, including a widely-publicised 2011 study conducted by Michael Norton and Dan Ariely reporting widespread underestimation of American wealth inequality. According to Norton and Ariely, many Americans who responded to their survey seemed to have a very poor idea of how drastic the current state of wealth inequality really is, estimating that the bottom 40 per cent of American society accounts for a much higher percentage of overall American wealth than they really do, and not grasping the enormity of wealth held by the top 20 per cent of Americans.
Chambers and his co-authors, on the other hand, are arguing that Norton and Ariely’s original conclusion does not actually reflect how people truly think about American society. Rather, they think that the original results may have been biased by the specific way in which these questions were asked.
In the original Norton and Ariely survey, participants were asked to estimate how much wealth is accounted for by the top 20 per cent of Americans. However, Chambers and his colleagues believe that asking the question this way is fairly abstract, and people might be more likely to respond by using quick, snap-judgment types of answers – which might not reflect how they actually think or feel.
In contrast, Chambers and colleagues asked Americans to estimate the percentage of US citizens whose annual incomes fell into three categories: Under $35,000, $35,000-$74,999, and $75,000 or higher. These numbers roughly represent the cutoff points for the bottom, middle, and top third of American earners. Yet, on average, the respondents in this survey greatly overestimated the percentage of Americans who fall into the lowest category (estimating 48 per cent) and underestimated the percentage of Americans who fall into the highest category (23 per cent).
The researchers also found similar results when they specifically tried to get respondents to provide estimates of how big the income gap itself happens to be. On average, people thought that incomes earned by the 'top 20 per cent' in 2010 were about 31 times greater than those earned by the bottom 20 per cent. Yes, there is a significant degree of income inequality in the United States – but it’s not quite that high (in reality, the top 20 per cent earns incomes that are 15 times greater than the bottom 20 per cent). Further probing into this inaccuracy reveals that people aren’t exactly equal in their misperceptions, either. In fact, this effect is largely caused by severe overestimations of the incomes of top earners. Although the average income for someone in the top 20 per cent was around $170,000 in 2010, participants estimated that this figure was actually closer to $2 million.
As the authors simply asked participants to provide their own numerical estimates, I was concerned and curious if the high average could be explained by a few participants providing outrageously large estimates and skewing the mean, so I asked Chambers about the distribution of the responses that they received. Although Chambers confirms that the distribution was positively skewed and there were some of these outrageously high estimates in the mix (10 per cent of the sample estimated that the average income of the top 20 per cent was over $10 million each year), the median estimate was $287,500 – still much higher than the true amount ($169,000). About 40 per cent of the participants gave estimates of $400,000 or greater, and the data were 'Winsorized', a procedure that minimises the impact of outliers when computing an average. So, these results cannot simply be explained by a few participants skewing the numbers!
It is important for Americans to recognise the extent of income inequality in the United States. However, if we perpetuate the idea that this inequality is significantly worse than it actually is, it could end up having severe consequences for rectifying the actual problems that exist. If people have reason to suspect that these claims are being exaggerated, they may doubt there is any problem at all.
_________________________________
Chambers JR, Swan LK, & Heesacker M (2014). Better off than we know: distorted perceptions of incomes and income inequality in America. Psychological science, 25 (2), 613-8 PMID: 24317422
Post written for the BPS Research Digest by guest host Melanie Tannenbaum, UIUC Social Psych PhD Candidate and Scientific American Blogger.
- Most People Think Ceos Are Paid Too Much
Tim Cook, CEO of Apple Inc, attends the 2013 Allen & Co conference. It's often assumed that a desire to reduce income inequality is held only by people on lower pay, or by those who endorse left-wing views. However, a new study of over 55,000...
- Unleash The Crowd Within
You can boost your quiz performance by unleashing the crowd within, a new study shows. The next time you're asked to estimate a historical date, for example, try doing the following: make your first estimate; then pause and assume your first guess...
- Why Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals
Psychologists at New York University say they've found the answer to why people with right wing political views are happier than left-leaning liberals (as previously indicated by survey research). In short, conservatives are less upset by inequality...
- Is Low Intelligence To Blame For Short Life Expectancy In Poor Countries?
People in countries with a large gap between the rich and poor have short life expectancies, not because of the economic inequality and lack of resources, but rather because they are unintelligent. That’s the controversial claim of Satoshi Kanazawa...
- Fear Of Terror In Britain Before 7/7
Two years before the recent London bombings, Robin Goodwin and colleagues surveyed 100 employees at the British Library in London, and 240 students in London and Oxford, to see if there was a relationship between what they valued in life and how threatened...
Neuroscience
Mind the gap: Overestimating income inequality
How much money do you think you would have to make each year to land yourself in the infamous One Per Cent of salary earners?
According to a new study, your answer is very likely to be wrong. Research conducted by John Chambers of St. Louis University and colleagues at the University of Florida reveals that – at least where Americans are concerned – people are actually significantly likely to overestimate how much money is earned by the richest people.
This finding directly contradicts recent research coming from other labs, including a widely-publicised 2011 study conducted by Michael Norton and Dan Ariely reporting widespread underestimation of American wealth inequality. According to Norton and Ariely, many Americans who responded to their survey seemed to have a very poor idea of how drastic the current state of wealth inequality really is, estimating that the bottom 40 per cent of American society accounts for a much higher percentage of overall American wealth than they really do, and not grasping the enormity of wealth held by the top 20 per cent of Americans.
Chambers and his co-authors, on the other hand, are arguing that Norton and Ariely’s original conclusion does not actually reflect how people truly think about American society. Rather, they think that the original results may have been biased by the specific way in which these questions were asked.
In the original Norton and Ariely survey, participants were asked to estimate how much wealth is accounted for by the top 20 per cent of Americans. However, Chambers and his colleagues believe that asking the question this way is fairly abstract, and people might be more likely to respond by using quick, snap-judgment types of answers – which might not reflect how they actually think or feel.
In contrast, Chambers and colleagues asked Americans to estimate the percentage of US citizens whose annual incomes fell into three categories: Under $35,000, $35,000-$74,999, and $75,000 or higher. These numbers roughly represent the cutoff points for the bottom, middle, and top third of American earners. Yet, on average, the respondents in this survey greatly overestimated the percentage of Americans who fall into the lowest category (estimating 48 per cent) and underestimated the percentage of Americans who fall into the highest category (23 per cent).
The researchers also found similar results when they specifically tried to get respondents to provide estimates of how big the income gap itself happens to be. On average, people thought that incomes earned by the 'top 20 per cent' in 2010 were about 31 times greater than those earned by the bottom 20 per cent. Yes, there is a significant degree of income inequality in the United States – but it’s not quite that high (in reality, the top 20 per cent earns incomes that are 15 times greater than the bottom 20 per cent). Further probing into this inaccuracy reveals that people aren’t exactly equal in their misperceptions, either. In fact, this effect is largely caused by severe overestimations of the incomes of top earners. Although the average income for someone in the top 20 per cent was around $170,000 in 2010, participants estimated that this figure was actually closer to $2 million.
As the authors simply asked participants to provide their own numerical estimates, I was concerned and curious if the high average could be explained by a few participants providing outrageously large estimates and skewing the mean, so I asked Chambers about the distribution of the responses that they received. Although Chambers confirms that the distribution was positively skewed and there were some of these outrageously high estimates in the mix (10 per cent of the sample estimated that the average income of the top 20 per cent was over $10 million each year), the median estimate was $287,500 – still much higher than the true amount ($169,000). About 40 per cent of the participants gave estimates of $400,000 or greater, and the data were 'Winsorized', a procedure that minimises the impact of outliers when computing an average. So, these results cannot simply be explained by a few participants skewing the numbers!
It is important for Americans to recognise the extent of income inequality in the United States. However, if we perpetuate the idea that this inequality is significantly worse than it actually is, it could end up having severe consequences for rectifying the actual problems that exist. If people have reason to suspect that these claims are being exaggerated, they may doubt there is any problem at all.
_________________________________
Chambers JR, Swan LK, & Heesacker M (2014). Better off than we know: distorted perceptions of incomes and income inequality in America. Psychological science, 25 (2), 613-8 PMID: 24317422
Post written for the BPS Research Digest by guest host Melanie Tannenbaum, UIUC Social Psych PhD Candidate and Scientific American Blogger.
- Most People Think Ceos Are Paid Too Much
Tim Cook, CEO of Apple Inc, attends the 2013 Allen & Co conference. It's often assumed that a desire to reduce income inequality is held only by people on lower pay, or by those who endorse left-wing views. However, a new study of over 55,000...
- Unleash The Crowd Within
You can boost your quiz performance by unleashing the crowd within, a new study shows. The next time you're asked to estimate a historical date, for example, try doing the following: make your first estimate; then pause and assume your first guess...
- Why Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals
Psychologists at New York University say they've found the answer to why people with right wing political views are happier than left-leaning liberals (as previously indicated by survey research). In short, conservatives are less upset by inequality...
- Is Low Intelligence To Blame For Short Life Expectancy In Poor Countries?
People in countries with a large gap between the rich and poor have short life expectancies, not because of the economic inequality and lack of resources, but rather because they are unintelligent. That’s the controversial claim of Satoshi Kanazawa...
- Fear Of Terror In Britain Before 7/7
Two years before the recent London bombings, Robin Goodwin and colleagues surveyed 100 employees at the British Library in London, and 240 students in London and Oxford, to see if there was a relationship between what they valued in life and how threatened...