Framing inequality: How different ways of describing economic inequality shape appraisals of and responses to inequality
Final Report Abstract
Rising inequalities are a key challenge of our time. The present project examined the role of advantage framing (e.g., “the rich have more than the poor”) versus disadvantaged framing (e.g., “the poor have less than the rich”) in shaping perceptions of and reactions to inequality. We experimentally examined effects of these two kinds of framing and studied their use in lay and media discourse. Experiments examining framing effects on emotional reactions, legitimacy appraisals, and willingness to act against inequality yielded different results depending on context. A largescale preregistered experiment on perceptions of global inequality showed no effects of comparative framing on these variables, contrasting previous studies. For workplace inequality between temporary and permanent workers we found that disadvantage framing (versus advantage framing) decreased perceived legitimacy and increased empathy towards the disadvantaged group (temporary workers) as well as intentions to act. For gender inequality in sports we found mixed results. In one experiment, women reacted more strongly than men to disadvantage versus advantage faming, in the other, men reacted more strongly to this framing than women. Experiments testing framing effects on explanations and attributions also yielded mixed results. A first series of studies testing framing effects on whether people spontaneously (try to) explain inequality found no systematic effects. A second set of studies tested effects on how people explain inequality and showed that framing influences whom people focus explanations of inequality on and what kinds of interventions they support (confirming most predictions). A third set of studies found that advantage (compared to disadvantage) framing leads to higher agreement with internal attributions, thus ascribing responsibility for advantages to the privileged group. To study the use of advantage and disadvantage framing in discourse, a first media analysis found that advantage and disadvantage framing in newspaper articles depended on the inequality context reported on. Analyses of social media (Twitter, now X) posts found (a) that Twitter users writing about economic inequality rarely used direct group comparisons, that (b) racial inequality was more often framed as Black disadvantage than as White advantage, but that the latter generated more discussion, and (c) that gender inequality was more often framed as disadvantage and that this was somewhat moderated by the valence of outcomes. Finally, experimentally varying participants’ communication goal to present inequality as legitimate versus as illegitimate did not affect advantage vs. disadvantage framing, but instead the extent to which participants described inequality by refering to involved people versus abstract concepts. In sum, the project shows the importance of advantage and disadvantage framing as well as the limits and context specificity of the respective effects.
Publications
-
Globale Ungleichheit – Psychologische Aspekte eines Makrophänomens. In L. Pfaller, M. Sarikaya, V. Gutsche & R. Holzinger (Eds.), Distinktion, Ausgrenzung und Mobilität. Interdisziplinäre Pespektiven auf soziale Ungleichheit. Erlangen, FAU University Press.
Reese G.
-
How whom we talk about affects attributions for income inequality [Research report]. 52nd Congress of the German Psychological Society. Hildesheim, Germany
Braun, M. & Bruckmüller, S.
-
Justice in the eye of the beholder: How comparative framing affects our perceptions of social inequalities. Annual Meeting of the Belgian Association of Psychological Sciences (2022, June 2-3). Leuven, Belgium
Schnepf, J., Reese, G. & Martiny, S.
-
One group’s advantage or another’s disadvantage? How comparative framing shapes explanations of, and reactions to, different kinds of inequality. Annual Meeting of the Belgian Association of Psychological Sciences (2022, June 2-3). Leuven, Belgium
Bruckmüller, S. & Braun, M.
-
ow whom we talk about affects attributions for income inequality [Research report]. 17th International Conference on Language and Social Psychology (2022, June 22-25, hybrid online and in-person conference). Hong Kong
Braun, M. & Bruckmüller, S.
-
Unequal tweets? Tweets about Black disadvantage are more common, and more likely to be passed on, than tweets about White privilege. 17th International Conference on Language and Social Psychology (2022, June 22-25, hybrid online and in-person conference). Hong Kong
Malapally, A. & Bruckmüller, S.
-
Comparison focus matters: How we compare high and low earners affects internal attributions for income inequality. 19th General Meeting of the European Association of Social Psychology (2023, July 1- 4). Krakow, Poland
Braun, M. & Bruckmüller, S.
-
How privilege and disadvantage framing shape explanations of and suggestions for interventions against different kinds of inequality. 19th General Meeting of the European Association of Social Psychology (2023, July 1- 4). Krakow, Poland
Bruckmüller, S. & Braun, M.
-
Understanding Inequality as Privilege Versus Disadvantage: The double-edged sword of visibility and its implications for research on inequality [Position talk]. 18th Conference of the Social Psychology Section of the German Psychological Society. Graz, Austria
Bruckmüller, S.
-
Unequal tweets – tweets about disadvantage are more common and generate more responses than tweets about privilege. 19th General Meeting of the European Association of Social Psychology (2023, July 1- 4). Krakow, Poland
Malapally, A., Blombach, A., Heinrich, P., Schnepf, J. & Bruckmüller, S.
-
Unequal Tweets: Black Disadvantage is (Re)tweeted More but Discussed Less Than White Privilege. Political Communication, 41(1), 107-128.
Malapally, Annette; Blombach, Andreas; Heinrich, Philipp; Schnepf, Julia & Bruckmüller, Susanne
-
When do we understand inequality in terms of disadvantage and when in terms of privilege? And why does that matter? [Research report]. 19th General Meeting of the European Association of Social Psychology. Krakow, Poland
Malapally, A. & Bruckmüller, S.
