Brown N Derek, Jacoby-Senghor Drew S, Raymundo Isaac
University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Sci Adv. 2022 May 6;8(18):eabm2385. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abm2385.
Nine preregistered studies ( = 4197) demonstrate that advantaged group members misperceive equality as necessarily harming their access to resources and inequality as necessarily benefitting them. Only when equality is increased within their ingroup, instead of between groups, do advantaged group members accurately perceive it as unharmful. Misperceptions persist when equality-enhancing policies offer broad benefits to society or when resources, and resource access, are unlimited. A longitudinal survey of the 2020 U.S. voters reveals that harm perceptions predict voting against actual equality-enhancing policies, more so than voters' political and egalitarian beliefs. Finally two novel-groups experiments experiments reveal that advantaged participants' harm misperceptions predict voting for inequality-enhancing policies that financially hurt them and against equality-enhancing policies that financially benefit them. Misperceptions persist even after an intervention to improve decision-making. This misperception that equality is necessarily zero-sum may explain why inequality prevails even as it incurs societal costs that harm everyone.
九项预先注册的研究(涉及4197人)表明,优势群体成员错误地认为平等必然会损害他们获取资源的机会,而不平等必然会使他们受益。只有当群体内部而非群体之间的平等程度提高时,优势群体成员才会准确地将其视为无害。当促进平等的政策给社会带来广泛利益,或者资源及其获取不受限制时,这种错误认知依然存在。一项针对2020年美国选民的纵向调查显示,与选民的政治和平等主义信念相比,对平等有损的认知更能预测其投票反对实际的平等促进政策。最后,两项新颖群体实验表明,优势参与者对平等有损的错误认知能预测他们投票支持那些会在经济上伤害他们的不平等加剧政策,以及投票反对那些会在经济上使他们受益的平等促进政策。即使在进行了旨在改善决策的干预之后,这种错误认知仍然存在。这种认为平等必然是零和博弈的错误认知,或许可以解释为什么不平等现象持续存在,尽管它会带来损害所有人的社会成本。