UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)

What we want and what we see: Preferences, perceptions and judgments about inequalityand meritocracy

Steijn, S.R.

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA):Steijn, S. R. (2016). What we want and what we see: Preferences, perceptions and judgments about inequalityand meritocracy.

General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s),other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, statingyour reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Askthe Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam,The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

Download date: 01 Oct 2020

Sander Steijn

P R E F E R E N C E S ,

P E R C E P T I O N S

J U D G M E N T S

I N E Q U A L I T Y

M E R I T O C R A C Y

ABOUT

AND

AND

SANDER STEIJN is a political sociologist with a research master degree in social sciences. He wrote this dissertation at the Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research at the University of Amsterdam. Currently, he works as a methodologist at the Netherlands Institute for Social Research (Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau).

WHAT WE WANT AND WHAT WE SEE:

Preferences, perceptionsand judgments about inequality and meritocracy

SANDEr STEijN

design & layout: Leonie Brunedruk: robstolk®

binder: Agia & Lith

© Sander Steijn, Amsterdam 2016

No part of this publication may be reproduced or trans-mitted in any form, by print, photo print, microfilm or any other means without prior permission of the author.

ACADEMiSCH PrOEFSCHriFT

ter verkrijging van de graad van doctoraan de Universiteit van Amsterdamop gezag van de Rector Magnificus

prof. dr. K.I.J. Maex

ten overstaan van een door het College voor Promoties ingesteldecommissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Agnietenkapel

op 11 november 2016, te 10 uur

doorSANDEr rAOul STEijN

geboren te Utrecht

WHAT WE WANT AND WHAT WE SEE:

Preferences, perceptions and judgments about inequality

and meritocracy

PrOMOTiECOMMiSSiE:

Promotor: prof. dr. H.G. van de Werfhorst Universiteit van Amsterdam

Copromotor: prof dr. B.M. Burgoon Universiteit van Amsterdam

Overige leden: prof. dr. R. Andersen University of Western Ontario

prof. dr. P.T. de Beer Universiteit van Amsterdam

prof. dr. W.J.H. van Oorschot KU Leuven

prof. dr. F.I.G. Vandenbroucke Universiteit van Amsterdam

prof. dr. B.G.M. Völker Universiteit van Amsterdam

Faculteit der Maatschappij en Gedragswetenschappen

TAblE OF CONTENT

Acknowledgments 10

CHAPTEr 1:iNTrODuCTiON _____________________________________________________ 12

1.1 Introduction 12

1.2 The two parts of this dissertation 14

1.3 Theoretical background 15

1.3.1 Attitudes about inequality 15

1.3.2 Societal impacts of inequality 16

1.4 Overview of the book chapters 17

CHAPTEr 2: PrOblEMATiC iNEquAliTy? PrEFErENCES, PErCEPTiONS AND juDgMENTS AbOuT (NON-) MEriTOCrATiC rEWArDS iN THE NETHErlANDS _____________________________________________ 22

2.1 Introduction 23

2.2 Theory 26

2.2.1 Existing conceptualizations 26

2.2.2 A new conceptualization of attitudes about inequality: judgments about inequality as the difference between preferences and perceptions 29

2.2.3 Social stratification of judgments about inequality 31

2.3 Measuring preferred and perceived (non-) meritocratic bases of economic Success 33

2.3.1 Preferences for (non-) meritocratic rewards 35

2.3.2 Perceptions of (non-) meritocratic rewards 36

2.3.3 Judgments about (non-) meritocratic rewards 36

2.3.4 Other variables 38

2.4 Results 42

2.4.1 Results for the analysis of belief that income differences are too large 42

2.4.2 Results for the analysis of ‘origins’ 47

2.5 Discussion 50

Appendices A-F 58

CHAPTEr 3: juDgMENTS AbOuT MEriTOCrATiC rEWArDS AND DEMAND FOr rEDiSTribuTiON. ________________________ 70

3.1 Introduction 71

3.2 Merit and demand for redistribution 74

3.2.1 Meritocratic perceptions and demand for redistribution 75

3.2.2 Meritocratic preferences and demand for redistribution 75

3.2.3 Meritocratic judgments and demand for redistribution 76

3.2.4 The present study 76

3.3 Data 77

3.4 Results 82

3.5 Discussion 86

Appendices A-C 92

CHAPTEr 4: FAiliNg MEriTOCrACy? iNEquAliTy AND COrruPTiON PErCEPTiONS. _____________________________ 94

4.1 Introduction 95

4.2 Theory 97

4.2.1 Inequality effects 97

4.2.2 Inequality and corruption perceptions 98

4.2.3. Inequality and stratification in corruption perceptions 100

4.3 Data 102

4.4 Results 108

4.4.1 Inequality and corruption perceptions 108

4.4.2 Inequality and stratification in corruption perceptions 109

4.5 Discussion 109

CHAPTEr 5: PErCEivED iNEquAliTy AND gENErAlizED TruST ______ 118

5.1 Introduction 119

5.2 Perceived inequality and generalized trust 120

5.3 Data and measurement 122

5.3.1 Multi-level models with country-aggregated perceived inequality 122

5.3.2 Models with perceived inequality measured at the individual level 124

5.4 Results 129

5.4.1 Country-aggregated perceived inequality 129

5.4.2 Individual level perceived inequality 133

5.5 Discussion 134

Appendix A 140

CHAPTEr 6: CONCluSiON _________________________________________ 142

6.1 Main contributions 143

6.1.1 A conceptualization of attitudes about inequality that reflects their comparative essence 143

6.1.2 Empirical findings based on the new conceptualization 144

6.1.3 The relationship between inequality and (stratification in) corruption perceptions 145

6.1.4 The relationship between perceived inequality and generalized trust 146

6.2. Considerations for future research 147

6.2.1. Qualitative studies into what is understood as meritocratic 147

6.2.2. Differences in preferences, perceptions and judgments about inequality and meritocracy within countries 148

6.2.3. Differences in preferences, perceptions and judgments about inequality and meritocracy between countries 149

6.3 A closing note on the need for accurate measurement of preferences, perceptions and judgments about inequality and meritocracy. 150

Nederlandse samenvatting 152

Summary 158

Relative interest of co-authors and PhD candidate per empirical chapter 164

Where to begin? I have spent more than 20 percent of my life being a PhD-candidate. When I started my PhD, I was relatively young in comparison to my peers (they rarely seemed to grow tired of reminding me of this), showed no signs of balding and still had so much to learn. Much has changed, much has remained the same. I am thankful for the opportunities that I had to learn1, chat, study, discuss, teach and write. Many people have been of great impor-tance to me in the past years and I want to thank them here.

My supervisors have been a great support throughout this project. Herman, I am very thank-ful that you gave me the opportunity to write a dissertation. Ever since meeting you during my research master, I have enjoyed your academic mentorship. You stimulated me to follow my in-terests and your knowledge about and contagious enthusiasm for sociology contributed greatly to the completion of this project. Our meetings always left

me motivated and inspired. Apart from your feedback on my work, I especially enjoyed it when our talks digressed into non-academic areas, with one of my favorite topics be-ing the dubious selection of sports by your daughters.

Brian, you were involved with this project from the start. As our paths unfortunately did not cross during my Political Science bachelor, I am even more happy that I could learn from you during my PhD years. In our talks about my project, in the methodology clinic- which you taught with Annette, who I would like to also thank for her useful comments- and in other scientific seminars, you showed me how one can be simultaneously critical and con-structive. Your feedback challenged me to further develop and clarify my arguments. When evaluating the societal and scientific relevance of projects that I am involed with, I often recall the simple criterion you proposed for this pur-pose: So what?

Being a part of the scientific community at the AISSR has been a true privilege. I would like to thank all my col-

ACkNOWlEDgEMENTS

8 What we want and what we see

1Even while writing these acknowledgments, I stumbled upon a captivating new piece of information. I was amazed to learn that the Dutch misin-terpretation of basketball called “korfbal” translates to korfball in English.

leagues at IN3/IIL, AMCIS and IPECS for all the collabo-rations and their useful and insightful comments on ear-lier drafts of some of the chapters that are included in this dissertation.

At the SCP, I have found a new stimulating work envi-ronment. I would like to thank Ineke and Jaco for giving me the opportunity to work at the SCP and kindly supporting me in finishing my dissertation. I look forward to repaying your support in the coming years.

Perhaps the best part of writing this dissertation was meeting so many intelligent and sociable people. While I will name a few people specifically, I would like to thank everyone that I ever:

· danced with on a table in a small German town· discussed random intercepts with· played Werewolves with· collaborated with on papers· took an early morning swim with during a PhD-weekend · visited conferences with· shared both a house and a promotor with (Bram and Jacq, it was an honor!) · shared lunch(walks) with · did the disservice of insisting on ordering watered coffee at the Coffee Company2.

I would like to thank Elise for both the small talk and the serious conversations and for taking care of the aes-thetic decoration of our office. Marii, it was a pleasure to have such a sharp-minded colleague working on a related topic; thanks for showing me Estonian hospitality. Marysia, thanks for your voice of reason, our shared moments of cynicism about academia, our frequent coffee walks during your time in Amsterdam and your maternalizing Facebook messages afwerwards. Thijs, thanks for being an academic role model and for being an adversary in pingpong (inter-estingly both in the beginning and final stages of my trajec-

Acknowledgements 9

2Being young and foolish, I once promised to include the girls at the Coffee Company in my Acknowledgments. Although I regret this promise, I will honor it, albeit in a footnote.

tory). Thomas, thanks for your advice and companionship in both difficult and joyful times.

I'm particularly appreciative of having two prime para-nimphs. Emily, we've known each other for over a decade. We were already friends when I started working on my PhD and it was amazing to see you start one (at the same depart-ment) as well. I hope many pubquizes, festivals and escape rooms lie ahead. Martin, while I pride myself in handpick-ing you as a roommate in the former building, I must ad-mit you have exceeded expectations. Apart from being my colleague (now for the second time) and my go-to guy for mortgage and investment issues, you have become a true friend.

I want to thank my friends for their tangible and intan-gible support. The most difficult period during my PhD-years came when illness not only increasingly restricted me from working on my thesis, but also greatly influenced my day to day life. My friends (I will not fall privy to the dangerous endeavor of listing you, but hopefully you know who you are) were there. This meant, and still does mean, the world to me.

On a similar note, I would like to thank my family. Inge, Wout, Michiel and Marc, while we are pretty evenly spread out across the country and have chosen different paths in life, I am proud of- and thankful for- our strong bond as siblings. Mom and Dad, thank you for your continuous sup-port throughout my education, but most importantly, for caring, in all the different meanings of the word.

And then there's Leonie. It has been equally fascinating and pleasurable to observe the combination of your artistic and analytical talent at work when you were designing the cover and inner work of this book. The result is tremendous and I'm very grateful to you for it. Out of all the things that have changed since I began working on my dissertation, the best one is undoubtedly the fact that there is now us. With most of my beliefs, I am open to the possibility that I might very well by wrong. However, I am very convinced about you and me. I am extremely thankful for the past few years and I look forward to all that lies ahead for us.

Perceiving is a sort of suffering. – AriSTOTlE, de anima