Literature DB >> 35580184

Chronic frames of social inequality: How mainstream media frame race, gender, and wealth inequality.

Sora Jun1, Rosalind M Chow2, A Maurits van der Veen3, Erik Bleich4.   

Abstract

How social inequality is described—as advantage or disadvantage—critically shapes individuals’ responses to it [e.g., B. S. Lowery, R. M. Chow, J. R. Crosby, J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45, 375–378, 2009]. As such, it is important to document how people, in fact, choose to describe inequality. In a corpus of 18,349 newspaper articles (study 1), in 764 hand-coded news media publications (study 2), and in a preregistered experiment of 566 lay participants (study 3), we document the presence of chronic frames of race, gender, and wealth inequality. Specifically, race and gender inequalities are more likely to be framed as subordinate groups’ disadvantages than as dominant groups’ advantages, and wealth inequality is more likely to be described with no frame (followed by dominant group advantage, then subordinate group disadvantage). Supplemental lexicon-based text analyses in studies 1 and 2, survey results in study 3, and a preregistered experiment (study 4; N = 578) provide evidence that the differences in chronic frames are related to the perceived legitimacy of the inequality, with race and gender inequalities perceived as less legitimate than wealth inequality. The presence of such chronic frames and their association with perceived legitimacy may be mechanisms underlying the systematic inattention to White individuals’ and men’s advantages, and the disadvantages of the working class.

Entities:  

Keywords:  gender inequality; racial inequality; wealth inequality

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35580184      PMCID: PMC9173779          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2110712119

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   12.779


  17 in total

1.  Race and gender on the brain: electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals.

Authors:  Tiffany A Ito; Geoffrey R Urland
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2003-10

2.  White guilt and racial compensation: the benefits and limits of self-focus.

Authors:  Aarti Iyer; Colin Wayne Leach; Faye J Crosby
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull       Date:  2003-01

3.  Concern for the in-group and opposition to affirmative action.

Authors:  Brian S Lowery; Miguel M Unzueta; Eric D Knowles; Phillip Atiba Goff
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2006-06

4.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal.

Authors:  Dale J Barr; Roger Levy; Christoph Scheepers; Harry J Tily
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  Paying for positive group esteem: how inequity frames affect whites' responses to redistributive policies.

Authors:  Brian S Lowery; Rosalind M Chow; Eric D Knowles; Miguel M Unzueta
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2011-08-08

6.  The effect of inequality frames on support for redistributive tax policies.

Authors:  Rosalind M Chow; Jeff Galak
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2012-10-25

7.  Less is more? Think again! A cognitive fluency-based more-less asymmetry in comparative communication.

Authors:  Vera Hoorens; Susanne Bruckmüller
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2015-07-13

8.  When inequality matters: the effect of inequality frames on academic engagement.

Authors:  Brian S Lowery; Daryl A Wout
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2010-06

9.  Why benefiting from discrimination is less recognized as discrimination.

Authors:  L Taylor Phillips; Sora Jun
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2021-09-13

10.  Permeability of Group Boundaries: Development of the Concept and a Scale.

Authors:  Bibiana M Armenta; Katherine Stroebe; Susanne Scheibe; Nico W Van Yperen; Alwin Stegeman; Tom Postmes
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull       Date:  2017-01-26
View more
  1 in total

1.  Chronic frames of social inequality: How mainstream media frame race, gender, and wealth inequality.

Authors:  Sora Jun; Rosalind M Chow; A Maurits van der Veen; Erik Bleich
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 12.779

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.