People weigh salaries more than ratios in judgments of income inequality, fairness, and demands for redistribution

Ignazio Ziano*, Christophe Lembregts, Mario Pandelaere

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Five experiments (total n = 2422, with U.S. American and French participants, four preregistered) show that people are more likely to use median salaries rather than CEO-median employee compensation ratios when making inequality and fairness judgments based on company compensation data. In separate evaluation of companies, we find no significant impact of compensation ratios, which express objective levels of income inequality, but a significant impact of median salaries. In joint evaluation, ratios have an impact, but median salaries have a bigger impact. Our results point to a difference between perceived and actual inequality indicators: people do not perceive inequality based on a widely-used indicator of inequality (compensation ratios), but rather use representative workers’ salaries, and believe lower representative wages are connected to higher inequality. We discuss theoretical implications for the psychological understanding of economic inequality, and practical implications for the regulation of the presentation of compensation data.

Original languageEnglish
Article number102495
JournalJournal of Economic Psychology
Volume89
Early online date7 Feb 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2022

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright: © 2022 Elsevier B.V.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'People weigh salaries more than ratios in judgments of income inequality, fairness, and demands for redistribution'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this