An Empirical Analysis of the Structuration of American Ideologies About Economic Justice

Curtis Holland

doi:10.18778/1733-8077.9.4.04

Authors

Curtis Holland Northeastern University, U.S.A.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.9.4.04

Keywords:

Dominant Ideology, Structural Social Psychology, Inequality, Great Recession, Human Nature, Economic Sociology

Abstract

A consensus has been forming among structural social psychologists that most Americans hold beliefs in both individualistic and structural explanations of inequality. Yet, even many who espouse structural beliefs nonetheless emphasize individual-level explanations of inequality to disproportionate extents. This study is aimed to identify common trends in the logic used by a conventional group of Americans – MBA students – to rationalize their more general political and economic beliefs. While a large number of studies have emphasized the prevalence of dominant ideology beliefs, and others have speculated theoretically on how such beliefs are reproduced, this study aims to bring these bodies of work together. I sought to build an initial understanding of how contradictions in Americans’ political and economic ideologies are transmuted, and to identify heuristic concepts fundamental to this process. Findings suggest that particular assumptions about human nature serve to “fill” the cognitive “gap” which would otherwise present individuals with insurmountable ambiguities in their ideologies about economic justice. Respondents also reflected some level of awareness of the impact of ideology on their thought processes, even as they accept such processes, and the realities they constitute, as inevitable.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Curtis Holland, Northeastern University, U.S.A.

Curtis Holland is a PhD Candidate in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Northeastern University in Boston, M.A. His dissertation will examine social reconstruction in Northern Ireland, with particular focus on community responses to violence and the potential development of new political discourses. Curtis’ research interests include political sociology, neoliberal globalization, economic sociology, deviance and social control, and ethnic/racial conflict.

References

Della Fave, Richard L. 1974. “On the Structure of Egalitarianism.” Social Problems 22(2):199-213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/799759

Edin, Katherine. 2000. “What do low income mothers say about marriage?” Social Problems 47(1):112-133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2000.47.1.03x0282v

Feagin, Joe. 1972. “God Helps Those who Help Themselves.” Psychology Today 6:101-129.

Feagin, Joe. 1975. Subordinating the Poor: Welfare and American Beliefs. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Frederick, William C. 2008. “The Business Schools’ Moral Dilemma.” Pp. 25-42 in Advancing Business Ethics Education Information, edited by Diane L. Swanson and Dann G. Fisher. Charlotte, NC: Age Publishing.

Freeman, R. Edward and David Newkirk. 2008. “Business as a Human Enterprise: Implications for Education.” Pp. 131-148 in Rethinking Business Management: Examining the Foundations of Business Education, edited by Samuel Gregg and James R. Stoner, Jr. Princeton, NJ: Witherspoon Institute.

Gans, Herbert J. 1995. The War against the Poor: The Underclass and Antipoverty Policy. New York: Basic Books.

Giddens, Anthony. 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis. Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Glaser, Barney. 1998. Doing Grounded Theory – Issues and Discussions. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, Barney and Anselm Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine.

Hebdige, Dick. 1979. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. New York: Methuen.

Hochschild, Jennifer. 1981. What’s Fair? American Beliefs about Distributive Justice. Cambridge, London: Harvard University Press.

Howard, Judith A. and Daniel G. Renfrow. 2003. “Social Cognition.” Pp. 259-281 in Handbook of Social Psychology, edited by John Delamater. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-36921-X_11

Huber, Joan and William Form. 1973. Income and Ideology. New York: Free Press.

Hunt, Matthew O. 1996. “The Individual, Society, or Both? A Comparison of Black, Latino, and White Beliefs about the Causes of Poverty.” Social Forces 75:293-332. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2580766

Hunt, Matthew O. 2007. “African American, Hispanic, and White Beliefs about Black/White Inequality, 1977-2004.” American Sociological Review 72:390-415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200304

Jackman, Mary. 1994. The Velvet Glove: Paternalism and Conflict in Gender, Class, and Race Relations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520337794

Kluegel, James R. and Eliot R. Smith. 1986. Beliefs about Inequality: Americans’ Views of What is and What Ought to Be. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Martin, John Levi and Matthew Desmond. 2010. “Political Position and Social Knowledge.” Sociological Forum 25:1-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2009.01154.x

McLeod, Jane. D. and Kathryn J. Lively. 2003. “Social Structure and Personality.” Pp. 77-102 in Handbook of Social Psychology, edited by John Delamater. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-36921-X_4

Miles, Matthew B. and Michael A. Huberman. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Rytina, John Huber, William H. Form, and John Pease. 1970. “Income and Stratification Ideology: Beliefs about the American Opportunity Structure.” The American Journal of Sociology 75(4):703-716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/224897

Sallach, David L. 1974. “Class Domination and Ideological Hegemony.” The Sociological Quarterly 15(1):38-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1974.tb02126.x

Strauss, Anselm and Juliet Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.