HOW DOES POVERTY WORK? REPRESENTATIONS AND CAUSAL ATTRIBUTIONS FOR POVERTY AND WEALTH

Abstract

This study analyses the attributions of causality and the representations about poverty and wealth in order to better understand people's perception and to suggest adequate and shared interventions. The data we analyzed refer to a research which has been carried out on 2000 participants in Italy. A Principal Component Analysis has allowed the identification of three components relating to internal, external and metaphysical attributions for the phenomena of poverty and wealth. Following analysis have showed significant relations between attributions and factors like income, age, education level and working condition. We have also compared respondent’s perception of the phenomenon (his representation of impoverishing factors, related to himself or to others) and his attributional style, focusing on possible relations between the outcomes of this comparison and other socio-economic categories

Keywords

• social perception, attributions for poverty, Locus of control

References

1. Abercrombie, Nicholas and Bryan S. Turner (1978), “The Dominant Ideology Thesis”. The British Journal of Sociology, Vol.29, No.2, pp.149-170.
2. Blank, Rebecca (2003), “Selecting among anti-poverty policies: can an economist be both critical and caring?”, Rev. of social economy, Vol.61, No.4, pp. 447-469.
3. Bradshaw, Ted (2007), “Theories of poverty and anti-poverty programs”. Journal of the Community Development Society, Vol.38, No.1, pp. 7-25.
4. Feagin, John (1972), “Poverty: we still believe that God helps those who help themselves”, Psychology today, Vol.1, pp. 101-129.
5. Feagin, Joe (1975), Subordinating the poor, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
6. Hilgartner, Stephen and Charles Bosk (1988), “The rise and fall of social problems: A Public Arenas Model.”, Amer. J. of Sociol., Vol.94, No.1, pp.53-78.
7. Kay, Aaron, Szymon Czaplinski and John Jost (2009), Left–right ideological differences in system justification following exposure to complementary versus noncomplementary stereotype exemplars. European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol.39, pp.290-298
8. Kluegel, James and Eliot Smith (1981), “Beliefs about stratification”, Annual review of Sociology, Vol.7, pp. 29-56.

9. Kluegel, James and Eliot Smith (1986), Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be, New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
10. Kreidl, Mark (2000), “Perception of poverty and wealth in post-communist and western countries”, Social Justice research, Vol.13, No.2, pp. 151-175.
11. Lerner, Melvin J. (1980). The belief in a just world. New York: Plenum.
12. Levenson, H. (1973), “Parental antecedents of internal, powerful others, and chance locus of control orientations”, Developmental Psych., Vol.9, pp. 260-265.
13. Rank, Mark, (2003). “American poverty as a structural failing: evidence and arguments”, Journal of Sociology and social welfare. Vol.30, No.4, pp. 3-30.
14. Schiller, Bradley, R. (1989). The Economics of Poverty and Discrimination, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15. Seligman, Martin and Gwyneth Beagley (1975), “Learned helplessness in the rat”, Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol.73, No.3, pp.256-262.
16. Sher, Jonathan, Education in Rural America, Westview: Boulder.
17. Slagsvold, Britt and Annemette Sİrensen, (2008), “Age, education, and the gender gap in the sense of control”, International Journal of Human Development, Vol.67, No.1, pp.25-42.
18. Wilson, George (1996), “Toward a revised framework for examining beliefs about the causes of poverty”, The Sociological Quarterly. Vol.37, No.3, pp. 413-428.
19. Zucker, Gail Sahar and Bernard Weiner, (1993). “Conservatism and perceptions of poverty: an attributional analysis”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol.23, No.12, pp.925-943.