FAQ
PL | EN

Ustawienia prywatności (cookies)

Ta strona używa ciasteczek (cookies), dzięki którym nasz serwis może działać lepiej. Aby uzyskać więcej informacji i spersonalizować swoje preferencje, kliknij „Ustawienia”. W każdej chwili możesz zmienić swoje preferencje, a także cofnąć zgodę na używanie plików cookie na poniższej stronie.
Polityka prywatności (link otworzy się w nowym oknie)
* z wyjątkiem niezbędnych plików cookies do prawidłowego działania strony oraz realizacji obowiązków prawnych administratora
Przesuwając suwak w prawo aktywujesz konkretną zgodę. Przesuwając suwak w lewo wyłączasz taką zgodę.

Meritocracy and inequality – exploring a complex relationship

Data publikacji: 30.12.2022

Sztuka Leczenia, Tom 37 (2022), Tom 37, Numer 2, s. 13-22

https://doi.org/10.4467/18982026SZL.22.009.16670

Autorzy

,
Maurits Dekkers
Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia
Wszystkie publikacje autora →
,
Max Erkelenz
Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia
Wszystkie publikacje autora →
,
Lyra Hoeben
Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia
Wszystkie publikacje autora →
,
Charlotte Lenhard
Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia
Wszystkie publikacje autora →
Stavroula Kalaitzi
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
Indiana University Bloomington
, Stany Zjednoczone Ameryki
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2584-2023 Orcid
Wszystkie publikacje autora →

Pobierz pełny tekst

Drukuj drukuj Cytuj cytuj

Tytuły

Meritocracy and inequality – exploring a complex relationship

Abstrakt

Recent studies have suggested that the inequality problem seems to be legitimated by meritocratic attitudes. Whilst it is argued that meritocracy justifies socio-economic inequalities by defining individual achievements and efforts as causes for inequality, it is often overlooked how underlying mechanisms work. This study investigates how meritocracy sustains inequalities. In its mixed methods explanatory sequential design, it first builds on quantitative data from an International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) questionnaire, finding a significantly positive and inelastic relationship between inequality acceptance and meritocratic beliefs. Subsequently, a qualitative systematic literature review is conducted, suggesting that the relationship between meritocracy and inequality may be more circular than previously assumed. Furthermore, the results suggest that people’s meritocratic attitudes depend more on their social context than on their endorsement of meritocracy.

Bibliografia

Pobierz bibliografię

Akbaş M., Ariely D., Yuksel S. (2019). When is inequality fair? An experiment on the effect of procedural justice and agency. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 161, 114–127, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2019.02.014 (accessed: 10.04.2022).

CrossRef

Au W. (2014). Hiding behind high-stakes testing: Meritocracy, objectivity and inequality in US education. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 12(2).

Barr A., Miller L. (2020). The effect of education, income inequality and merit on inequality acceptance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 80, 102276.

Creswell J.W. (2015). Revisiting mixed methods and advancing scientific practices. In S.N. Hesse-Biber,

R.B. Johnson (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Iquiry (pp. 57–71). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Darnon C., Smeding A., Redersdorff S. (2018). Belief in school meritocracy as an ideological barrier to the promotion of equality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(4), 523–534.

Fehr D., Muller D., Preuss M. (2020). Social mobility perceptions and inequality acceptance, Working Papers in Economics and Statistics, 2.

Granaglia E. (2019). Can market inequalities be justified? The intrinsic shortcomings of meritocracy. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 51, 284–290.

Heiserman N., Simpson B. (2017). Higher inequality increases the gap in the perceived merit of the rich and poor. Social Psychology Quarterly, 80(3), 243–253.

Hitt L.M., Wu D.J., Zhou X. (2002). Investment in enterprise resource planning: Business impact and productivity measures. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(1), 71–98.

Hogg R.V., McKean, J.W., Craig A.T. (2005). Introduction to Mathematical Statistics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

ISSP (2009). International Social Survey Programme on “Social Inequality IV”, https://www.gesis. org/en/issp/modules/issp-modules-by-topic/social-inequality/2009 (accessed: 10.04.2022).

Jiménez-Jiménez N., Molis E., Solano-García Á. (2020). The effect of initial inequality on meritocracy: A voting experiment on tax redistribution. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 175, 380–394, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.09.019 (accessed: 10.04.2022).

CrossRef

Kay J.S., Shane J., Heckhausen J. (2017). Youth’s causal beliefs about success: Socioeconomic differences and prediction of early career development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence: A Multidisciplinary Research Publication, 46(10), 2169–2180.

Lincoln Y.S., González y González E.M. (2008). The search for emerging decolonizing methodologies in qualitative research: Further strategies for liberatory and democratic inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 14(5), 784–805.

McCoy S.K., Major B. (2007). Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of inequality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(3), 341–351.

Mijs J.J. (2016). The unfulfillable promise of meritocracy: Three lessons and their implications for justice in education. Social Justice Research, 29(1), 14–34.

Mijs J.J. (2019). The Paradox of Inequality: Income inequality and belief in meritocracy go hand in hand. Socio-Economic Review, 0.

Mijs J.J., Savage M. (2020). Meritocracy, elitism and inequality. The Political Quarterly, 91(2), 397–404, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12828 (accessed: 20.04.2022).

CrossRef

Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G., PRISMA Group*. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264–269. 

Niehues J. (2014). Subjective perceptions of inequality and redistributive preferences: An international comparison. Cologne Institute for Economic Research. IW-TRENDS Discussion Paper, 2, 1–23.

Page M.J., McKenzie J.E., Bossuyt P.M., Boutron I., Hoffmann T.C., Mulrow C.D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372: n71, doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

CrossRef

Palinkas L.A., Aarons G.A., Horwitz S., Chamberlain P., Hurlburt M., Landsverk J. (2011). Mixed method designs in implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(1), 44-53.

Roex K.L.A., Huijts T., Sieben I. (2019). Attitudes towards income inequality: ‘Winners’ versus ‘losers’ of the perceived meritocracy. Acta Sociologica, 62(1), 47–63.

Scully M.A. (2002). Confronting errors in the meritocracy. Organisation, 9(3), 396–401.

Solt F., Hu Y., Hudson K., Song J., Yu D.E. (2016). Economic inequality and belief in meritocracy in the United States. Research & Politics, 3(4).

Taylor M., O’Brien D. (2017). ‘Culture is a meritocracy’: Why creative workers’ attitudes may reinforce social inequality. Sociological Research Online, 22(4), 27–47.

Warikoo N.K., Fuhr C. (2014). Legitimating status: Perceptions of meritocracy and inequality among undergraduates at an elite British University. British Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 699–717.

Informacje

Informacje: Sztuka Leczenia, Tom 37 (2022), Tom 37, Numer 2, s. 13-22

Typ artykułu: Oryginalny artykuł naukowy

Tytuły:

Angielski:

Meritocracy and inequality – exploring a complex relationship

Polski: Merytokracja i nierówności – badanie złożonej relacji

Autorzy

Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia

Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia

Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia

Maastricht University, Maastricht, Holandia

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2584-2023

Stavroula Kalaitzi
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece
Indiana University Bloomington
, Stany Zjednoczone Ameryki
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2584-2023 Orcid
Wszystkie publikacje autora →

National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece

Indiana University Bloomington
Stany Zjednoczone Ameryki

Publikacja: 30.12.2022

Otrzymano: 02.04.2022

Zaakceptowano: 19.09.2022

Status artykułu: Otwarte __T_UNLOCK

Licencja: CC BY 4.0  ikona licencji

Udział procentowy autorów:

Maurits Dekkers (Autor) - 20%
Max Erkelenz (Autor) - 20%
Lyra Hoeben (Autor) - 20%
Charlotte Lenhard (Autor) - 20%
Stavroula Kalaitzi (Autor) - 20%

Korekty artykułu:

-

Języki publikacji:

Angielski

Liczba wyświetleń: 2530

Liczba pobrań: 2779

Merytokracja i nierówności – badanie złożonej relacji

Meritocracy and inequality – exploring a complex relationship

cytuj

Pobierz PDF Pobierz

pobierz pliki

RIS BIB ENDNOTE