Daniel McArthur’s research while affiliated with University of Oxford and other places

Stigmatising stereotypes about welfare recipients play a crucial role in building public support for welfare retrenchment. Existing literature finds that the highly educated are more sympathetic towards welfare recipients. This is surprising given the economic advantage associated with educational attainment. Furthermore, educational attainment has increased even as sympathy for welfare recipients has declined. I address these puzzles using three decades of British survey data and find that it is the socially liberal attitudes rather than the economic advantage associated with higher education that explains why this group is sympathetic towards welfare recipients. These findings reveal an educational cleavage in stereotypes about welfare recipients, which is based on non‐economic concerns, and has implications for support for welfare retrenchment and policies such as increased conditionality. This cleavage is weaker in more highly educated regions, implying that there are diminishing returns from increasing educational attainment in terms of sympathetic attitudes towards welfare recipients. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

In this thesis I investigate how an individual’s economic position and the context they live in affects their sympathy for the poor. Poverty and welfare receipt are stigmatised across high income countries; such attitudes reduce support for redistribution and exacerbate the negative impact of poverty on wellbeing. Across three empirical chapters, I use attitudinal data from the UK and Europe to investigate the relationship between individual advantage, broader economic context, and the prevalence of stigmatising stereotypes about welfare recipients and the poor. I apply an innovative perspective combining qualitative research on the experiences of people in poverty and comparative political economy work on inequality and redistribution to address neglected topics in the study of deservingness perceptions. In the first empirical chapter I argue that those in more disadvantaged economic positions have more sympathetic attitudes towards welfare recipients. However, this relationship is counteracted by the role of social status and authoritarian attitudes, which can make the disadvantaged hold less sympathetic views. The second chapter uses survey data from twenty-seven European countries to show that individuals in more unequal nations are more likely to believe that laziness rather than injustice is the cause of poverty. I argue that a plausible explanation of this relationship is status anxiety among disadvantaged individuals. In the third chapter I conduct the first longitudinal analysis of the association between area level unemployment and attitudes towards the unemployed, finding little evidence of a meaningful effect of exposure on stigmatising stereotypes. Overall, this thesis argues that status anxiety plays a major role in shaping stigmatising stereotypes, explaining why people are less sympathetic towards the poor in high inequality contexts, and why disadvantaged individuals often hold especially negative attitudes.

Recessions appear to coincide with an increasingly stigmatising presentation of poverty in parts of the media. Previous research on the connection between high unemployment and media discourse has often relied on case studies of periods when stigmatising rhetoric about the poor was increasing. We build on earlier work on how economic context affects media representations of poverty by creating a unique dataset that measures how often stigmatising descriptions of the poor are used in five centrist and right-wing British newspapers between 1896 and 2000. Our results suggest stigmatising rhetoric about the poor increases when unemployment rises, except at the peak of very deep recessions (e.g. the 1930s and 1980s). This pattern is consistent with the idea that newspapers deploy deeply embedded Malthusian explanations for poverty when those ideas resonate with the economic context, and so this stigmatising rhetoric of recessions is likely to recur during future economic crises.

Recessions appear to coincide with an increasingly stigmatising presentation of poverty in parts of the media. Previous research on the connection between high unemployment and media discourse has often relied on case studies of periods when stigmatising rhetoric about the poor was increasing. We build on earlier work on how economic context affects media representations of poverty by creating a unique dataset that measures how often stigmatising descriptions of the poor are used in five centrist and right-wing British newspapers between 1896 and 2000. Our results suggest stigmatising rhetoric about the poor increases when unemployment rises, except at the peak of very deep recessions (e.g. the 1930s and 1980s). This pattern is consistent with the idea that newspapers deploy deeply embedded Malthusian explanations for poverty when those ideas resonate with the economic context, and so this stigmatising rhetoric of recessions is likely to recur during future economic crises.