Me First

The evidence of increasing wealth inequality in the United States, combined with self-interested attempts by the organized rich to deny a financial safety net to the poor, have led researchers to examine differences in the psychological cultures of people of different income levels. Social psychologist Paul Piff and his colleagues have proposed that wealthy Americans are less helpful than their middle class or poor fellow citizens.

Despite some highly publicized counterexamples, rich people donate a smaller percentage of their income to charity than poor people. In a 2001 survey, the Independent Sector found that families earning less than $25,000 per year give away on average 4.2% of their incomes to charity, while those earning more than $75,000 per year give away 2.7%. In a series of four laboratory experiments, Piff and his colleagues found upper class participants to be less generous, trusting and helpful than lower class participants. A new set of seven studies by Piff and others both broadens the evidence for upper class selfishness by examining the relationship between social class and ethical behavior, and looks more carefully at the reasons for it.

That part of Piff's research that has captured mass media attention is two studies of class differences in driving behavior. As one blogger put it, “Rich people are more likely to drive like assholes.” In these studies, observers surreptitiously watched whether drivers illegally cut off other cars at an intersection, or illegally cut off pedestrians in the crosswalk. Cars were classified into five categories of status depending on their age, make and appearance. (Observers were able to do this with high levels of agreement.) The results are shown below, and were statistically significant.

Of course, the conclusion that rich people are more likely to behave illegally depends on there being a high correlation between people's personal wealth and the value of their car. The authors cite one source for this plausible assertion; I have not yet been able to track it down.

The remaining five studies were laboratory experiments which compared the willingness of students of different family income levels to engage in mildly unethical behaviors such as helping themselves to candy intended for children, cheating in an experimental game, or reporting greater willingness to engage in unethical behaviors at work. An important purpose of these studies was to look at the relationship between these behaviors and a measure of favorable attitudes toward greed, i.e., “Overall, greed is moral.”

In all five studies, upper class participants showed greater willingness to behave unethically. The measure of greed also predicted unethical behavior. More importantly, the relationship between social class and unethical behavior was mediated by greed. That is, the relationship between social class and misbehavior was no longer significant after statistically eliminating the effect of greed.

To further demonstrate the mediating role of greed, Piff primed the idea that greed is good by asking participants to list three social benefits of greed. Not only did students given this prime endorse more unethical behaviors, but the differences between the social classes disappeared. That is, the lower and middle class students endorsed just as many unethical behaviors as the richer students after completing the “greed-is-good” exercise.

Piff's explanations for his results is that wealthy people are not dependent on others to meet their needs and have better resources to cope with unanticipated costs of unethical behavior, i.e., they can better afford a traffic ticket. Their privileged situation encourages goal-directedness, self-centeredness, and lack of concern for others--an attitude of entitlement. The results are social values that view greed as positive, and that in turn lead to less helpful and more unethical behavior. Piff mentions economics education as an additional factor that may encourage upper-class greed.

Since Piff's subjects were college students, I'm surprised he didn't mention parental modeling as a contributing factor. In my view, unethical behavior is deeply embedded in the capitalist system. Adult endorsement of greed may be part of an attempt to justify past selfish and unethical behavior in the workplace, behavior which is perceived as having been required for career advancement, or even to keep one's job.

You may also be interested in reading:

Class Acts

Bending the Curve