Background

This is a preregistered replication of our mediation effect: Class Zero-Sum Beliefs -> Class Solidarity -> Support for progressive economic policy.

Procedure

Participants answered two randomly-ordered blocks: (1) Worldviews; and (2) Policy support.

In the Worldviews block, the following measures were randomly-ordered: (1) class-based zero-sum beliefs; (2) general zero-sum mindset; (3) class solidarity; (4) linked fate; and (5) social dominance orientation.

In the policy support block, they read about one of four policy proposals, and then indicated their support for that policy.

Hypotheses

Class-based zero-sum beliefs predict support for progressive economic policy.
Class-based zero-sum beliefs predict class solidarity.
The relationship between class-based zero-sum beliefs and support for progressive economic policy is at least partially mediated by class solidarity.

Analysis plan

Linear Model 1: Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor.
Linear Model 2: Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset as a control variable.
Linear Model 3: Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, and social dominance orientation.
Linear Model 4: Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, social dominance orientation, income, education, age, race, gender, and self-reported social class control variables.
Linear Model 5: Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor.
Linear Model 6: Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset as a control variable.
Linear Model 7: Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, and social dominance orientation.
Linear Model 8: Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, social dominance orientation, income, education, age, race, gender, and self-reported social class control variables.
Mediation model 1: Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Class solidarity as the mediator.
Mediation model 2: Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Class solidarity as the mediator; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, and social dominance orientation as control variables.
Mediation model 3: Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Class solidarity as the mediator; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, social dominance orientation, income, education, age, and self-reported social class as control variables.

Exploratory analysis

All mediation models from analysis plan with Linked Fate as the mediator instead of Class Solidarity.

Attention Check

But first, let’s exclude participants who failed a very simple attention check.

att_1	N	Perc
0	6	1.99
1	295	98.01

Alright, that leaves us with 295. Cool.

Demographics

Race

race	N	Perc
Asian	24	8.14
Black or African American	46	15.59
Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin	14	4.75
Other (please specify)	1	0.34
White	193	65.42
multiracial	16	5.42
NA	1	0.34

Gender

gender	N	Perc
man	155	52.54
other	6	2.03
woman	134	45.42

Age

age_mean	age_sd
38.29	11.79

Education

edu	N	Perc
noHS	1	0.34
GED	56	18.98
2yearColl	36	12.20
4yearColl	139	47.12
MA	44	14.92
PHD	16	5.42
NA	3	1.02

Subjective SES

ses	N	Perc
Lower Class	23	7.80
Lower Middle Class	80	27.12
Middle Class	156	52.88
Upper Middle Class	35	11.86
Upper Class	1	0.34

Working Class

To what extent do you see yourself as part of the working class? (1 = Not at all part of the working class to 5 = Entirely part of the working class)

Income

Politics

Ideology

Participants were asked about the extent to which they subscribe to the following ideologies on a scale of 1-7 (select NA if unfamiliar): Conservatism, Liberalism, Democratic Socialism, Libertarianism, Progressivism.

Party ID

party_id	N	Perc
Democrat	145	49.15
Independent	84	28.47
Republican	66	22.37

Vote in 2020

vote_2020	N	Perc
Joe Biden	179	60.68
Donald Trump	70	23.73
I did not vote	40	13.56
Third-party candidate	6	2.03

Vote in 2024

vote_2024	N	Perc
Joe Biden	152	51.53
Donald Trump	72	24.41
I will not vote	42	14.24
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.	11	3.73
Other	10	3.39
Cornel West	4	1.36
Jill Stein	4	1.36

Measures

Class-based Zero-Sum Beliefs

Adapted from Chinoy et al., 2022: https://nathannunn.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2022/12/Zero_Sum_US_Political_Divides.pdf

If the upper class becomes richer, this comes at the expense of the working class
If the upper class makes more money, then the working class makes less money
If the upper class does better economically, this does NOT come at the expense of the working class [R]

alpha = 0.89

Linked Fate

What happens to working class people in this country will have something to do with what happens in my life
My material interests are aligned with the interests of the working class

SDO

An ideal society requires some groups to be on top and others to be on the bottom
Some groups of people are simply inferior to other groups
No one group should dominate in society [R]
Groups at the bottom are just as deserving as groups at the top [R]
Group equality should not be our primary goal
It is unjust to try to make groups equal
We should do what we can to equalize conditions for different groups [R]
We should work to give all groups an equal chance to succeed [R]

alpha = 0.89

Zero-Sum Mindset

The success of one person is usually the failure of another person
Life is such that when one person gains, someone else has to lose
When someone does much for others, they lose
In most situations, different people’s interests are incompatible
When one person is winning, it does not mean that someone else is losing [R]
Life is like a tennis game - A person wins only when another person loses
One person’s success is not another person’s failure [R]

alpha = 0.86

Class Solidarity

I feel a sense of solidarity with the working class
I support policy that helps the working class
I stand united with the working class
Policies negatively affecting the working class should be changed
More people should know about how the working class are negatively affected by economic issues
It’s important to challenge the power structures that disadvantage the working class

alpha = 0.91

Policy Support

Participants saw one of six policy descriptions:

Minimum wage: Congress has not increased the federal minimum wage, currently set at 7.25 dollars, since 2009. Some Congresspeople are proposing a policy that would gradually raise the federal minimum wage to 15 dollars an hour by 2025. After 2025, the minimum wage would be adjusted each year to keep pace with growth in the median wage, a measure of wages for typical workers.
Student debt: Some Congresspeople are proposing a policy that would help to address the student loan debt crisis by forgiving up to 50,000 dollars in loans per borrower. Approximately 42 million Americans, or about 1 in 6 American adults, owe a cumulative 1.6 trillion dollars in student loans. Student loans are now the second-largest slice of household debt after mortgages, bigger than credit card debt.
Housing: Some Congresspeople are proposing a housing affordability policy that would help ensure that every American has a place to live. The policy would allow for smaller, lower cost homes like duplexes, townhouses, and garden apartments to be built in middle- and upper-class neighborhoods, and would build new nonprofit homes.
Climate: Some Congresspeople are proposing a Green New Deal bill which would phase out the use of fossil fuels, with the government providing clean energy jobs for people who can’t find employment in the private sector. All jobs would pay at least 15 dollars an hour, and include healthcare benefits and collective bargaining rights. This would be paid for by raising taxes on incomes over 200,000 dollars a year by 15 percentage points.

Support

To what extent do you oppose or support this policy? (1 = Strongly Oppose to 7 = Strongly Support)

Definition of working class

The working class is the socioeconomic group consisting of workers who provide labor in exchange for wage (1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree)

Analysis

Correlation Matrix

Analysis Plan

Linear Model 1

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-27)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	2.95	[2.34, 3.56]	9.54	293	< .001
Zs class	0.50	[0.38, 0.62]	8.14	293	< .001

Linear Model 2

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset as a control variable.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-28)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	3.08	[2.35, 3.81]	8.32	292	< .001
Zs class	0.51	[0.39, 0.64]	8.05	292	< .001
Zsm	-0.06	[-0.23, 0.12]	-0.65	292	.519

Linear Model 3

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, and social dominance orientation.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-29)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	4.90	[3.98, 5.81]	10.54	270	< .001
Zs class	0.28	[0.14, 0.43]	3.84	270	< .001
Zsm	0.19	[0.00, 0.38]	1.99	270	.047
SDO	-0.52	[-0.70, -0.33]	-5.57	270	< .001
Ideo con	-0.09	[-0.20, 0.02]	-1.63	270	.104

Linear Model 4

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, social dominance orientation, income, education, age, race, gender, and self-reported social class control variables.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-30)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	4.54	[3.03, 6.05]	5.93	248	< .001
Zs class	0.30	[0.15, 0.45]	3.90	248	< .001
Zsm	0.20	[0.00, 0.40]	1.99	248	.048
SDO	-0.50	[-0.69, -0.31]	-5.21	248	< .001
Ideo con	-0.09	[-0.21, 0.02]	-1.66	248	.098
Age	0.00	[-0.01, 0.02]	0.46	248	.645
Income num	-0.10	[-0.21, 0.00]	-2.00	248	.046
Edu num	0.08	[-0.10, 0.26]	0.88	248	.378
Ses num	0.18	[-0.13, 0.48]	1.15	248	.253
White	-0.38	[-0.80, 0.04]	-1.80	248	.074
Man	0.11	[-0.28, 0.49]	0.55	248	.586

Linear Model 5

Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-31)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	4.57	[4.26, 4.89]	28.74	293	< .001
Zs class	0.28	[0.21, 0.34]	8.71	293	< .001

Linear Model 6

Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset as a control variable.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-32)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	4.94	[4.57, 5.31]	26.44	292	< .001
Zs class	0.31	[0.24, 0.37]	9.49	292	< .001
Zsm	-0.16	[-0.25, -0.07]	-3.57	292	< .001

Linear Model 7

Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, and social dominance orientation.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-33)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	6.02	[5.59, 6.45]	27.42	270	< .001
Zs class	0.17	[0.10, 0.24]	4.93	270	< .001
Zsm	-0.02	[-0.11, 0.07]	-0.54	270	.591
SDO	-0.36	[-0.45, -0.28]	-8.27	270	< .001
Ideo con	0.01	[-0.05, 0.06]	0.21	270	.837

Linear Model 8

Class solidarity as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, social dominance orientation, income, education, age, race, gender, and self-reported social class control variables.

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-34)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	6.00	[5.27, 6.74]	16.10	245	< .001
Zs class	0.17	[0.10, 0.25]	4.72	245	< .001
Zsm	-0.02	[-0.12, 0.08]	-0.39	245	.700
SDO	-0.36	[-0.45, -0.27]	-7.67	245	< .001
Ideo con	0.01	[-0.04, 0.06]	0.36	245	.719
Age	0.00	[-0.01, 0.01]	0.11	245	.913
Income num	0.05	[0.00, 0.10]	2.10	245	.037
Edu num	-0.04	[-0.12, 0.05]	-0.81	245	.421
SesLower Middle Class	-0.11	[-0.51, 0.28]	-0.57	245	.566
SesMiddle Class	-0.18	[-0.58, 0.22]	-0.90	245	.369
SesUpper Middle Class	-0.34	[-0.84, 0.16]	-1.32	245	.187
SesUpper Class	-1.10	[-2.66, 0.47]	-1.38	245	.169
White	0.04	[-0.16, 0.24]	0.38	245	.705
Man	-0.05	[-0.24, 0.13]	-0.54	245	.588

Mediation Model 1

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Class solidarity as the mediator.

a = 0.28 (p = 0)
b = 0.71 (p = 0)
direct = 0.5 (p = 0)
indirect = 0.31 (p = 0)

Mediation Model 2

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Class solidarity as the mediator; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, and social dominance orientation as control variables.

a = 0.18 (p = 0)
b = 0.49 (p = 0)
direct = 0.26 (p = 0)
indirect = 0.17 (p = 0.017)

Mediation Model 3

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Class solidarity as the mediator; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, social dominance orientation, income, education, age, and self-reported social class as control variables.

a = 0.18 (p = 0)
b = 0.51 (p = 0)
direct = 0.26 (p = 0)
indirect = 0.17 (p = 0.019)

Note-to-self: Nailed it.

Exploratory Analysis

Mediation Model 1

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Linked Fate as the mediator.

a = 0.19 (p = 0)
b = 0.41 (p = 0)
direct = 0.5 (p = 0)
indirect = 0.42 (p = 0)

Mediation Model 2

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Linked Fate as the mediator; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, and social dominance orientation as control variables.

a = 0.15 (p = 0.001)
b = 0.28 (p = 0.001)
direct = 0.26 (p = 0)
indirect = 0.22 (p = 0.003)

Mediation Model 3

Support for policy as the outcome variable; Class Zero-Sum Beliefs as the primary predictor; Linked Fate as the mediator; general zero-sum mindset, conservatism, social dominance orientation, income, education, age, and self-reported social class as control variables.

a = 0.15 (p = 0.002)
b = 0.3 (p = 0.001)
direct = 0.26 (p = 0)
indirect = 0.22 (p = 0.002)

Mediation Model 4

Double mediators.

Interaction with Self-Reported Working Class

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-42)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	1.70	[-0.32, 3.71]	1.66	290	.098
Zs class	0.69	[0.26, 1.11]	3.19	290	.002
Wrkclass	0.37	[-0.17, 0.91]	1.34	290	.183
Zs class \(\times\) Wrkclass	-0.05	[-0.16, 0.06]	-0.95	290	.341

Interaction with Subjective SES

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-43)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	3.23	[0.96, 5.50]	2.81	291	.005
Zs class	0.50	[0.08, 0.93]	2.33	291	.021
Ses num	-0.08	[-0.87, 0.71]	-0.21	291	.836
Zs class \(\times\) Ses num	0.00	[-0.16, 0.15]	-0.05	291	.958

Separated by policy

Minimum wage

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-44)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	4.46	[2.01, 6.91]	3.65	55	< .001
Zs class	0.26	[-0.01, 0.53]	1.95	55	.056
Zsm	0.25	[-0.13, 0.62]	1.32	55	.194
SDO	-0.37	[-0.70, -0.03]	-2.21	55	.032
Ideo con	-0.04	[-0.23, 0.15]	-0.45	55	.657
Age	0.01	[-0.02, 0.04]	0.44	55	.661
Income num	0.03	[-0.16, 0.23]	0.32	55	.747
Edu num	0.13	[-0.25, 0.50]	0.69	55	.496
Ses num	0.15	[-0.38, 0.67]	0.56	55	.577
White	-0.70	[-1.41, 0.02]	-1.96	55	.055
Man	-0.56	[-1.30, 0.19]	-1.50	55	.140

Student debt

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-45)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	5.03	[2.10, 7.95]	3.45	55	.001
Zs class	0.37	[0.03, 0.71]	2.17	55	.034
Zsm	0.30	[-0.17, 0.77]	1.28	55	.207
SDO	-0.61	[-1.04, -0.19]	-2.88	55	.006
Ideo con	-0.13	[-0.38, 0.12]	-1.05	55	.300
Age	0.00	[-0.04, 0.03]	-0.13	55	.900
Income num	-0.15	[-0.37, 0.07]	-1.36	55	.179
Edu num	-0.02	[-0.43, 0.39]	-0.10	55	.919
Ses num	0.04	[-0.60, 0.67]	0.11	55	.912
White	-0.38	[-1.29, 0.53]	-0.83	55	.409
Man	0.61	[-0.23, 1.45]	1.46	55	.149

Housing

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-46)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	7.66	[3.61, 11.71]	3.79	54	< .001
Zs class	0.15	[-0.20, 0.50]	0.86	54	.391
Zsm	0.04	[-0.34, 0.41]	0.19	54	.847
SDO	-0.77	[-1.20, -0.35]	-3.66	54	< .001
Ideo con	0.04	[-0.21, 0.29]	0.33	54	.744
Age	-0.01	[-0.05, 0.03]	-0.41	54	.685
Income num	-0.17	[-0.36, 0.03]	-1.73	54	.088
Edu num	-0.13	[-0.53, 0.27]	-0.66	54	.511
Ses num	0.18	[-0.51, 0.86]	0.52	54	.608
White	-0.67	[-1.55, 0.21]	-1.52	54	.135
Man	0.18	[-0.62, 0.99]	0.46	54	.650

Climate

(#tab:unnamed-chunk-47)
Predictor	\(b\)	95% CI	\(t\)	\(\mathit{df}\)	\(p\)
Intercept	1.75	[-2.18, 5.67]	0.89	51	.376
Zs class	0.41	[0.08, 0.73]	2.52	51	.015
Zsm	0.33	[-0.17, 0.84]	1.32	51	.194
SDO	-0.32	[-0.74, 0.09]	-1.58	51	.121
Ideo con	-0.14	[-0.40, 0.11]	-1.13	51	.265
Age	0.01	[-0.03, 0.05]	0.29	51	.776
Income num	-0.16	[-0.43, 0.10]	-1.24	51	.220
Edu num	0.30	[-0.04, 0.65]	1.76	51	.085
Ses num	0.36	[-0.40, 1.13]	0.95	51	.348
White	-0.19	[-1.20, 0.83]	-0.37	51	.711
Man	-0.05	[-0.96, 0.86]	-0.11	51	.913

Class-Based Zero-Sum Beliefs

March 2024: Analysis

Background

Procedure

Hypotheses

Analysis plan

Exploratory analysis

Attention Check

Demographics

Race

Gender

Age

Education

Subjective SES

Working Class

Income

Politics

Ideology

Party ID

Vote in 2020

Vote in 2024

Measures

Class-based Zero-Sum Beliefs

Linked Fate

SDO

Zero-Sum Mindset

Class Solidarity

Policy Support

Support

Definition of working class

Analysis

Correlation Matrix

Analysis Plan

Linear Model 1

Linear Model 2

Linear Model 3

Linear Model 4

Linear Model 5

Linear Model 6

Linear Model 7

Linear Model 8

Mediation Model 1

Mediation Model 2

Mediation Model 3

Exploratory Analysis

Mediation Model 1

Mediation Model 2

Mediation Model 3

Mediation Model 4

Interaction with Self-Reported Working Class

Interaction with Subjective SES

Separated by policy

Minimum wage

Student debt

Housing

Climate