Higher System Justification Beliefs Predict Greater Acceptance of Economic Inequality Among University Students

How to effectively address inequality is a prominent debate in U.S. society due to increasing wealth disparities. This divide may stem from differing economic system justification beliefs. For example, people who view society as fairly structured may be more accepting of inequality, even when the inequality is created through structural advantages rather than individual differences in traits like effort. The present study investigated the relationship between perceptions of societal fairness and evaluations of different economic inequality sources, how these perceptions relate to beliefs about how wealth is distributed in society, and whether responses differed by age, gender, and race. U.S. college students (N = 191, 18–23 years old) completed an 8-item scale to assess economic system justification beliefs. Participants also evaluated the acceptability of inequalities created through individual, structural, random, and hidden sources, predicted the cause of wealth and poverty, and determined the actual and most ideal wealth distribution in the United States. Participants with higher system justification beliefs rated all sources of inequality as more acceptable (ps < .001), with men in particular rating many sources of inequality as more acceptable (ps ≤ .05). Those with higher system justification beliefs were also more likely to select an individual source of inequality (e.g., merit) as the cause of both wealth and poverty (ps ≤ .001) and to believe the United States had a more egalitarian distribution (p = .002). These findings offer insight into how system justification beliefs influence college students’ conceptualizations of economic inequality and whether they consider it a problem. This understanding is key to tackling growing societal disparities.