ABSTRACT This paper investigates how the ideological profiles of Uruguayan economists relate to their opinions regarding inequality and discrimination. Based on survey data, we explore the links between three ideological dimensions—political orientation, sexist attitudes (benevolent and hostile), and pro‐market beliefs—and their opinions. We find that right‐wing political ideology, hostile sexism, and pro‐market attitudes are consistently associated with lower agreement that income distribution should be more equitable, lower recognition of gender and racial discrimination, and reduced support for redistributive and antidiscrimination policies. By contrast, benevolent sexism exhibits weaker and more inconsistent associations with economists' views. We further show that whereas diagnostic assessments mediate the relationship between ideology and policy preferences, ideological orientations continue to exert direct effects on policy views even after controlling for diagnoses. These findings reveal that disagreements among economists about inequality and discrimination reflect not only different interpretations of evidence but also distinct normative commitments shaped by ideology. Our results challenge the notion of economics as a value‐neutral discipline and highlight the need for greater reflexivity about how personal beliefs influence economic analysis and policy recommendations.
Amarante et al. (2026) studied this question.