Beliefs about the Effects of Information Provision: Evidence from Preferences for Redistribution
About this Session
Time
Thu. 16.04. 15:55
Room
Lobby
Speaker
by Sebastian Blesse, Philipp Lergetporer, Clara-Marie Pache and Helen Zeidler
Providing information about prevailing inequalities is considered a key tool for reducing misperceptions about the extent of inequality in society. It is likewise regarded as a foundation for evidence-based policymaking. It remains unclear, however, whether people actually value information about inequality and whether such information is effective in correcting misperceptions and shifting preferences for redistribution. In this paper, we provide novel evidence on the demand for information provision in the general population. We conducted an information provision experiment in summer 2025 with a representative sample of the German population (N ~ 3,000), stratified by age, gender, education, employment, and state of residence. The experiment employed a between-subject design, with respondents randomly assigned with equal probability to two treatment groups (‘inequality effect’ and ‘polarization effect’) or a control group. Both treatments are based on factual information taken from the comprehensive meta-analysis by Marino et al. (2024), published in the European Journal of Political Economy under the title ‘(Mis-)Perceptions, information, and political polarization: A survey and a systematic literature review.’ In the inequality effect group, respondents were informed that providing information on inequality often fails to shift support: in 63% of cases analyzed by Marino et al. (2024), inequality information had no effect on support for redistributive policies. In the polarization effect group, respondents were informed that inequality information generally does not affect differences in support for redistributive policies: in 78% of cases analyzed by Marino et al. (2024), inequality information did not influence polarization in support. By informing respondents about the ineffectiveness of inequality information in shifting support, we investigate how this affects the demand for information provision and preferences for redistributive policies. Regarding the inequality effect, prior beliefs vary: 44% of respondents expect inequality information to increase support for redistribution, 20% anticipate a decrease, and 36% believe it would have no effect. Receiving this information, respondents correct their posterior beliefs toward the factual value. Posterior beliefs in the polarization effect group likewise shift toward the factual value. We further investigate how the treatments influence the willingness to inform oneself, the willingness to inform the public, and support for information provision as a policy tool. Preliminary analyses reveal no statistically significant effects. We likewise find no significant treatment effects in an incentivized donation task. The follow-up survey shows that the inequality effect treatment has persistent effects on correcting belief misperceptions.
Providing information about prevailing inequalities is considered a key tool for reducing misperceptions about the extent of inequality in society. It is likewise regarded as a foundation for evidence-based policymaking. It remains unclear, however, whether people actually value information about inequality and whether such information is effective in correcting misperceptions and shifting preferences for redistribution. In this paper, we provide novel evidence on the demand for information provision in the general population. We conducted an information provision experiment in summer 2025 with a representative sample of the German population (N ~ 3,000), stratified by age, gender, education, employment, and state of residence. The experiment employed a between-subject design, with respondents randomly assigned with equal probability to two treatment groups (‘inequality effect’ and ‘polarization effect’) or a control group. Both treatments are based on factual information taken from the comprehensive meta-analysis by Marino et al. (2024), published in the European Journal of Political Economy under the title ‘(Mis-)Perceptions, information, and political polarization: A survey and a systematic literature review.’ In the inequality effect group, respondents were informed that providing information on inequality often fails to shift support: in 63% of cases analyzed by Marino et al. (2024), inequality information had no effect on support for redistributive policies. In the polarization effect group, respondents were informed that inequality information generally does not affect differences in support for redistributive policies: in 78% of cases analyzed by Marino et al. (2024), inequality information did not influence polarization in support. By informing respondents about the ineffectiveness of inequality information in shifting support, we investigate how this affects the demand for information provision and preferences for redistributive policies. Regarding the inequality effect, prior beliefs vary: 44% of respondents expect inequality information to increase support for redistribution, 20% anticipate a decrease, and 36% believe it would have no effect. Receiving this information, respondents correct their posterior beliefs toward the factual value. Posterior beliefs in the polarization effect group likewise shift toward the factual value. We further investigate how the treatments influence the willingness to inform oneself, the willingness to inform the public, and support for information provision as a policy tool. Preliminary analyses reveal no statistically significant effects. We likewise find no significant treatment effects in an incentivized donation task. The follow-up survey shows that the inequality effect treatment has persistent effects on correcting belief misperceptions.