Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Faculty & Research
  • Faculty
  • Research
  • Featured Topics
  • Academic Units
  • …→
  • Harvard Business School→
  • Faculty & Research→
Publications
Publications
  • June 23, 2020
  • Article
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Inequality in Socially Permissible Consumption

By: Serena Hagerty and Kate Barasz
  • Format:Print
ShareBar

Abstract

Lower-income individuals are frequently criticized for their consumption decisions; this research examines why. Eleven preregistered studies document systematic differences in permissible consumption—interpersonal judgments about what is acceptable (or not) for others to consume—such that lower-income individuals’ decisions are subject to more negative and restrictive evaluations. Indeed, the same consumption decisions may be deemed less permissible for a lower-income individual than for an individual with higher or unknown income (Studies 1A & 1B)—even when purchased with windfall funds. This gap persists among participants from a large, nationally representative sample (Study 2) and when testing a broad array of “everyday” consumption items (Study 3). Additional studies investigate why: the same items are often perceived as less necessary for lower- (versus higher-) income individuals (Studies 4 & 5). Combining both permissibility and perceived necessity, further studies (Studies 6 & 7) demonstrate a causal link between the two constructs: a purchase decision will be deemed permissible (or not) to the extent that it is perceived as necessary (or not). However, because—for lower-income individuals—fewer items are perceived as necessary, fewer are therefore socially permissible to consume. This finding not only exposes a fraught double standard, but also portends consequential behavioral implications: people prefer to allocate strictly “necessary” items to lower-income recipients (Study 8)—even if such items are objectively and subjectively less valuable (Studies 9A & 9B)—which may result in an imbalanced and inefficient provision of resources to the poor.

Keywords

Interpersonal Judgments; Consumption; Economic Inequalty; Income; Equality and Inequality; Spending; Judgments

Citation

Hagerty, Serena, and Kate Barasz. "Inequality in Socially Permissible Consumption." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, no. 25 (June 23, 2020): 14084–14093.
  • Find it at Harvard
  • Read Now

More from the Authors

    • January 2023
    • Journal of the Association for Consumer Research

    Calculators for Women: When Identity-Based Appeals Backfire

    By: Tami Kim, Kate Barasz, Michael I. Norton and Leslie K. John
    • August 2021
    • Journal of Consumer Research

    Hoping for the Worst? A Paradoxical Preference for Bad News

    By: Kate Barasz and Serena Hagerty
    • 2020
    • Faculty Research

    Consumers Punish Firms That Cut Employee Pay in Response to COVID-19

    By: Bhavya Mohan, Serena Hagerty and Michael Norton
More from the Authors
  • Calculators for Women: When Identity-Based Appeals Backfire By: Tami Kim, Kate Barasz, Michael I. Norton and Leslie K. John
  • Hoping for the Worst? A Paradoxical Preference for Bad News By: Kate Barasz and Serena Hagerty
  • Consumers Punish Firms That Cut Employee Pay in Response to COVID-19 By: Bhavya Mohan, Serena Hagerty and Michael Norton
ǁ
Campus Map
Harvard Business School
Soldiers Field
Boston, MA 02163
→Map & Directions
→More Contact Information
  • Make a Gift
  • Site Map
  • Jobs
  • Harvard University
  • Trademarks
  • Policies
  • Accessibility
  • Digital Accessibility
Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College.