Previous research has suggested that growing up in hard times increases support for government redistribution of wealth.
A new Columbia Business School study examines whether that compassionate viewpoint is universal or more self-interested, particularly as it pertains to immigrants.
Key Takeaways:
- The researchers found that experiencing difficult macroeconomic conditions like a recession during young adulthood strengthens an individual’s anti-immigration attitude in a way that persists throughout their lifetime.
- Their study demonstrates that although people who entered adulthood during recessions support government redistribution of wealth and assistance for the poor, that support is largely self-interested, geared toward one’s “ingroup.”
- These findings challenge the assumption that hard economic times foster universal compassion or social inclusiveness, instead demonstrating that such experiences lead to greater hostility toward “outgroup” members, including people of different races and religions, as well as immigrants.
- The study also highlights the enduring impact of the impressionable years, between ages 18 and 25, when the findings show people form attitudes that will last their entire lives.
It stands to reason: If you were once poor, you might be more likely than others to support government relief initiatives like unemployment benefits or social welfare. If similar programs helped you get on your feet when you were young, why not favor spreading the wealth to benefit others in need?
Some existing research supports the pattern that people who come of age in difficult times support government redistribution, but Columbia Business School Professor Stephan Meier sought to expand on that research with a follow-up question: Does the compassion gained by experiencing economic hardships while young extend to everyone, or is it more self-interested than universal, rejecting the needs of perceived outsiders? Meier and his co-authors created a study to examine the long-term effects of coming of age during economic downturns on attitudes toward members of one particularly divisive group, often viewed as outsiders: immigrants.
“What we thought about was maybe you want the government to help, but just for your group,” Meier says, “The easiest way to think about ‘my group’ or ‘the other groups’ is through the lens of immigration — immigrants versus us, the nationals.”
Impressionable Years, Formative Experiences
The study defines the impressionable years as those between the ages of 18 and 25, when many young adults enter the workforce. Psychologists have posited that experiences during this time frame have a significant impact on shaping individuals’ worldviews and preferences. Experiencing a recession during one’s impressionable years has been shown to have a lasting effect on incomes, careers, and political and economic preferences. Research in psychology suggests that coming of age in difficult economic times reduces narcissism and that recessions result in lower levels of individualism. These findings, combined with the link between recessions and supporting government redistribution, suggest that people who entered young adulthood in tough macroeconomic conditions could be more caring toward others than those who did not.
To conduct the research, the study authors used US and global survey data spanning several decades, dating back as far as the 1970s. In both data sets, surveyors asked participants about their views on immigrants. Specifically, participants were asked about their attitudes regarding reducing or increasing immigration rates and whether they agreed with the idea that native-born workers should be given priority over immigrants for jobs during times of economic hardship. Controlling for variables including gender, education, and income, as well as national shocks like an uptick in immigration or shifts in policy, researchers compared survey participants’ views on immigrants to the macroeconomic conditions they had experienced during their impressionable years.
If the increased support for wealth redistribution associated with recessions is driven by an increase in universal compassion for the poor, the researchers predicted that support for immigration would rise accordingly (since immigration tends to reduce global poverty, according to the study). However, if the increased support for redistribution is directed more toward oneself or one's ingroup, the researchers predicted support for immigration would decrease, since immigrants are often seen as competition for jobs and other resources.
Looking Out for Number One
The results were unequivocal: “If you grew up in harder times, you’re less in favor of immigration; you’re more hostile to others,” Meier says. The study demonstrated that entering adulthood in economic hard times shaped parochialism — or the tendency to favor one’s own group — for the rest of one’s life, increasing outgroup bias against people of a different race or religion, as well as immigrants. This suggests bias toward one’s ingroup and views on immigrants are solidified much earlier in people’s lives than prior research has implied. On the other hand, experiencing good macroeconomic conditions during young adulthood led to increased openness to immigration. This finding aligns with previous research indicating that young people who experience periods of growth tend to be more tolerant and prosocial.
To Meier, what stands out most is the role of one’s impressionable years in shaping views on immigration for decades to come. “You could ask the 50-year-old who lives in Nebraska in 2022 [what they think about immigration]. Obviously, the Nebraska unemployment that year matters, but somehow it also matters what happened 30 years ago when they grew up in Missouri,” he says. What’s happening now in the macroeconomy will have similar long-term impacts on the viewpoints of today’s 18- to 25-year-olds, he adds.
Meier suggests governments consider these results when deciding how to manage inflation versus unemployment, economic factors that are often inversely related. High unemployment rates have consequences for the unemployed, he says, but if a bad macroeconomy causes a rise in anti-immigration sentiments, that can have broader implications.
“As an economist, I like flows of goods. But in my view, it’s also important that we don't restrict flows of people; we need people who come in and create opportunities and jobs,” he says. “Our study shows that hard times lead to very persistent resistance to what I personally believe to be a good thing.”
Adapted from “Does growing up in economic hard times increase compassion? The case of attitudes towards immigration” by Maria Cotofan, King’s College London; Robert Dur, Erasmus University Rotterdam; and Stephan Meier, Columbia Business School.
