“Luxury beliefs”: Signaling through ideology?

IF 1.5 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Margaret Samahita
{"title":"“Luxury beliefs”: Signaling through ideology?","authors":"Margaret Samahita","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2026.102538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The concept of “luxury beliefs”—ideological stances used to signal status—has attracted growing attention in public discourse. Using a set of statements commonly described as “luxury beliefs”, I conduct an online experiment with a nationally representative U.S. sample (<span><math><mrow><mi>n</mi><mo>=</mo><mn>715</mn></mrow></math></span>) to examine how widely these beliefs are recognized, whether they are associated with higher socioeconomic status (proxied by education and income), and whether individuals use them for status signaling toward relevant audiences. I find that: (i) Only 39% of the participants, primarily Republicans, report having heard of “luxury beliefs”. (ii) Agreement with luxury beliefs is not associated with higher education or income. (iii) There is little evidence of signaling behavior, aside from suggestive evidence that Independents express higher agreement with luxury beliefs when paired with a Democrat. These results indicate that luxury beliefs are not widely recognized or used as status signals in the general population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 102538"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804326000297","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The concept of “luxury beliefs”—ideological stances used to signal status—has attracted growing attention in public discourse. Using a set of statements commonly described as “luxury beliefs”, I conduct an online experiment with a nationally representative U.S. sample (n=715) to examine how widely these beliefs are recognized, whether they are associated with higher socioeconomic status (proxied by education and income), and whether individuals use them for status signaling toward relevant audiences. I find that: (i) Only 39% of the participants, primarily Republicans, report having heard of “luxury beliefs”. (ii) Agreement with luxury beliefs is not associated with higher education or income. (iii) There is little evidence of signaling behavior, aside from suggestive evidence that Independents express higher agreement with luxury beliefs when paired with a Democrat. These results indicate that luxury beliefs are not widely recognized or used as status signals in the general population.
“奢侈信念”:通过意识形态发出信号?
“奢侈信仰”的概念——用来表明地位的意识形态立场——在公共话语中引起了越来越多的关注。使用一组通常被描述为“奢侈信念”的陈述,我对一个具有全国代表性的美国样本(n=715)进行了一个在线实验,以检验这些信念被认可的程度,它们是否与更高的社会经济地位(以教育和收入为代表)有关,以及个人是否使用它们向相关受众发出地位信号。我发现:(1)只有39%的参与者(主要是共和党人)报告听说过“奢侈信仰”。(ii)认同奢侈观念与高等教育或收入无关。(iii)几乎没有信号行为的证据,除了暗示性的证据表明,当独立人士与民主党人配对时,他们对奢侈观念的认同程度更高。这些结果表明,在一般人群中,奢侈品观念并没有被广泛认可或用作地位信号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
83 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书