Top

Social Justice Research

Published in:

13-03-2018

Social Justice Beliefs Regarding Old-Age Provisions in Germany: A Latent Profile Analysis

Authors: Janna Franke, Julia Simonson

Published in: Social Justice Research | Issue 2/2018

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Examining personal beliefs about social justice in the way a society provides financial security in old age may reveal potential conflicts about the distribution of wealth. Individuals differ with regard to how they believe old-age provisions should be distributed (e.g., based on principles of merit or self-reliance), and individuals often endorse more than one belief at the same time. Using latent profile analysis and data from the 2014 German Ageing Survey we identify five separate profiles of social justice beliefs among older adults (40–85 years) in Germany. Belief profiles were based on the extent to which people simultaneously endorse and/or reject meritocratic, redistributive, self-reliant, and fatalistic ideas regarding old-age provisions. Almost 20% of the sample demonstrated a belief system in line with the German meritocratic system. Roughly three-fifth did not show strong preferences for a specific social justice principle. However, we identified two belief profiles representing 22.4% of the sample which may reflect dissent from the current system. Sociodemographic characteristics, political identification, and indicators of social disadvantage (e.g., lower income, fears of decline in social status, and feelings of social exclusion) were differentially associated with the five belief profiles. Overall, the results showed that in particular people of lower socioeconomic status were critical with respect to the principles of the German pension system raising questions regarding the demand of political interventions.

previous article The Social Value of Expressing Personal and General Belief in a Just World in Different Contexts

next article Exploring New Directions in Self-Forgiveness Research: Integrating Self and Other Perspectives on Moral Repair

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Due to the demographic changes, the old-age dependency ratio has changed from 22.0 persons aged 65 and older per 100 persons in working age (15–64) in 1990 in Germany to 32.0 in 2016 (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tsdde510&plugin=1, accessed March 29, 2017).

Many terms have been used to describe social justice beliefs. Wegener and Liebig (1995b) used the term “social justice ideologies,” whereas Reeskens and van Oorschot (2013), following Miller (1999), used the term “core principles of redistributive justice.” Liebig, Hülle, and May (2016) used the expression “social justice orientations.” We have decided to use the term “social justice beliefs” on the grounds that the expression seems less awkward than “ideologies.” Moreover, “ideology” implies a finished worldview, whereas the word “beliefs” seems somewhat more accommodating of subjective considerations, which makes it more suitable for discussion of specific personal attitudes and beliefs, as we do in this study.

Including self-employed.

The same pattern applies for the Akaike information criterion values (not reported in Table 2).

We assumed that having children and being married would be associated with support for redistributive ideas (Hypothesis 4). The results for the predictors “marital status” and “children” were, however, not in line with our hypothesis. Individuals in Profile 2 indicated the highest support for redistributive ideas, but being married was not significantly related to Profile 2 and having children was in fact negatively related to Profile 2.

Aldridge, A. A., & Roesch, S. C. (2008). Developing coping typologies of minority adolescents: A latent profile analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 31(4), 499–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.08.005.CrossRefPubMed

Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Auxiliary variables in mixture modeling: Three-step approaches using Mplus. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(3), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2014.915181.CrossRef

Bäcker, G. (2016). Dauerbaustelle Sozialstaat: Chronologie gesetzlicher Neuregelungen in der Sozialpolitik 1998-2015. Duisburg: Institut Arbeit und Qualifikation, Universität Duisburg/Essen.

Bode, I., & Wilke, F. (2014). Private Vorsorge als Illusion. Realitätsprobleme des neuen deutschen Rentenmodells. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

Böhnke, P. (2006). Am Rande der Gesellschaft. Risiken sozialer Ausgrenzung. Opladen: Verlag Barbara Budrich.

Börsch-Supan, A. (2014). Reformprozess der Altersvorsorge. In P. Masuch, W. Spellbrink, U. Becker, & S. Leibfried (Eds.), Grundlagen und Herausforderungen des Sozialstaats. Denkschrift 60 Jahre Bundessozialgericht, Band 1 (pp. 711–728). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.

Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2000). Reciprocity, self-interest, and the welfare state. Nordic Journal of Political Economy, 26, 33–53.

Bude, H., & Lantermann, E.-D. (2006). Soziale Exklusion und Exklusionsempfinden. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 58(2), 233–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-006-0054-1.CrossRef

Collins, L. M., & Lanza, S. T. (2010). Latent class and latent transition analysis: With applications in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. New York: Wiley.

Converse, P. E. (2006). The nature of belief systems in mass publics (1964). Critical Review, 18(1–3), 1–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913810608443650.CrossRef

Corneo, G., & Grüner, H. P. (2002). Individual preferences for political redistribution. Journal of Public Economics, 83(1), 83–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(00)00172-9.CrossRef

Dallinger, U., & Liebig, S. (2004). Gerechtigkeit zwischen den Generationen in der wohlfahrtsstaatlichen Alterssicherung. In S. Liebig, H. Lengfeld, & S. Mau (Eds.), Verteilungsprobleme und Gerechtigkeit in modernen Gesellschaften (pp. 97–131). Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

Douglas, M. (1978). Cultural bias. London: Royal Anthropological Institute.

Gerber, M., Jonsdottir, I. H., Lindwall, M., & Ahlborg, G., Jr. (2014). Physical activity in employees with differing occupational stress and mental health profiles: A latent profile analysis. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 15(6), 649–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2014.07.012.CrossRef

Gerlitz, J.-Y., Mühleck, K., & Scheller, P. (2007). Zur Erhebung von Gerechtigkeitsideologien mit Bezug zur Altersvorsorge. Dokumentation der Instrumentenentwicklung für das ISJP 2006. ISJP-Arbeitsbericht (Vol. 117). Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.

Gerlitz, J.-Y., Mühleck, K., Scheller, P., & Schrenker, M. (2012). Justice perception in times of transition: Trends in Germany, 1991–2006. European Sociological Review, 28(2), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcq062.CrossRef

Goodman, L. A. (1974). Exploratory latent structure analysis using both identifiable and unidentifiable models. Biometrika, 61(2), 215–231. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/61.2.215.CrossRef

Jæger, M. M. (2006). What makes people support public responsibility for welfare provision: Self-interest or political ideology? A longitudinal approach. Acta Sociologica, 49(3), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699306067718.CrossRef

Jasso, G., & Wegener, B. (1997). Methods for empirical justice analysis: Part 1. Framework, models, and quantities. Social Justice Research, 10(4), 393–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02683292.CrossRef

Klaus, D., Engstler, H., Mahne, K., Wolff, J. K., Simonson, J., Wurm, S., Tesch-Römer, C. (2017). Cohort profile: The German Ageing Survey (DEAS). International Journal of Epidemiology, 46(4), 1105–1105g. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw326.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kluegel, J. R., & Matějů, P. (1995). Egalitarian vs. inegalitarian principles of distributive justice. In J. R. Kluegel, D. S. Mason, & B. Wegener (Eds.), Social justice and political chance: Public opinion in capitalist and post-communist states (pp. 209–238). New York: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRef

Konzelmann, L., Wagner, C., & Rattinger, H. (2012). Turnout in Germany in the course of time: Life cycle and cohort effects on electoral turnout from 1953 to 2049. Electoral Studies, 31(2), 250–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2011.11.006.CrossRef

Kroh, M., & Fetz, K. (2016). Das Profil der AfD-AnhängerInnen hat sich seit Gründung der Partei deutlich verändert. DIW Wochenbericht, 83(34), 711–719.

Lanza, S. T., & Rhoades, B. L. (2013). Latent class analysis: An alternative perspective on subgroup analysis in prevention and treatment. Prevention Science, 14(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-011-0201-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lanza, S. T., Tan, X., & Bray, B. C. (2013). Latent class analysis with distal outcomes: A flexible model-based approach. Structural Equation Modeling, 20(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2013.742377.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Liebig, S., Hülle, S., & May, M. (2016). Principles of the just distribution of benefits and burdens: The “Basic Social Justice Orientations” scale for measuring order-related social justice attitudes. In SOEP paper on multidisciplinary panel data research (Vol. 831). Berlin: DIW Berlin.

Liebig, S., & Wegener, B. (1995). Primäre und sekundäre Ideologien. Ein Vergleich von Gerechtigkeitsvorstellungen in Deutschland und den USA. In H.-P. Müller, & B. Wegener (Eds.), Soziale Ungleichheit und soziale Gerechtigkeit (Vol. 4, pp. 265–293, Sozialstrukturanalyse). Opladen: Leske+Budrich.

Mahne, K., Wolff, J. K., Simonson, J., & Tesch-Römer, C. (2017). Altern im Wandel: Zwei Jahrzehnte Deutscher Alterssurvey (DEAS). Wiesbaden: Springer.CrossRef

McLachlan, G., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite mixture models. New York: Wiley.CrossRef

Merz, E. L., & Roesch, S. C. (2011). A latent profile analysis of the Five Factor Model of personality: Modeling trait interactions. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(8), 915–919.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Miller, D. (1999). Principles of social justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Mühleck, K. (2003). Stabilität von Einstellungen. Gerechtigkeitsideologien im ISJP-Panel 2000-2002. ISJP-Arbeitsbericht (Vol. 97). Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.

Mühleck, K. (2009). Gerechtigkeit und Wahlverhalten. Gerechtigkeitswahrnehmungen und Gerechtigkeitseinstellungen als Motive politischen Handelns. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRef

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2006). Mplus User’s Guide (4 edn.). Los Angeles, CA.

Osborne, D., & Sibley, C. G. (2017). Identifying “types” of ideologies and intergroup biases: Advancing a person-centred approach to social psychology. European Review of Social Psychology, 28(1), 288–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2017.1379265.CrossRef

Ravallion, M., & Lokshin, M. (2000). Who wants to redistribute? The tunnel effect in 1990s Russia. Journal of Public Economics, 76, 87–104.CrossRef

Reeskens, T., & van Oorschot, W. (2013). Equity, equality, or need? A study of popular preferences for welfare redistribution principles across 24 European countries. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(8), 1174–1195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2012.752064.CrossRef

Sabbagh, C., & Vanhuysse, P. (2014). Perceived pension injustice: A multidimensional model for two most-different cases. International Journal of Social Welfare, 23(2), 174–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12047.CrossRef

Schrenker, M. (2009). Warum fast alle das deutsche Rentensystem ungerecht finden, aber trotzdem nichts daran ändern möchten. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 61(2), 259–282.CrossRef

Schrenker, M. (2011). Generationengerechtigkeit in der Alterssicherung. Theoretische Perspektiven und empirische Befunde. Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.

Schrenker, M., & Wegener, B. (2007). Was ist gerecht? Ausgewählte Ergebnisse aus dem International Social Justice Project 1991–2007. ISJP Technical Report (Vol. 150). Berlin: International Social Justice Project.

Svallfors, S. (2010). Public Attitudes. In F. G. Castles, S. Leibfried, J. Lewis, H. Obinger, & C. Pierson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the welfare state (pp. 241–251). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ullrich, C. (2004). Sozialpolitische Gerechtigkeitsprinzipien, empirische Gerechtigkeitsüberzeugungen und die Akzeptanz sozialer Sicherungssysteme. In S. Liebig, H. Lengfeld, & S. Mau (Eds.), Verteilungsprobleme und Gerechtigkeit in modernen Gesellschaften (pp. 29–68). Frankfurt a.M.: Campus.

van Groezen, B., Kiiver, H., & Unger, B. (2009). Explaining Europeans’ preferences for pension provision. European Journal of Political Economy, 25(2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2008.10.003.CrossRef

Vermunt, J. K. (2010). Latent class modeling with covariates: Two improved three-step approaches. Political Analysis, 18(4), 450–469. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpq025.CrossRef

Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2004). Latent class analysis. In M. S. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman, & T. F. Liao (Eds.), The SAGE encyclopedia of social science research methods (pp. 549–553). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Wegener, B. (1998). Belohnungs- und Prinzipiengerechtigkeit. Die zwei Welten der empirischen Gerechtigkeitsforschung. ISJP-Arbeitsbericht (Vol. 56). Berlin: Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.

Wegener, B., & Liebig, S. (1995a). Dominant ideologies and the variation of distributive justice norms: A comparison of East and West Germany, and the United States. In J. R. Kluegel, D. S. Mason, & B. Wegener (Eds.), Social justice and political change: Public opinion in capitalist and post-communist states (Vol. 3, p. 239). New York: De Gruyter.

Wegener, B., & Liebig, S. (1995b). Hierarchical and social closure conceptions of distributive social justice: A comparison of East and West Germany. In J. R. M. Kluegel, D. S. Mason, & B. Wegener (Eds.), Social justice and political change: Public opinion in capitalist and post-communist states. New York: Aldine/de Gruyter.

Title: Social Justice Beliefs Regarding Old-Age Provisions in Germany: A Latent Profile Analysis
Authors: Janna Franke
Julia Simonson
Publication date: 13-03-2018
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Social Justice Research / Issue 2/2018
Print ISSN: 0885-7466
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6725
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-018-0305-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 2/2018

The Social Value of Expressing Personal and General Belief in a Just World in Different Contexts

Exploring New Directions in Self-Forgiveness Research: Integrating Self and Other Perspectives on Moral Repair

Relational and Group Collective Self Responses to Observed Victimization Across Cultures

Belief in a Just World as a Resource of Victimized Students