Merit, Need, Entitlement? Investigating Fairness of Housing Evaluations

Abstract The article empirically investigates how individuals evaluate unequal housing conditions with respect to the distributive justice principles of merit, need, and status entitlement. Also addressed is the “double standards” hypothesis. The data stem from an online survey fielded to a random sample of the population of a mid-sized German city (N = 1,154). In a factorial survey experiment, respondents rated example residential constellations of fictitious persons with respect to their perceived fairness. The vignettes varied merit-, need-, and entitlement-related factors, and housing conditions. The findings show that respondents take these justice principles into account when making judgments about fair housing, and that need-related factors (having children) are more important than merit (professional performance). Further, there are double standards of the form that performance is applied differently based on the gender and occupational status of fictitious residents. The article finishes by discussing issues that should be addressed by future work and calls for more empirical studies on fairness of housing evaluations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zeitschrift für Soziologie
Published
2024-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/zfsoz-2024-2026
Primary Topic
Housing Market and Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Merit, Need, Entitlement? Investigating Fairness of Housing Evaluations

Felix Wolter
Zeitschrift für Soziologie
Housing Market and Economics
article

Merit, Need, Entitlement? Investigating Fairness of Housing Evaluations

Felix Wolter
article en

Abstract

Abstract The article empirically investigates how individuals evaluate unequal housing conditions with respect to the distributive justice principles of merit, need, and status entitlement. Also addressed is the “double standards” hypothesis. The data stem from an online survey fielded to a random sample of the population of a mid-sized German city (N = 1,154). In a factorial survey experiment, respondents rated example residential constellations of fictitious persons with respect to their perceived fairness. The vignettes varied merit-, need-, and entitlement-related factors, and housing conditions. The findings show that respondents take these justice principles into account when making judgments about fair housing, and that need-related factors (having children) are more important than merit (professional performance). Further, there are double standards of the form that performance is applied differently based on the gender and occupational status of fictitious residents. The article finishes by discussing issues that should be addressed by future work and calls for more empirical studies on fairness of housing evaluations.

Zeitschrift für SoziologieVol. 53(4)
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Universität Konstanz
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Housing Market and Economics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.