Ideology and Economist's Views on Inequality and Discrimination: Evidence From Uruguay

ABSTRACT This paper investigates how the ideological profiles of Uruguayan economists relate to their opinions regarding inequality and discrimination. Based on survey data, we explore the links between three ideological dimensions—political orientation, sexist attitudes (benevolent and hostile), and pro‐market beliefs—and their opinions. We find that right‐wing political ideology, hostile sexism, and pro‐market attitudes are consistently associated with lower agreement that income distribution should be more equitable, lower recognition of gender and racial discrimination, and reduced support for redistributive and antidiscrimination policies. By contrast, benevolent sexism exhibits weaker and more inconsistent associations with economists' views. We further show that whereas diagnostic assessments mediate the relationship between ideology and policy preferences, ideological orientations continue to exert direct effects on policy views even after controlling for diagnoses. These findings reveal that disagreements among economists about inequality and discrimination reflect not only different interpretations of evidence but also distinct normative commitments shaped by ideology. Our results challenge the notion of economics as a value‐neutral discipline and highlight the need for greater reflexivity about how personal beliefs influence economic analysis and policy recommendations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Kyklos
Published
2026-04-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.70052
Primary Topic
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Ideology and Economist's Views on Inequality and Discrimination: Evidence From Uruguay

Marisa Bucheli, Verónica Amarante, Tatiana Pérez
Kyklos
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
article

Ideology and Economist's Views on Inequality and Discrimination: Evidence From Uruguay

Marisa Bucheli, Verónica Amarante, Tatiana Pérez
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper investigates how the ideological profiles of Uruguayan economists relate to their opinions regarding inequality and discrimination. Based on survey data, we explore the links between three ideological dimensions—political orientation, sexist attitudes (benevolent and hostile), and pro‐market beliefs—and their opinions. We find that right‐wing political ideology, hostile sexism, and pro‐market attitudes are consistently associated with lower agreement that income distribution should be more equitable, lower recognition of gender and racial discrimination, and reduced support for redistributive and antidiscrimination policies. By contrast, benevolent sexism exhibits weaker and more inconsistent associations with economists' views. We further show that whereas diagnostic assessments mediate the relationship between ideology and policy preferences, ideological orientations continue to exert direct effects on policy views even after controlling for diagnoses. These findings reveal that disagreements among economists about inequality and discrimination reflect not only different interpretations of evidence but also distinct normative commitments shaped by ideology. Our results challenge the notion of economics as a value‐neutral discipline and highlight the need for greater reflexivity about how personal beliefs influence economic analysis and policy recommendations.

Kyklos
Universidad de la República de Uruguay (UY), Universidad de Montevideo (UY)
Comisión Sectorial de Investigación Científica
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
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.