Correction to: Social Justice Research https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-022-00389-0

“The original version of this article unfortunately contained a number of small typographical errors, and that have now been corrected with this erratum.”

  • Bartels, L. M. (2008). Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new Gilded Age. Princeton University Press.

  • Blanden, J., Machin, S., & Rahman, S. (2019). Generation gap: Young Brits less likely to ‘do better’ than their parents. CentrePiece, 24, 24–26.

  • Chambers, J. R., Swan, L. K., & Heesacker, M. (2015). Perceptions of U.S. social mobility are divided (and distorted) along ideological lines. Psychological Science, 26, 413–423.

  • Cohen, J. (1989). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In A. Hamlin & P. Pettit (Eds.), The good polity: Normative analysis of the state (pp. 17–34). Blackwell.

  • Davis, A., Hecht, K., Burchardt, T., Gough, I., Hirsch, D., Rowlingson, K., & Summers, K. (2020). Living on different incomes in London: Can public consensus identify a ‘riches line’? Trust for London.

  • Edmiston, D. (2018). The poor “sociological imagination” of the rich: Explaining attitudinal divergence towards welfare, inequality, and redistribution. Social Policy and Administration, 52, 983–997.

  • Engelhardt, C., & Andreas, W. (2014). Biased perceptions of income inequality and redistribution. CESifo working paper series (Vol. 4838, pp. 1–23).

  • Hecht, K., & Kate, S. (2020). The long and short of it: The temporal significance of wealth and income. Social Policy & Administration, Online First, 1–15.

  • Hecht, K. (2021). It’s the value that we bring: Performance pay and top income earners’ perceptions of inequality.

  • Heuer, J.-O., Mau, S., & Zimmerman, K. (2018). Attitudes to inequality: Citizen deliberation about the (Re-)distribution of income and wealth in four welfare state regimes. In P. Taylor-Gooby & B. Leruth (Eds.), Attitudes, aspirations and welfare: Social policy directions in uncertain times (pp. 93–135). Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Karadja, M., Mollerstrom, J., & Seim, D. (2017). Richer (and holier) than though? The effect of relative income improvements on demands for redistribution. Review of Economics and Statistics, 99, 201–212.

  • Kelley, J., & Evans, M. D. R. (1995). Class and class conflict in six Western nations. American Sociological Review, 60, 1.

  • Kiatpongsan, S., & Norton, M. I. (2014). How much should CEOs make? A universal desire for more equal pay. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 587–593.

  • Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. The Journal of Poli

  • Margalit, Y. (2013). Explaining social policy preferences: Evidence from the Great Recession. American Political Science Review, 107, 80–103.

  • McCall, L. (2013). The undeserving rich. American beliefs about inequality, opportunity, and redistribution. Cambridge University.

  • Mijs, J. J. B., & Hoy, C. (2021). How information about inequality impacts belief in meritocracy: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment in Australia, Indonesia and Mexico.

  • Mijs, J. J. B., & Roe, E. L. (2021). Is America coming apart? Socioeconomic segregation in neighbourhoods, schools, workplaces, and social networks, 1970–2020. Sociology Compass, Online First, 1–16.

  • Orton, M., & Rowlingson, K. (2007). Public attitudes to economic inequality. Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

  • Rowlingson, K., & Connor, S. (2011). The ‘deserving’ rich? Inequality, morality and social policy. Journal of Social Policy, 40, 437–434.

  • Runciman, W. G. (1966). Relative deprivation and social justice: A study of attitudes to inequality in Twentieth Century England. University of California Press.

  • Townsend, P. (1979). Poverty in the United Kingdom: A survey of household resources and standards of living. Penguin.

  • Zimmermann, K., Heuer, J.-O., & Mau, S. (2018). Changing preferences towards redistribution: How deliberation shapes welfare attitudes. Social Policy and Administration, 52, 969–982.

The original article has been corrected.