ABSTRACT
Belief in meritocracy and social status are central to understanding how people think and behave in relation to economic conflict. In this paper, we investigate how belief in meritocracy is moderated by (subjective) social status for three different aspects of citizens’ attitudes towards economic inequality and conflict, namely (1) perceived conflict, (2) anger about economic inequality and (3) intentions to change economic conflict (egalitarianism). Data from the International Social Survey Programme on 29 countries reveal that the effect of meritocracy depends on social status and differs meaningfully across the three attitudes. For people high in social status, belief in meritocracy relates to lower perceptions of conflict, anger, and egalitarianism. For people with a low subjective social status there is no or a weak relation of belief in meritocracy with the outcomes. In addition, when belief in meritocracy was low, those with a high subjective social status appeared to be concerned about inequality as they perceived more economic conflict and felt more anger than those with a low subjective social status. However, this was not the case for intentions to reduce inequality. Hence, these effects of meritocracy and social status should be understood in light of self-interest concerns of social groups, rather than solely ideological domination.