The length of our lives is tied to the amount of money we make. The link between health and wealth is well established, and it can have a staggering impact on the actual number of years a person lives. For example, in the United States, wealthy people can live up to 14 years longer than impoverished ones. This gap seems especially stark when compared to the number of years gained by eliminating all forms of cancer, according to the Centers for Disease Control—only three.
In this issue of Psychological Science in the Public Interest (Volume 26, Issue 2), Daniel J. Connolly (Princeton University), APS Fellow Nick Chater (University of Warwick), and APS Fellow George Loewenstein (Carnegie Mellon University) examine the political psychology of economic inequality with a discussion that highlights the cognitive processes that sustain high levels of inequality across nations.
"How is it that economic inequality remains so marginal on the political agenda in democratic societies, even as wealth has been steadily funneled toward a small minority at the expense of the majority?" the authors wrote.
Connolly and his coauthors outline three goals for the issue:
- to introduce psychological scientists to perspectives from other disciplines on inequality ,
- to explore the psychological dimensions of inequality, and
- to propose ways psychological scientists can influence public policies that target inequality.
Of the psychological dimensions they discuss, the team highlights what they call the "i-frame bias," a tendency to understand and explain social outcomes in terms of personal traits like talent and effect, while disregarding the systemic factors that advantage some individuals over others. Solutions proposed from the i-frame perspective focus on individual change rather than the need to update laws, social norms, and other conventions that shape individual behaviors and attitudes .
"The i-frame bias appears to be especially prevalent among the elites who benefit from existing arrangements," they wrote.
After arguing how psychology is crucial to understanding the politics of economic inequality, the authors outline steps for how better equality might be achieved. This discussion includes mention of taxes, unions, cultural and social norms, and collective action.
They also touch on how many of the challenges they discuss have the potential to become even more exacerbated in the age of generative AI .
"The future economic trajectory of AI and its consequences are, needless to say, difficult to forecast," Connolly and colleagues wrote. "But if we do end up in some form of 'postemployment' world, the psychological and economic impacts will be enormous, and policy responses may need to be radical."
In a commentary accompanying the issue , APS Fellow Michael Kraus and his colleagues from Northwestern University outline an approach to the politics of inequality that centers the public.
"Such an approach, we argue, is beneficial because it is not confined to insights from any one disciplinary history or constrained in what sorts of inequality it can study," Kraus and his team wrote. "Rather, a people-centered approach to the political psychology of inequality is characterized by its openness and pluralism in terms of people, methods, disciplines, and epistemologies."
References
Connolly, D., Chater, N., & Loewenstein, L. (2026). The political psychology of economic inequality . Psychological Science in the Public Interest.
Kraus, M., Lherisson, Q., Smutz, A., Burns, M., Sanji, D., Davis, K., Vinluan, A., & Dupree, C. (2026). A PUBLIC framework for the political psychology of inequality . Psychological Science in the Public Interest.
