'I Don't Agree with Giving Cash': A Survey Experiment Examining Support for Public Assistance.
Saved in:
| Title: | 'I Don't Agree with Giving Cash': A Survey Experiment Examining Support for Public Assistance. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Campbell, Colin, Gaddis, S. Michael |
| Source: | Social Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell). Nov2017, Vol. 98 Issue 5, p1352-1373. 22p. |
| Subjects: | Public welfare, Poverty, Government policy, Food stamps, Child care, Public opinion, Economics |
| Geographic Terms: | United States |
| Abstract: | Objective Existing research on support for anti-poverty programs largely focuses on broad categories of welfare. In this article, we examine variations in support across different public assistance programs. Methods We use an experimental survey design to examine whether support for public assistance is dependent on the type of aid offered. Results We find that programs that offer benefits in-kind are more popular than cash transfers. Moreover, food stamps and child-care subsidies enjoy more support than housing assistance. Open-ended survey responses show that when evaluating anti-poverty programs, respondents adopt one of two perspectives: (1) cash assistance is problematic but other forms of assistance are acceptable or (2) any assistance is problematic. Conclusion By too narrowly focusing on welfare, social scientists run the risk of developing theories and explanations that may not apply to the much larger part of the safety net that is delivered in-kind. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Social Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell) is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective Existing research on support for anti-poverty programs largely focuses on broad categories of welfare. In this article, we examine variations in support across different public assistance programs. Methods We use an experimental survey design to examine whether support for public assistance is dependent on the type of aid offered. Results We find that programs that offer benefits in-kind are more popular than cash transfers. Moreover, food stamps and child-care subsidies enjoy more support than housing assistance. Open-ended survey responses show that when evaluating anti-poverty programs, respondents adopt one of two perspectives: (1) cash assistance is problematic but other forms of assistance are acceptable or (2) any assistance is problematic. Conclusion By too narrowly focusing on welfare, social scientists run the risk of developing theories and explanations that may not apply to the much larger part of the safety net that is delivered in-kind. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00384941 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/ssqu.12338 |
