Welfare Stigma Research Articles

Reconsidering the effect of welfare stigma on unemployment

Stigma has been modeled in the literature as a cost of welfare participation, providing a disincentive to welfare entry; hence, traditional models predict that stigma leads to higher search effort and higher employment. We develop a more comprehensive model that accounts for the fact that welfare stigma may elicit psychological effects and foster negative attitudes towards welfare recipients, affecting their employment prospects. We find two contrasting effects. The first reinforces the standard prediction: rational individuals foreseeing the reduction in employability defer welfare entry (deterrence effect); the second goes in the opposite direction: once assisted, individuals experience less welfare-to-employment transitions, both because of reduced search effectiveness and of reduced search effort (entrapment effect). When stigma is not too high, the latter effect prevails: more stigma yields to less employment and more welfare participation. The result is stronger if individuals are not able to foresee their loss of employability.

How Costly is Welfare Stigma? Separating Psychological Costs from Time Costs

This paper empirically decomposes the costs of welfare participation using a model of labor supply and participation in multiple welfare programs. Prior estimates of the cost of welfare participation have not differentiated psychological costs, or stigma, from the effort required to become eligible and maintain eligibility (time costs). The relative size of these two costs has implications for policy. We find that psychological costs are at least as large as the time costs associated with participation in food assistance programs. In addition, we find that the incidence of psychological costs is inconsistent with these costs acting as an effective screening mechanism.

Stigma, Optimal Income Taxation, and the Optimal Welfare Program: A Numerical Simulation Approach

This article integrates the theory of welfare stigma and the theory of optimal income taxation. We study optimal income taxation and an optimal welfare program within a unified framework while taking welfare stigma into account. In our framework, the government is assumed to have two policy instruments, namely general income taxation and a welfare program. Individuals are assumed to be heterogeneous along two dimensions, namely wages (skill) and welfare stigma. The government cannot observe the two characteristics of individuals. Each individual is assumed to take the income tax schedule and the parameters of the welfare program as given and make labor supply decisions to maximize his utility. The government is assumed to choose both an optimal income tax schedule and an optimal welfare program so as to maximize a social welfare function subject to its own revenue budget constraint and individuals’ behavioral response to the income tax schedule and the parameters of the welfare program. As the model cannot be solved analytically, we take a numerical simulation approach. Our simulations show that (1) it is optimal for the government to offer both a negative income tax schedule and a welfare program, which is consistent with the theoretical result obtained by An in a much-simplified version of our model, and (2) the actual welfare program in the United States might be less generous than the optimal welfare program.

Income Support and Stigma Effects for Young Australians

AbstractThe central research question addressed in this article is how receipt of income support payments affects the well‐being of youths. Using 1997–2004 panel data from a nationally representative survey of Australian youths, we attempt to estimate the size of the welfare stigma faced by Australian youths, where stigma is defined as the effect of welfare receipt on reported happiness levels. In analysing the determinants of happiness, we argue that it is important to control for dynamics and initial conditions. The latter arguably measures an initial setpoint of happiness which the psychology literature has found strong support for. In contrast to the general findings of the existence of a welfare stigma for adults, based on our results using dynamic panel probit models, our findings suggest that for Australian youths there is a small negative, but not statistically significant, stigma associated with welfare receipt.

Are Youths on Income Support Less Happy? Evidence from Australia

The central research question addressed in this paper is how receipt of income support payments affects the well-being of youths. Using 1997-2004 panel data from a nationally representative survey of Australian youths, we attempt to estimate the size of the welfare stigma faced by Australian youths, where stigma is defined as the effect of welfare receipt on reported happiness levels. In analysing the determinants of happiness, we argue that it is important to control for dynamics and initial conditions. The latter arguably measures an initial setpoint of happiness which the psychological literature has found strong support for. In contrast to the general findings of the existence of a welfare stigma for adults, based on our results using dynamic panel probit models, our findings suggest that for Australian youths, there is a small negative but not statistically significant stigma associated with welfare receipt.

Sources of stigma for means-tested government programs

Stigma has been shown to discourage participation in means-tested government programs. Prior research cannot explain why this deterrent effect varies in intensity across different individuals and programs. We develop a more comprehensive model of the possible determinants of stigma associated with means-tested programs than has previously been suggested by studies of welfare stigma. We test hypotheses using unique data based on interviews with 1405 respondents in 10 states and the District of Columbia, USA. The results suggest that there are two distinct forms of stigma related to participation in means-tested government programs: one related to self-identity, the other to the anticipation of negative treatment. Both forms of stigma are more pronounced for Welfare compared to Medicaid. The sources of stigma identified by conventional treatments of welfare stigma (e.g., individual attributions of responsibility for poverty) have significant explanatory power, but neglect other important influences. We find that stigma is exacerbated by poor health and by minority status. Stigma is also fostered by the ways in which means-tested programs are implemented, including negative interactions with case workers, long waiting times, and, for Medicaid, applications for benefits in alternative enrollment sites such as health centers or hospitals. These findings suggest new points of leverage for addressing the potentially deleterious consequences of stigma.

Resisting the Welfare Mother: The Power of Welfare Discourse and Tactics of Resistance

This paper examines the impact of dominant discourses on welfare on the lives of women caught up within the American welfare system, focusing primarily on community differences in levels of stigma and the possibility for resistance to the dominant practices. Based upon interviews with 36 women conducted in 1997, one year after the passage of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, the paper compares women living in concentrated poverty in the inner cities with those living in rural and suburban communities. The levels of stigma vary dramatically between the two areas, with women in mixed class communities experiencing much more negative treatment and internalizing the punitive welfare discourse to a far greater extent. Women experiencing lower levels of welfare stigma are able to enact more resistive practices to counter the effects of the dominant discourse.

Are People Ashamed of Paying with Food Stamps?

We evaluate the claim that marginal ‘welfare stigma’causes a dollar of food to provide less utility if bought with food stamps rather than cash, and that this explains why, in the United States, the marginal propensity to consume food out of food stamps is larger than that out of income. This hypothesis has been advanced to explain the so‐called ‘cash‐out puzzle’: the empirical observation that the marginal propensity to consume food out of food stamps is much higher than that out of income, even for households who spend some cash income on food. We develop a theoretical model to identify the restrictions imposed by the hypothesis that the puzzle is indeed caused by such stigma. Using data from San Diego County, we find that two of the three predictions of the marginal stigma model are violated. These results cast serious doubt on the marginal stigma hypothesis.

Overcoming Barriers to Enrollment: A 50-State Assessment of Outreach and Enrollment Simplification Strategies for the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)

With the creation of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) in 1997, nearly all low-income uninsured children became eligible for some public health insurance; however, millions of eligible children still lack coverage. Lack of information about the program, problems associated with the enrollment process, and welfare stigma are common barriers that inhibit children's enrollment in public health programs. States have taken deliberate steps to overcome these barriers when creating their SCHIP by using outreach mechanisms and by simplifying the enrollment process; however, each state uses a unique combination of strategies. This exploratory research attempts to determine if an association exists between specific outreach and/or enrollment simplification strategies and the states' progress in enrolling eligible children. Based on empirical statistical analysis, this paper offers suggestions to policy makers and program officials about how to improve SCHIP enrollment processes and subsequently the health of children in the respective states.

The Economics of Welfare Participation and Welfare Stigma: A Review

The basic assumption of consumer demand theory stating that “more is better than less” appears to be violated by those individuals who, although eligible for welfare support, do not claim the benefits which they are entitled to receive. Take-up rates in different countries and in different programs range between 80% and only 25%. This paper reviews the main empirical studies of welfare participation, identifying the individual or household characteristics associated with different levels of participation in welfare programs. We conclude that low take-up rates cannot be satisfactorily explained by lack of information or by heavy transaction costs. in fact, there is some evidence that the psychological cost of claiming benefits, also known as welfare stigma, is probably the main determinant of low take-up rates. the decision not to take-up welfare benefits can be modeled as a rational, utility-maximising decision. the second part of this paper reviews the few contributions to an economic theory of welfare stigma and proposes some areas for future research on welfare take-up.

Welfare state type, labour markets and refugees: a comparison of Jews from the former Soviet Union in the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany

The massive exodus of Jews from the former Soviet Union [FSU] has been accompanied by welfare state retrenchment and labour market restructuration in the two preferred destination countries of refugee resettlement: the United States and Germany. This study compares the resettlement policies and outcomes of FSU Jews and shows how the context of resettlement, viz. differences in welfare state type, labour market formation and host ethnic community, yield marked differences in formal job market adaptation. FSU Jews in Germany are almost twice as likely as their American counterparts to rely on some form of refugee cash assistance for their primary means of support, whereas the American cohort is twice as likely to be employed in the formal labour market. However, informal labour market adaptation is quite similar. Findings suggest unwitting system convergence, each exercising a different form of social exclusion - welfare stigma and under employment for refugees in the United States, and high labour market regulation in Germany.

Welfare fraud and welfare stigma

The paper argues that welfare fraud and welfare stigma, apparently two phenomena of opposite nature, may be modeled with the aid of a single apparatus, thus allowing a comparative investigation of participants' take-up of welfare benefits. Focusing on social stigma generated through public exposure in welfare programs, it is shown that under fairly reasonable conditions on the parameters of the model, stigma will constitute a stronger deterrent to participation than the expected punishment for dishonest claiming (in both discouraging participation and reducing its duration). This result is in line with sociologists' contention that the threat of informal sanctions may have a much greater effect on behavior than the threat of legal sanctions. It suggests that the truly needy could be more effectively assisted if less effort were directed towards the enforcement of reporting regulations and work requirements in welfare programs, and more resources shifted to enforcing eligibility conditions and combating dishonest claiming.

Welfare Stigma among Low-Income, African American Single Mothers

This article conceptualizes the stigmatization process that is associated with the use of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) programs. A symbolic interactionist perspective that delineates the dynamics of stigma is used to frame the experiences of impoverished African American women who participate in such programs. Findings from a series of qualitative focus group interviews are used to assess current discussions of stigma and to inform efforts to reduce stigma. Past research documents that social stigma is associated with the use of public assistance programs (Rank, 1994). Participation in such programs is sometimes used as evidence that recipients hold deviant work orientations and that they should be labeled with a discredited status (Nichols-Casebolt, 1986). In recent years, relative to other public assistance programs, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) has been the most stigmatized of all (Block, Cloward, Ehrenreich, & Piven, 1987). At its inception, the AFDC program primarily served widows and their children. However, over the past three decades, it has shifted from a focus on divorced and separated women and their children to include never-married, African American women and their children (Quadagno, 1994). The inclusion of unmarried women has paralleled the view that AFDC increasingly serves the undeserving poor (Katz, 1989; Kelso, 1994; Mead, 1986; Murray, 1984). Quantitative and qualitative studies provide important insights into the relationship between social stigma and public assistance programs, including AFDC. Quantitative studies have identified key correlates of stigma and their relationship to economic, social, and psychologi cal outcomes (Horan & Austin, 1974; Kerbo, 1972; Lowenberg, 1981; Murray, 1984; Nichols-Casebolt, 1986). Qualitative research has described how AFDC recipients manage imputed stigma in their daily lives (Jeffers, 1967; Rank, 1994; Rogers-Dillon, 1995; Rosier & Corsaro, 1993; Stack, 1974; Valentine, 1978). These bodies of research address important substantive issues in the study of social stigma and public assistance programs, yet the correlational and descriptive nature of their analyses obscure more general dynamics. In light of the increasing denigration of impoverished African American women who use AFDC programs, a broader understanding of the stigmatization process is needed. The primary goal of this study is to conceptualize the stigmatization process that is associated with the use of AFDC programs. Expanding upon existing studies that are largely correlational and descriptive in nature, this article uses a symbolic interactionist perspective to frame the experiences of African American women who use such programs. Four research questions guided this study: 1. How do women perceive social stigma as it relates to their status as AFDC recipients? 2. What have been women's experiences of discriminatory treatment as AFDC recipients? 3. What strategies do women use to manage stigmatized perceptions and treatment? 4. How do women's perceptions and experiences as AFDC recipients affect their attitudes toward government reform efforts? I address several points in the discussion. First, I review qualitative and quantitative studies on stigma and public assistance programs. Second, I discuss how a symbolic interactionist perspective addresses the limitations of existing studies. Third, I describe the sample and research methods. Focus group interviewing procedures are discussed as they were conducted with a sample of African American single mothers who received AFDC. Next, I present findings from the qualitative group interviews using verbatim quotes that highlight women's perceptions and experiences of welfare stigma, as well as resulting coping strategies. I then discuss the implications of the research findings and consider how they inform current theoretical discussions of stigma and efforts to reduce stigma. …

The dynamics of welfare stigma

Drawing on the symbolic interactionist tradition, this paper focuses on the construction and management of welfare stigma in female welfare recipients' daily lives. In-depth interviews with ten women on welfare are analyzed, particularly in terms of how respondents manage their use of food stamps as stigma symbols. The complex and often contradictory pictures the women in this study painted of their feelings of stigma do not support the assumption, which underlies most research on welfare stigma, that welfare stigma is a coherent and relatively constant entity. The results of this study suggest instead that welfare stigma may vary depending on the social audience, situation, and recipient's life history. This analysis suggests that a symbolic interactionist approach to studying welfare stigma illuminates complex and dynamic aspects of welfare stigma that are obscured in other approaches and that future research on welfare stigma would benefit from drawing on the symbolic interactionist tradition.

Compliance with Unemployment-Insurance Job-Search Regulations

Previous articleNext article No AccessCompliance with Unemployment-Insurance Job-Search RegulationsPaul L. BurgessPaul L. Burgess Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Law and Economics Volume 35, Number 2Oct., 1992 Sponsored by The University of Chicago Booth School of Business and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/467259 Views: 4Total views on this site Citations: 8Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1992 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Yossef Tobol, Erez Siniver, Gideon Yaniv Do tightwads cheat more? Evidence from three field experiments, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 180 (Dec 2020): 148–158.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2020.10.003Hui Zeng, Xiaofen Yu, Haizhen Wen What factors drive public rental housing fraud? Evidence from Hangzhou, China, Habitat International 66 (Aug 2017): 57–64.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.05.007Gideon Yaniv, Erez Siniver The (honest) truth about rational dishonesty, Journal of Economic Psychology 53 (Apr 2016): 131–140.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2016.01.002Martin Halla, Friedrich G. Schneider Taxes and Benefits: Two Options to Cheat on the State, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 76, no.33 (Feb 2013): 411–431.https://doi.org/10.1111/obes.12024Liesbeth Van Parys, Ludo Struyven Withdrawal from the public employment service by young unemployed: a matter of non-take-up or of non-compliance? How non-profit social work initiatives may inspire public services, European Journal of Social Work 16, no.44 (Sep 2013): 451–469.https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2012.724387Arun S. Roy, Ging Wong Incidence of non-compliance with unemployment insurance regulations and associated claimant characteristics, Evaluation and Program Planning 22, no.33 (Aug 1999): 341–351.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(99)00028-2Gideon Yaniv Welfare fraud and welfare stigma, Journal of Economic Psychology 18, no.44 (Jun 1997): 435–451.https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(97)00016-0David Card, Brian P. McCall Is Workers' Compensation Covering Uninsured Medical Costs? Evidence from the “Monday Effect”, ILR Review 49, no.44 (Jul 1996): 690–706.https://doi.org/10.1177/001979399604900407

Understanding welfare stigma: Taxpayer resentment and statistical discrimination

Welfare stigma is widely regarded to be of central importance in understanding the impact of welfare programs in their goal of alleviating poverty. It affects both the decision to take up benefits and the well-being of those who actually do. This paper develops alternative models of the determinants of welfare stigma. We identify two views: a statistical discrimination approach and a taxpayer resentment view. We discuss how each may be formalized and derive their implications. We then examine what they imply about the relationship between stigma and program design.

We Can Run But We Can't Hide:

Long-term care costs are not covered to any significant extent by public or private insurance. As a result, nursing home patients often must use their entire life savings to pay for their care and once impoverished turn to welfare in the form of Medicaid, the federal-state health care program for the poor. Private-sector solutions, such as private long-term care insurance, should expand to play a larger role but cannot solve the whole problem by themselves. Reform of the Medicaid program to make the means test less onerous would be desirable, but this approach would retain the welfare stigma. What is needed is a public insurance program to which everyone would contribute and earn the right to benefits when they need them without having to prove impoverishment. Any public insurance program should leave a substantial role for the private sector. Public costs of a social insurance program would be high but not unaffordable, especially since society will incur most of these costs even without an expanded publ...

Cash Equivalence, Welfare Stigma, and Food Stamps

The Food Stamp Program (FSP) is one of the largest domestic redistributive transfer programs with approximately 22 million participants at a cost of $12 billion in 1983. The stated objective of the FSP is raise the levels of nutrition among low income by providing such households with an opportunity to obtain a low-cost nutritionally adequate diet [29,5]. For program evaluation and cost forecasting, accurate estimates of the determinants of eligible households' program participation and food expenditure decisions are of particular concern in light of the elimination of the purchase requirement (EPR) and other recent structural changes in the program. The problem of obtaining these estimates has three dimensions. First, observations on the behavior of eligible households under the post-EPR institutional setting are required. Second, the roles of welfare stigma and the cash equivalence of the in-kind food stamps must be clarified. Finally, because program participation is a household choice that affects food expenditures, the interdependence of eligible households' FSP participation and food expenditure decisions must be accommodated.' Emphasizing an important component of this interdependence, the connection between cash equivalence of stamps in the participation decision and in expenditures for food, this paper tackles all three dimensions. The purpose of this study is to determine the extent to which food stamps are cash equivalent and to determine which program and household characteristics, including the degree of cash equivalence and stigma, affect post-EPR Food Stamp Program participation

The Social Bases of Welfare Stigma

Use of the concept of welfare stigma suggests the theoretical framework of the labeling approach to deviance. In a review of issues from that literature, we distinguish between feelings of shame and expectations of liability as possible responses to a stigmatized role. We argue that the former reflects a more extreme internalization of the deviant label and use this measure of stigma in our study of the social bases of welfare stigma for a sample of Southern AFDC recipients. Our data show that education, age, and time on AFDC have positive net effects on stigma, while familiarity with a local WRO has a negative effect.

The Social Bases of Welfare Stigma

The Social Bases of Welfare Stigma