Higher social class undermines wise reasoning about interpersonal affairs

From Social class and wise reasoning about interpersonal conflicts across regions, persons and situations by Justin P. Brienza and Igor Grossmann. From the Abstract:

We propose that class is inversely related to a propensity for using wise reasoning (recognizing limits of their knowledge, consider world in flux and change, acknowledges and integrate different perspectives) in interpersonal situations, contrary to established class advantage in abstract cognition. Two studies—an online survey from regions differing in economic affluence (n = 2,145) and a representative in-lab study with stratified sampling of adults from working and middle-class backgrounds (n = 299) — tested this proposition, indicating that higher social class consistently related to lower levels of wise reasoning across different levels of analysis, including regional and individual differences, and subjective construal of specific situations. The results held across personal and standardized hypothetical situations, across self-reported and observed wise reasoning, and when controlling for fluid and crystallized cognitive abilities. Consistent with an ecological framework, class differences in wise reasoning were specific to interpersonal (versus societal) conflicts. These findings suggest that higher social class weighs individuals down by providing the ecological constraints that undermine wise reasoning about interpersonal affairs.

I am leery of studies with self-selected participants, online surveys, etc. On the other hand, this fits my priors.

The introduction is a little clearer.

How do people of different social class vary in their reasoning style? For at least a century, this question has been at the core of scholarship on mental abilities. Some research has suggested that people of higher social class exhibit a superior style of reasoning, with white-collars performing better on tasks measuring fluid and crystallized intelligence compared with blue-collars. A dominant explanation for this observation has involved differences in ecological affordances, with lower-class environments defined by fewer resources, greater threat, and more uncertainty — all factors that inhibit performance on abstract intelligence tests—suggesting that lower-class environments promote inferior reasoning. Here, we advance an alternative account, with a focus on wisdom-related pragmatic reasoning rather than abstract reasoning such as propositional logic. Central aspects of this reasoning style include intellectual humility, recognition that the world is in flux and changes, and the ability to take different contexts into account besides one’s own—factors philosophers have long associated with handling situations wisely.

I liked this finding.

Click to enlarge.

People with fewer academic credentials demonstrate a much higher index of wise reasoning (but with a much larger standard deviation) compared to those with college degrees.

This is consistent with Philip Tetlock's finding that forecasting capability of experts is often undermined by their loss of broader perspective. He doesn't use the terminology of wise reasoning but in effect that is what is happening. Pundits become very expert in their narrow field and with their high cognition and mastery, also become accustomed to being right in their narrow slice. They fail to take into account that their expertise in one narrow domain does not translate into other domains and they fail to take into sufficient account the broader context within which their domain resides. Informed wise reasoners (maintenance of humility, recognition of uncertainty, and respect for alternative views) frequently outperform the experts in their forecasting.

I suspect that this finding (were it to be more robustly replicated) factors into the the widening trust chasm between the Mandarin class and the average citizen. While the Mandarin class might be better credentialed and even possibly have higher average IQs, their absence of wise-reasoning means that most their grand schemes come astray. The wise reasoning average citizen recognizes failure of competence, frequently exacerbated by selfing-serving and corruption by the Mandarins. Mandarins, suffering a dearth of humility and failing to respect alternative perspectives, are insulated from recognizing the consequences of their frequent failures.

The wise-reasoning average citizen sees less and less reason to trust the Mandarin class. The Mandarin class becomes increasingly dismissive of the average citizen and their failure to tug the forelock to the Mandarins.