Publication type
Journal Article
Series Number
Authors
Publication date
January 1, 2026
Summary:
Social identity research has yet to fully engage with identity economics. This article bridges the two by examining capital market participation and capital income inequality – a critical economic behaviour and a societal issue that remain understudied in social psychology. We integrate psychological concepts and metrics of social identity with large-scale, representative UK data on household economics, encompassing 60,156 individuals and 130,598 observations from 2010 to 2023. Examining gender, ethnicity, education, occupation, politics, age and family as aspects of individuals' self-concept, our findings show that between- and within-person variations in these identities, beyond mere group memberships, were uniquely associated with both the presence and amount of capital income. Rather than reinforcing group membership effects, which could suggest adherence to group norms around capital market participation, our results highlight the importance of identity domains. Gender and ethnic identity were associated with lower capital income, whereas educational and political identity were linked to higher capital income. These patterns persisted across different groups and income strata. Importantly, the predictive power of social identities was comparable to traditional sociodemographic variables. This study extends social identity research to understudied economic behaviours and contributes to the emerging fields of identity economics and the psychology of inequality.
Published in
British Journal of Social Psychology
Volume
Volume: 65
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.70025
ISSN
01446665
Subjects
Notes
Open Access
© 2025 The Author(s). British Journal of Social Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
#588881