9/ Methodological contribution:
• We are among the first to use video-based interventions to study redistribution preferences.
• Our study is also the only one comparing video to text interventions for the same content.

Full paper: bit.ly/49tmpOz

8/ We add a unique dimension by showing participants that high inequality is avoidable—a perspective rarely tested in representative samples or high-income settings like the US.

7/ Our study breaks new ground by:
• Analysing, within the same experimental setting, how info about different types of inequality shapes preferences for different redistributive policies.
• Highlighting wealth inequality, a topic often overlooked in favour of income inequality in past research.

6/ Our findings also reveal:
• Information on inequality avoidability significantly updates participants' knowledge.
• Information on inequality or social mobility may serve as a primer, as most participants are already aware of high inequality and low social mobility in the US.

5/ Specific groups responded more strongly to inequality information:
• Middle-income earners
• Those with higher trust in the government
• Participants who underestimated inequality levels
• Women

Importantly, these effects weren’t driven by political orientation.

4/ The impact of these messages was amplified when participants also learned that inequality isn't necessary for economic growth.

3/ Our findings:
• Info on high wealth inequality → stronger support for progressive taxation.
• Info on low social mobility → greater preference for redistribution via fiscal spending.