Code
# {{< include 03-methods.qmd >}}
# {{< include 04-analisis.qmd >}}This document was last modified at 2025-06-16 12:53:01 and it was last rendered at 2025-06-16 12:53:01.
1 Introduction
Despite rising economic inequality and limited social mobility in contemporary societies (Chancel et al., 2022; López-Roldán & Fachelli, 2021), meritocratic beliefs remain remarkably stable among citizens (Mijs, 2019). The notion that economic disparities are justified by differences in meritocratic elements— such as individual effort and talent (Young, 1958)—has been identified as a key mechanism to explain the persistence of inequalities. Educational institutions have played a central role in promoting these beliefs due to their historical association with the promise of mobility and opportunity (Batruch et al., 2022; Dubet, 2011). Yet, research increasingly shows that schools often reproduce rather than reduce social inequalities (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990; Goudeau & Croizet, 2017). This contradiction has drawn attention to the role of schools in fostering meritocratic beliefs that operate as system-justifying ideologies, obscuring structural disadvantages (Jost & Hunyady, 2003; Wiederkehr et al., 2015). Understanding how young people perceive and endorse these beliefs is crucial, as they shape educational experiences and reinforce broader narratives about fairness and inequality.
While meritocracy is often defined as a system in which rewards are distributed based on individual merit—namely, effort and ability (Young, 1958)—its conceptualization in empirical research remains fragmented. Across disciplines, meritocratic beliefs have been measured through diverse constructs, ranging from general attitudes about social mobility and distributive justice to implicit ideas about success and individual responsibility (Castillo et al., 2019; Trump, 2020). Most instruments rely on single-dimension items or fail to distinguish between descriptive and normative components of meritocratic reasoning. Moreover, few tools capture non-meritocratic logics—such as the perceived role of social origin, family wealth, or connections—in shaping outcomes (e.g. Kunovich & Slomczynski, 2007; Reynolds & Xian, 2014). This heterogeneity in conceptual and operational definitions hinders comparative research and limits the capacity to assess how individuals, especially youth, interpret and internalize meritocracy. Addressing this measurement gap is particularly relevant in educational settings, where such beliefs are first socialized and may have long-term implications for attitudes toward inequality and justice (Batruch et al., 2022; Elenbaas, 2019).
To respond to this challenge, Castillo et al. (2023) propose a conceptual and measurement framework for meritocracy. This work distinguishes between two dimensions of meritocratic beliefs: perceptions (how individuals think meritocracy operates in practice) and preferences (how they think it should operate). The framework also differentiates between meritocratic factors—such as effort and ability—and non-meritocratic ones, including social contacts or coming from a wealthy family. Based on these distinctions, the authors developed a short, multidimensional scale, which they applied and validated in a representative sample of Chilean adults. Their findings show that perceptions and preferences regarding meritocratic and non-meritocratic elements are distinct yet interrelated, coexisting in complex ways
Due to the role that meritocratic beliefs play in the justification of individual achievement (or failure) in contemporary societies, schools are central sites for the socialization of meritocratic beliefs, promoting the idea that academic success depends primarily on effort and talent (Batruch et al., 2022; Erivwo et al., 2021; Wiederkehr et al., 2015). This belief not only sustains the school’s selective function but also reinforces broader narratives of individual responsibility and fairness. Research has shown that belief in school meritocracy is associated with greater acceptance of social and economic inequalities (Batruch et al., 2022; Castillo et al., 2024; Darnon et al., 2018), suggesting that schools contribute not only to the reproduction but also to the legitimization of inequality. In highly stratified systems like Chile’s, this discourse may obscure the effects of social origin on educational outcomes (Goudeau & Croizet, 2017).
Against this background, and with the aim of contributing to empirical research on the early formation of meritocratic beliefs (Batruch et al., 2022; Elenbaas, 2019), this study seeks to extend the work of Castillo et al. (2023) by evaluating the applicability of their conceptual and measurement framework among school-aged populations in Chile. Specifically, it assesses whether perceptions and preferences regarding meritocratic and non-meritocratic principles are empirically distinguishable, stable across age cohorts, and consistent over time. By focusing on early adolescence—a formative stage for civic and moral socialization—this study explores how distributive beliefs emerge, develop, and potentially consolidate within school settings.
This study focuses on Chile, a particularly relevant context for examining meritocracy in education. Despite sustained economic growth and poverty reduction, Chile remains one of the most unequal countries in Latin America and the OECD (Chancel et al., 2022; Flores et al., 2020), partly rooted in neoliberal reforms that turned education into a competitive market (Boccardo, 2020; Madariaga, 2020). Implemented during the dictatorship and expanded in democracy, these reforms institutionalized school choice and public-private competition, generating a highly stratified and segregated educational system (Corvalán et al., 2017). While public discontent has driven important reforms, meritocratic narratives remain deeply embedded in students’ understandings of success and fairness (Canales Cerón et al., 2021).
This study addresses two research questions: (1) To what extent do Chilean students perceive and prefer meritocratic and non-meritocratic principles in society? (2) Are these beliefs consistent across age cohorts and stable over time? To investigate these questions, we use two waves of panel survey data collected in 2023 (N = 839) and 2024 (N = 612) from sixth-grade and first-year secondary students attending nine schools in Chile. The analyses focus on the factorial validity of the measurement model and its invariance across groups and time, using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and longitudinal measurement invariance testing. The following sections present the theoretical framework, describe the data and analytical strategy, and report the empirical findings. We conclude by discussing the implications of our results for research on socialization, education, and the early formation of inequality-related beliefs.
1.1 Meritocratic perceptions and preferences
1.2 Meritocratic perceptions and preferences at school
2 Discussion
3 Conclusion
4 References
Batruch, A., Jetten, J., Van de Werfhorst, H., Darnon, C., & Butera, F. (2022). Belief in School Meritocracy and the Legitimization of Social and Income Inequality. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 194855062211110. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506221111017
Boccardo, G. (2020). 30 años de privatizaciones en Chile: Lo que la pandemia reveló (Nodo XXI). Santiago.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (Second Edition). Sage Publications Ltd.
Canales Cerón, M., Orellana Calderón, V. S., & Guajardo Mañán, F. (2021). Sujeto y cotidiano en la era neoliberal: El caso de la educación chilena. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, 67(244). https://doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.2448492xe.2022.244.70386
Castillo, J. C., Iturra, J., Maldonado, L., Atria, J., & Meneses, F. (2023). A Multidimensional Approach for Measuring Meritocratic Beliefs: Advantages, Limitations and Alternatives to the ISSP Social Inequality Survey. International Journal of Sociology, 53(6), 448–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207659.2023.2274712
Castillo, J. C., Torres, A., Atria, J., & Maldonado, L. (2019). Meritocracia y desigualdad económica: Percepciones, preferencias e implicancias. Revista Internacional de Sociología, 77(1), 117. https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2019.77.1.17.114
Chancel, L., Piketty, T., Saez, E., & Zucman, G. (2022). World inequality report 2022. https://bibliotecadigital.ccb.org.co/handle/11520/27510.
Corvalán, J., Carrasco, A., & García-Huidobro;J. E. (2017). Mercado escolar: Libertad, diversidad y desigualdad. Ediciones UC.
Darnon, C., Wiederkehr, V., Dompnier, B., & Martinot, D. (2018). “Where there is a will, there is a way”: Belief in school meritocracy and the social-class achievement gap. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57(1), 250–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12214
Dubet, F. (2011). Repensar la justicia social (Sexta Edición). Siglo XXI.
Elenbaas, L. (2019). Against unfairness: Young children’s judgments about merit, equity, and equality. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 186, 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.05.009
Erivwo, A., Varghese, E., Mathai, A., & Afrin, T. (2021). Meritocracy in the Educational System. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4740695
Flores, I., Sanhueza, C., Atria, J., & Mayer, R. (2020). Top Incomes in Chile: A Historical Perspective on Income Inequality, 1964–2017. Review of Income and Wealth, 66(4), 850–874. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12441
Jost, J., & Hunyady, O. (2003). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13(1), 111–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280240000046
Kunovich, S., & Slomczynski, K. M. (2007). Systems of Distribution and a Sense of Equity: A Multilevel Analysis of Meritocratic Attitudes in Post-industrial Societies. European Sociological Review, 23(5), 649–663. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcm026
López-Roldán, P., & Fachelli, S. (Eds.). (2021). Towards a Comparative Analysis of Social Inequalities between Europe and Latin America. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48442-2
Madariaga, A. (2020). The three pillars of neoliberalism: Chile’s economic policy trajectory in comparative perspective. Contemporary Politics, 26(3), 308–329. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2020.1735021
Mijs, J. (2019). The paradox of inequality: Income inequality and belief in meritocracy go hand in hand. Socio-Economic Review, 19(1), 7–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwy051
Reynolds, J., & Xian, H. (2014). Perceptions of meritocracy in the land of opportunity. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 36, 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rssm.2014.03.001
Trump, K.-S. (2020). When and why is economic inequality seen as fair. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 46–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.12.001
Wiederkehr, V., Bonnot, V., Krauth-Gruber, S., & Darnon, C. (2015). Belief in school meritocracy as a system-justifying tool for low status students. Frontiers in Psychology, 6.
Young, M. (1958). The rise of the meritocracy. New Brunswick, N.J., U.S.A: Transaction Publishers.