{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.009402283411685695, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.622222222222222, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Hidden figures: A longitudinal analysis of the relationship between local context and beliefs about the causes of unemployment

Public support for the welfare state is shaped by beliefs about whether recipients are deserving or not. In the case of unemployed people, beliefs about whether they are at fault for their situation or not play a central role in shaping deservingness perceptions. Political actors and lay accounts suggest that living in disadvantaged places can shape attitudes towards welfare recipients. Existing research disagrees on whether higher local unemployment improves attitudes by providing information about the labour market, or worsens them by priming fears of welfare dependency. Thus, this study investigates whether individuals living in areas with higher unemployment benefit claims are more or less likely to believe that the unemployed are responsible for their situation. I innovate using a large sample of longitudinal data from the British Election Study to investigate the role of measuring unemployment benefit claims at multiple spatial scales, and over time. The results provide little evidence of a relationship between local unemployment and beliefs about the causes of unemployment, especially among affluent people. These findings challenge claims that antipathy towards unemployment benefits is shaped by exposure to unemployed people and undermine arguments that spatial segregation by income leads to decreased solidarity with the unemployed.