1
00:00:00,276 --> 00:00:12,610
In California, you're supposed to stop for a pedestrian at the crosswalk. And in a recent study, some 90% of drivers did- except for those driving luxury cars.

2
00:00:12,610 --> 00:00:15,073
Like this BMW.

3
00:00:15,073 --> 00:00:20,499
They were almost as likely to run the intersection as wait for the person to cross the street.

4
00:00:20,499 --> 00:00:26,159
Piff: "Drivers of those BMW's, those Porsche's, those Mercedes, were anywhere from 3-4 times more likely

5
00:00:26,159 --> 00:00:31,731
to break the law than drivers of less expensive, low-status cars."

6
00:00:31,731 --> 00:00:42,370
In a country more and more polarized by inequality, U CAL Berkley's Paul Piff led a series of startling studies showing an apparent link between

7
00:00:42,370 --> 00:00:46,525
wealth and well unseemly behavior.

8
00:00:46,617 --> 00:00:52,795
Experimenter: "Oh and by the way there's candy there, its actually for children for another study but you're welcome to take a few pieces if you want to."

9
00:00:53,549 --> 00:00:58,890
That's the script an experimenter recited to every subject, and the results?

10
00:00:58,890 --> 00:01:03,775
Piff: "Wealthier participants took two times as much candy from children as did poor participants."

11
00:01:03,775 --> 00:01:09,931
Another experiment tested honesty in reporting dice scores when cash was on the line.

12
00:01:09,931 --> 00:01:17,158
Piff: "People all the way at the top, who made 150/200 thousand dollars a year,were actually cheating four times as much as

13
00:01:17,158 --> 00:01:25,786
someone all the way at the bottom who made under 15,000 dollars a year, just to win credits for a $50 cash prize."

14
00:01:25,786 --> 00:01:33,372
So, experimental evidence that rich people are more likely to break the law while driving, help themselves

15
00:01:33,372 --> 00:01:46,493
to candy meant for children, cheat in a game of chance, also to lie during negotiations and endorse unethical behavior including stealing at work.

16
00:01:46,493 --> 00:01:50,669
The academic paper that resulted made headlines everywhere.

17
00:01:50,669 --> 00:01:55,163
The Wall Street journal article leading with the question "Ready the Pitchforks?"

18
00:01:55,163 --> 00:02:00,247
Kiltner: "It is very clear that this study of social class touched a nerve."

19
00:02:00,247 --> 00:02:05,350
Psychology professor, Dackerd Kiltner is Paul Piff's boss and co-author.

20
00:02:05,350 --> 00:02:12,270
Kiltner: "We published these studies in relatively obscure scientific journals and literally the next day

21
00:02:12,270 --> 00:02:17,180
we're getting hundreds of emails from around the world, and a lot quite hostile."

22
00:02:17,180 --> 00:02:23,781
Piff: "I've got a lot of vitriol and hate email from people calling me out for junk science and having a liberal agenda."

23
00:02:23,781 --> 00:02:33,004
Hey but wait, didn't those who complained have a point? That the research was done at famously, some might say "infamously", liberal university.

24
00:02:33,004 --> 00:02:36,579
Narrator: "Hey, they're in Berkley what other results did you expect them to get?"

25
00:02:36,579 --> 00:02:44,414
Piff: "I regularly hear the Berkly idiot scientist who is finding what they expect to find. Let me tell you

26
00:02:44,414 --> 00:02:53,297
we did not expect to find this. Our findings apply to both liberals and conservatives, it doesn't matter who you are if you wealthy you're more likely to show these patterns of results."

27
00:02:53,297 --> 00:03:00,629
Results consistent across thirty studies he's run on thousands of people all over the United States.

28
00:03:00,629 --> 00:03:05,876
So what is it about wealth that might make people behave differently?

29
00:03:05,876 --> 00:03:09,711
Narrator: "What are we doing here?"
Piff: "We're playing a game of Monopoly that's rigged."

30
00:03:09,711 --> 00:03:15,990
This game is typical of another kind of experiment Piff likes to run. Instead of studying actual

31
00:03:15,990 --> 00:03:20,383
rich people, Piff gets subjects to feel rich in the lab.

32
00:03:20,383 --> 00:03:35,286
The designated Monopoly "money bags" starts with a few legs up: $2000 versus the poor mans $1000, an upscale playing piece, the "Roles", versus the "old shoe".

33
00:03:35,286 --> 00:03:38,115
The right to toss two dice instead of just one.

34
00:03:40,976 --> 00:03:46,331
Meaning I, assigned the role of rich person, get an extra turn.

35
00:03:46,331 --> 00:03:49,763
Participant: "So I roll again because I got doubles..."
Piff: "Yep"

36
00:03:51,209 --> 00:03:56,852
uh six, so, 1,2,3,4,5,6 and that's Tennessee Avenue and of course I'll buy that

37
00:03:56,852 --> 00:04:05,282
Meanwhile poor Paul Piff..."I only get to roll one die and as it says here, when I pass go I collect the lower salary, I collect $100."

38
00:04:05,822 --> 00:04:09,520
>"Here's your one die."
>"Thanks so much."

39
00:04:09,520 --> 00:04:13,647
Piff: "I can't roll doubles, I don't get the opportunity to go very far on the board."

40
00:04:13,647 --> 00:04:20,489
Piff has run this experiment with hundreds of people on the Berkley campus. The rich players

41
00:04:20,489 --> 00:04:31,046
are determined randomly by coin toss. The game rigged so they cannot lose. And yet, says Piff, despite their presumably liberal bent going in,

42
00:04:31,046 --> 00:04:38,830
Piff: "When we ask them afterwords, how much do you feel you deserved to win the game, the rich people felt entitled.

43
00:04:38,830 --> 00:04:47,323
They felt they deserved to win the game. And that's a really incredible insight into what the mind does to make sense of advantage or disadvantage."

44
00:04:47,323 --> 00:04:58,149
So even though a subject like myself is just "play acting", "you consistently find that I begin to attribute

45
00:04:58,165 --> 00:05:02,608
success to myself even though it's a coin flip that got me on the board as opposed to that."

46
00:05:02,608 --> 00:05:11,003
Piff: "You, like a real rich person, start to attribute success to your own individual skills and talents

47
00:05:11,003 --> 00:05:18,156
and you become less attuned to all the other things that contributed to you being in the position that you're in."

48
00:05:20,186 --> 00:05:27,471
Piff is part of a team headed by Dackerd Kiltner that studies the psychological affects of both absolute

49
00:05:27,471 --> 00:05:35,223
and relative poverty and wealth. What they're studying is economic inequality.

50
00:05:35,377 --> 00:05:41,893
Which as our viewers probably know is as high as its been in almost a century in this country.

51
00:05:41,893 --> 00:05:54,002
Kiltner: "There are new data coming out on a daily basis from top laboratories showing no matter how you look at it, the affects of inequality are pernicious upon things like

52
00:05:54,002 --> 00:05:58,847
bullying on the school playground, the quality of your physical health, how you handle disease..."

53
00:05:58,847 --> 00:06:03,666
What's somewhat surprising, says Kiltner, is that even "the haves" suffer.

54
00:06:03,666 --> 00:06:15,010
Kiltner: "One of the things that wealth and money does is it comes with a set of values and if you want a deeper ideology, and one of them is "generosity is for suckers and greed is good"

55
00:06:15,010 --> 00:06:22,935
but it turns out there are a lot of new data that show if you are generous and charitable and altruistic,

56
00:06:22,935 --> 00:06:33,410
you'll live longer, you'll feel more fulfilled, you'll feel more expressive of who you are as a person, you probably will feel more control and freedom in you life."

57
00:06:33,410 --> 00:06:40,854
Of course they're are plenty of wildly generous rich folks, just look at the growing list of billionaires

58
00:06:40,854 --> 00:06:44,716
who have pledged to give the bulk of their fortunes to charity.

59
00:06:45,840 --> 00:06:55,340
But statistically speaking, there's a significant tendency to look out for number one if you're at the top.

60
00:06:55,340 --> 00:07:04,880
(playing game)

61
00:07:04,880 --> 00:07:11,010
And as Piff observed when he ran this experiment with hundreds of doggedly friendly Berkley types,

62
00:07:11,010 --> 00:07:15,429
those in the role of "top dog" began to bark like one.

63
00:07:15,429 --> 00:07:21,672
Narrator: "So I get 200 bucks, well give me 140 cause I'm going to buy Mediterranean."

64
00:07:21,672 --> 00:07:28,596
Piff: "OK, done, now listen to the way you just spoke to me. It was very directive, but almost like a demand. But we found

65
00:07:28,596 --> 00:07:38,926
consistently with people who were the rich players that they actually started to become, in their behavior, as if they were like rich people in real life.

66
00:07:38,926 --> 00:07:48,922
They were more likely to eat from a bowl of pretzels that we positioned for players off to the side, more likely to eat with their mouths full, so a little ruder in their behavior to the other person..."

67
00:07:48,922 --> 00:07:53,763
While I was thanking God no pretzels were present, Piff continued.

68
00:07:53,763 --> 00:08:01,130
Those arbitrarily assigned the role of low dog, became more nearly man's best friend.

69
00:08:01,130 --> 00:08:10,103
"If I take someone whose rich and make them feel psychologically less well off they become way more generous, way more charitable, way more likely to

70
00:08:10,103 --> 00:08:12,421
offer help to another person."

71
00:08:12,421 --> 00:08:21,734
Narrator: "So when people are playing this Monopoly game and they're in the poor personal role that you're playing, they, if they were more rich in real life

72
00:08:21,734 --> 00:08:25,922
become more understanding, more compassionate?"

73
00:08:25,922 --> 00:08:31,633
Piff: "Not just in this game of Monopoly but in a whole bunch of other experiments that we've run where we

74
00:08:31,633 --> 00:08:36,954
make rich people feel poor or poor people feel rich, you find the same kinds of differences."

75
00:08:36,954 --> 00:08:45,801
Differences that could conceivably help people understand their subconscious biases and perhaps even moderate the costly effects of

76
00:08:45,801 --> 99:59:59,999
economic inequality. But until that happens, we'd suggest you look both ways before crossing.