UC Berkeley

Narratives play a powerful role in shaping and advancing social change. Societal narratives about marginalized groups directly impact which policies are prioritized and enacted, as well as how these groups are socially constructed. This is particularly evident in how poverty narratives have shaped the reform of anti-poverty government programs, such as welfare, and continue to stigmatize current programs aimed at alleviating poverty as well as people experiencing poverty. Addressing poverty will require changing the stigmatizing narratives that continue to be associated with it, as well as adopting new approaches to economic security that challenge the status quo of past anti-poverty programs.There has been growing interest in guaranteed income (GI) programs, which provide unconditional cash payments on a regular basis with no work requirements or restrictions on spending. Findings from GI pilot programs across the U.S. suggest positive outcomes related to income stability, employment, education, and mental well-being. While promising, it remains unclear whether there is sufficient public support for guaranteed income or if the poverty narratives that have stigmatized existing anti-poverty programs also affect perceptions of guaranteed income. Despite the role these narratives play, few studies have explored how they 1) impact people experiencing poverty and 2) influence opinions on newer programs like GI. Understanding the impact of these narratives is crucial to reimagining how society addresses poverty. This dissertation aims to fill this gap through three papers.Chapter 2 describes the development of a novel survey instrument to assess public support for GI, and findings from a nationally representative survey of 1,050 respondents that used that instrument. Respondents were asked about their support for guaranteed income programs for various populations, including people with disabilities, single mothers, and specific racial/ethnic groups. The results indicated that younger adults, Democrats, women, Black, multiracial, and Hispanic respondents, along those with lower levels of education and income, were more likely to support guaranteed income, while older, white, non-Hispanic respondents, those with higher levels of education and income, and Republicans were more opposed. Support was greater for populations perceived as “deserving,” such as people with disabilities, pregnant women, families with children under 18, and single mothers.Chapter 3 explores whether attitudes toward poverty, measured by the Attitudes Toward Poverty Scale that assesses individual versus structural beliefs about poverty, and belief in the existence and impact of structural racism, measured by the Structural Racism Index, influence support for GI using the same nationally representative survey from Chapter 2. Using proportional odds ordinal logistic regression, people who believed poverty results from systemic issues like discrimination or lack of opportunity were significantly more likely to support GI, while those who believed poverty is due to laziness or poor choices were less likely to support. Each unit increase in structural beliefs about poverty was associated with a 673% increase in odds of GI support; similarly, belief in structural racism was associated with a 206% increase. These associations remained significant even after accounting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education level, income, political affiliation, and prior use of public assistance. These results demonstrate that personal beliefs about the causes of poverty and structural racism may shape policy preferences.Chapter 4 examines the impact of poverty narratives on 40 Black and Pasifika (Pacific Islander) women in California (ages 19-45 years) who had sought public assistance, using in-depth interview data. The study examined how harmful poverty narratives manifest in participants’ lives and the emotional and interpersonal impacts they have. Participants consistently encountered a dominant narrative framing use of public assistance as a moral failing rather than a response to structural barriers. This framing was reproduced and communicated through a wide range of sources—family members, peers, teachers, coworkers, and social media—often without being explicitly taught. These messages were absorbed early, reinforced across generations, and woven into everyday conversations, jokes, and judgments. The impacts were deeply personal; participants internalized shame, felt judged and scrutinized, questioned their own worth, and often hid their use of public assistance out of fear of being labeled or devalued. Despite the shame these narratives caused, several participants actively challenged them, highlighting their goals, efforts, and the reality that needing help does not diminish their worth.This dissertation provides valuable insights into how poverty narratives shape support for guaranteed income programs, while also highlighting the lived experiences of Black and Pasifika women in navigating public assistance. The findings demonstrate the need to challenge and counter negative poverty narratives to drive anti-poverty efforts.