Socioeconomic Status and Meta-Perceptions: How Markers of Culture and Rank Predict Beliefs About How Others See Us

How does a person's socioeconomic status (SES) relate to how she thinks others see her? Seventeen studies (eight pre-registered; three reported in-text and 14 replications in supplemental online material [SOM], total N = 6,124) found that people with low SES believe others see them as colder and less competent than those with high SES. The SES difference in meta-perceptions was explained by people's self-regard and self-presentation expectations. Moreover, lower SES people's more negative meta-perceptions were not warranted: Those with lower SES were not seen more negatively, and were less accurate in guessing how others saw them. They also had important consequences: People with lower SES blamed themselves more for negative feedback about their warmth and competence. Internal meta-analyses suggested this effect was larger and more consistent for current socioeconomic rank than cultural background.

Thinking Structurally: A Cognitive Framework for Understanding How People Attribute Inequality to Structural Causes

To make accurate causal inferences about social-group inequalities, people must consider structural causes. Structural causes are a distinct type of extrinsic cause-they are stable, interconnected societal forces that systematically advantage some social groups and disadvantage others. We propose a new cognitive framework to specify how people attribute inequality to structural causes. This framework is rooted in counterfactual theories of causal judgment and suggests that people will recognize structural factors as causal when they are perceived as "difference-making" for inequality above and beyond any intrinsic causes. Building on this foundation, our framework makes the following contributions. First, we propose specific types of evidence that support difference-making inferences about structural factors: within-group change (i.e., observing that disadvantaged groups' outcomes improve under better societal conditions) and well-matched between-group comparisons (i.e., observing that advantaged group members, who have similar baseline traits to the disadvantaged group, experience more favorable societal conditions and life outcomes). Second, we consider contextual, cognitive, and motivational barriers that may complicate the availability and acceptance of this evidence. We conclude by exploring how the framework might be applied in future research examining people's causal inferences about inequality.

Believe to achieve? Understanding how social class background impacts the effects of achievement striving on propensity to negotiate

Purpose

Negotiation is important for career success. Therefore, this study draws from social expectancy and self-regulation theories to develop a model proposing that social class background (SCB) influences the ease with which achievement striving translates into propensity to negotiate. Specifically, the authors examine how SCB moderates the relationship between achievement striving and negotiation propensity via a key mediator—status-based identity uncertainty—reflective of one's (un)certainty about their societal standing.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors collected data across three surveys over a four-week period from 460 participants. The authors assessed negotiation propensity by asking participants to rank-order behavioral reactions, representative of different degrees of negotiation engagement, in response to three scenarios.

Findings

The positive effects of achievement striving on negotiation propensity are attenuated for individuals with lower SCBs, in part, because achievement-oriented individuals with lower SCBs experience a heightened sense of status-based identity uncertainty. Although achievement striving is an asset for initiating negotiations, it appears to disproportionately benefit those with higher SCBs.

Originality/value

Individuals higher in achievement striving and with lower SCBs may approach the negotiation process differently than those with higher SCBs. This dynamic serves as another mechanism through which cumulative (dis)advantage processes in career success may occur over time.

Socioeconomic status differences in psychological responses to unfair treatments: Behavioral evidence of a vicious cycle

Two studies investigated whether lower socioeconomic status (SES) would be associated with greater tolerance for unfair treatments. Specifically, we hypothesized that individuals with lower SES would be less likely to perceive apparent injustice as unfair than those with higher SES, and furthermore, such differences in perception would lead to the corresponding differences in ensuing psychological responses. In support of the hypotheses, we found that (Study 1, N = 326; Study 2, N = 130), compared with higher SES participants, lower SES participants perceived one-sidedly disadvantageous distribution during the dictator game as less unfair. Moreover, a behavioral experiment in Study 2 showed that such tolerance for unfair treatments were associated with subsequent passive reactions in the ultimatum game. Taken together, the results imply a vicious cycle whereby the SES differences in a tendency to accept unfair treatments lead to psychological responses that may maintain or even strengthen the existing social disparities.

Links Between Socioeconomic Status, Daily Depressive Affect, Diurnal Cortisol Patterns, and All-Cause Mortality

OBJECTIVE

Socioeconomic status (SES) remains a robust risk factor for mortality. Various theoretical models postulate that lower SES is associated with higher negative affect, which then initiates a cascade of physiological disturbances that contribute to illness and early mortality. However, few studies have explicitly investigated the interplay between psychological and biological factors in determining SES disparities in mortality. This study examined the role of daily negative affect and cortisol secretion in explaining the SES-mortality link in a large sample of US adults.

METHODS

Using data from the Midlife in the United States study (n = 1735, mean [standard deviation] age = 56.40 [12.10] years, 56.4% female), we tested longitudinal associations between SES, daily negative affect, daily cortisol levels, and all-cause mortality 13 years later. Daily negative affect was classified into three clusters reflecting depressive affect, anxiety, and anger.

RESULTS

Higher SES was linked to a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval = 0.90 to 0.97). Furthermore, there was a sequential link between higher SES and lower mortality through lower daily depressive affect and a steeper ("healthier") diurnal cortisol slope (indirect effect = -0.0007, 95% confidence interval = -0.0014 to -0.0002). Daily anxiety and anger were not associated with cortisol levels or mortality (p values > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that daily negative emotional experiences and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis functioning may constitute important psychological and physiological pathways underlying the link between SES and all-cause mortality.

Causal Beliefs for Socioeconomic Status Attainment Scale: Development and Validation

That individuals attain socioeconomic status (SES) through their own effort and ability, which is a staple pillar of the meritocratic ethos and has been a popular topic of inquiry within social psychology. However, this focus on merit overshadowed other important causal factors that contribute to one's SES, such as opportunity and chance. This study presents psychometrically validated scales measuring one's causal beliefs of SES attainment for themselves (agency beliefs) and others (society beliefs). Utilizing a nationally representative sample, participants completed 68 items of causal agency and society beliefs for low and high SES attainment. Through factor analyses, item response theory, and careful item reduction, three subscales and six dimensions measuring (1) merit (effort and ability), (2) opportunity (social connections and privilege), and (3) chance (luck and fate) are introduced for each belief system. Correlation analyses reveal general support for construct validity. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Making it against the odds: How individual and parental co-agency predict educational mobility

INTRODUCTION

This study examines the role of individual agency and parental co-agency as resource factors enabling educational mobility (university enrolment and degree completion) among first-generation students.

METHODS

The study is based on Next Steps, a nationally representative cohort of UK students. Path models were run, linking different dimensions of agency assessed at age 13/14 to educational attainment by age 25/26, controlling for academic attainment and socio-demographic factors.

RESULTS

Educational mobility was predicted by student's expectation to go to university, their expectation of success, and school engagement during secondary school. In addition, parental co-agency played a significant role - highlighting the importance of parents in supporting upward educational mobility of their children.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple dimensions of agency are necessary for disadvantaged students to achieve academically. To support first-generation students, schools need to provide opportunities for them to become engaged in education, to experience mastery and to develop realistic expectations of success.

Social Class—Not Income Inequality—Predicts Social and Institutional Trust

Trust is the social glue that holds society together. The academic consensus is that trust is weaker among lower-class individuals and in unequal regions/countries, which is often considered a threat to a healthy society. However, existing studies are inconsistent and have two limitations: (i) variability in the measurement of social class and (ii) small numbers of higher level units (regions/countries). We addressed these problems using large-scale (cross-)national representative surveys (encompassing 560,000+ participants from 1,500+ regional/national units). Multilevel analysis led to two consistent sets of findings. First, the effects of social class on social trust were systematically positive, whereas the effects on institutional trust depended on the way social class was measured. Second, the effects of income inequality on social and institutional trust were systematically nonsignificant and smaller than the smallest negative effect of interest. Our findings suggest that researchers need to update their knowledge: social class—not income inequality—predicts trust.

The Possession of High Status Strengthens the Status Motive

The current research tested whether the possession of high status, compared with the possession of low status, makes individuals desire having high status even more. Five studies (total N = 6,426), four of which were preregistered, supported this hypothesis. Individuals with higher status in their social groups or who were randomly assigned to a high-status condition were more motivated to have high status than were individuals with low status. Furthermore, upper-class individuals had a stronger status motive than working-class individuals, in part, due to their high status. High-status individuals had a stronger status motive, in part, because they were more confident in their ability to achieve (or retain) high status, but not because of other possible mechanisms (e.g., task self-efficacy). These findings provide a possible explanation for why status hierarchies are so stable and why inequality rises in social collectives over time.

The Pathway From Social Status to Physical Health: Taking a Closer Look at Stress as a Mediator

Stress is often invoked as a potential contributor to disparities in physical health as a function of social status. Although there is good reason to believe that stress exposure and stress responses may be an important pathway linking lower social status to poor health, direct evidence is lacking. We summarize the evidence for this pathway and limitations of that evidence, focusing particularly on how stress is conceptualized and measured. We argue that in addition to more direct tests of mediation, the measurement of the mediator—stress—could also be improved. We also propose that measuring theory-specific stress exposures may be more fruitful than assessing general stress exposures (e.g., life events, global perceived stress) by increasing theoretical clarity and predictive utility of stress in this context.

The Development of Educational Aspirations and Expectations From Adolescence to Young Adulthood: A Longitudinal Study of Mexican-Origin Youth

Mexican-origin youth are at increased risk for school dropout and low educational attainment. High educational aspirations and expectations provide a potential source of resilience, given their association with positive educational outcomes. Using data from a longitudinal study of 674 Mexican-origin youth, we examined the development of educational aspirations ("how far would you like to go in school?") and expectations ("how far do you actually expect to go?") from 7th grade ( M age = 12.8) to 2 years post–high school ( M age = 19.8). Results indicate that Mexican-origin youth enter adolescence with very high aspirations and expectations (e.g., 67% expect to graduate from college) and maintain them even after transitioning into young adulthood. Several demographic and cultural factors, including parent education level, family income, the cultural value of familism, ethnic identity, and Spanish language use, were associated with higher aspirations and expectations.

The Misperception of Racial Economic Inequality

Racial economic inequality is a foundational feature of the United States, yet many Americans appear oblivious to it. In the present work we consider the psychology underlying this collective willful ignorance. Drawing on prior research and new evidence from a nationally representative sample of adults ( N = 1,008), we offer compelling evidence that Americans vastly underestimate racial economic inequality, especially the racial wealth gap. In particular, respondents thought that the Black–White wealth gap was smaller, by around 40 percentage points in 1963 and around 80 percentage points in 2016, than its actual size. We then consider the motivational, cognitive, and structural factors that are likely to contribute to these misperceptions and suggest directions for future research to test these ideas. Importantly, we highlight the implications of our collective ignorance of racial economic inequality and the challenge of creating greater accuracy in perceptions of these racial economic disparities, as well as outline the steps policymakers might take to create messages on this topic that effectively promote equity-enhancing policies. We close with an appeal to psychological science to at least consider, if not center, the racial patterning of these profound economic gaps.

The context of low socioeconomic status can undermine people's motivation for financial success

Why are some people poor, and why does poverty persist? One popular explanation blames society for blocking the advancement of lower socioeconomic status (SES) individuals. A second accuses the poor of being lazy. Here, we argue that both perspectives are missing a critical point. It is true that the material, social, and cultural context of low SES makes it difficult for people to successfully move up the ladder, even if they try. But this same context undermines their motivation to try, by encouraging them to believe they lack the requisite skills, that the world will treat them unfairly, and that professional success comes with significant costs. We argue that, if overlooked, this motivational consequence can reinforce stereotypes and inequality.