Article

The Local-Ladder Effect: Social Status and Subjective Well-Being

University of California, Berkeley—Haas School of Business, 545 Student Services Bldg. #1900, Berkeley, CA 94720-1900, USA.
Psychological Science (Impact Factor: 4.43). 05/2012; 23(7):764-71. DOI: 10.1177/0956797611434537
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Dozens of studies in different nations have revealed that socioeconomic status only weakly predicts an individual's subjective well-being (SWB). These results imply that although the pursuit of social status is a fundamental human motivation, achieving high status has little impact on one's SWB. However, we propose that sociometric status-the respect and admiration one has in face-to-face groups (e.g., among friends or coworkers)-has a stronger effect on SWB than does socioeconomic status. Using correlational, experimental, and longitudinal methodologies, four studies found consistent evidence for a local-ladder effect: Sociometric status significantly predicted satisfaction with life and the experience of positive and negative emotions. Longitudinally, as sociometric status rose or fell, SWB rose or fell accordingly. Furthermore, these effects were driven by feelings of power and social acceptance. Overall, individuals' sociometric status matters more to their SWB than does their socioeconomic status.

Full-text

Available from: Michael W Kraus, Apr 29, 2014
22 Followers
 · 
1,992 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The economic conditions of one's life can profoundly and systematically influence health outcomes over the life course. Our present research demonstrates that rejecting the notion that social class categories are biologically determined-a nonessentialist belief-buffers lower-class individuals from poor self-rated health and negative affect, whereas conceiving of social class categories as rooted in biology-an essentialist belief-does not. In Study 1, lower-class individuals self-reported poorer health than upper-class individuals when they endorsed essentialist beliefs but showed no such difference when they rejected such beliefs. Exposure to essentialist theories of social class also led lower-class individuals to report greater feelings of negative self-conscious emotions (Studies 2 and 3), and perceive poorer health (Study 3) than upper-class individuals, whereas exposure to nonessentialist theories did not lead to such differences. Discussion considers how lay theories of social class potentially shape long-term trajectories of health and affect of lower-class individuals. © 2015 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.
    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 01/2015; DOI:10.1177/0146167215569705 · 2.52 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: What makes low social status toxic to well-being? To internalize social status is to believe the self is responsible for it. We hypothesized that the more people internalize low subjective social status, the more their basic psychological needs are thwarted. Experiment 1 randomly assigned participants to imagine themselves in low, middle, or high social status and assessed their subjective social status internalization by independent ratings. The more participants internalized low status, the more they reported their basic psychological needs were thwarted. This effect did not appear among their higher status counterparts. Experiment 2 replicated and extended these findings using a behavioral manipulation of subjective social status and a self-report measure of internalization. We discuss implications for basic and action research.
    Self and Identity 03/2015; 14(2):157-172. DOI:10.1080/15298868.2014.965732 · 1.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Are the rich more unethical than the poor? To answer this question, the current research introduces a key conceptual distinction between selfish and unethical behavior. Based on this distinction, the current article offers 2 novel findings that illuminate the relationship between social class and unethical behavior. First, the effects of social class on unethical behavior are not invariant; rather, the effects of social class are moderated by whether unethical behavior benefits the self or others. Replicating past work, social class positively predicted unethical behavior; however, this relationship was only observed when that behavior was self-beneficial. When unethical behavior was performed to benefit others, social class negatively predicted unethical behavior; lower class individuals were more likely than upper class individuals to engage in unethical behavior. Overall, social class predicts people's tendency to behave selfishly, rather than predicting unethical behavior per se. Second, individuals' sense of power drove the effects of social class on unethical behavior. Evidence for this relationship was provided in three forms. First, income, but not education level, predicted unethical behavior. Second, feelings of power mediated the effect of social class on unethical behavior, but feelings of status did not. Third, two distinct manipulations of power produced the same moderation by self-versus-other beneficiary as was found with social class. The current theoretical framework and data both synthesize and help to explain a range of findings in the social class and power literatures. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 01/2015; 108(3). DOI:10.1037/pspi0000008 · 5.08 Impact Factor