Socioeconomic status on psychology
The article ‘The effects of family socioeconomic status on psychological and neural mechanisms as well as their sex differences’ by Feng Kong (2019) discusses the impact that a person’s socioeconomic status has on their development. The author argues that a person’s socioeconomic status, especially a person’s income, has a significant impact on their neural and cognitive development (Kong, 2019). He further argues that young people from families that belong to a higher socioeconomic status have better memory and cognitive functions compared to those that belong to the low level class in society. They also have better executive functions, language and literacy abilities as well as a more efficient working memory.
The author makes a compelling argument when discussing how individuals with a higher socioeconomic status are associated with more complex self regulatory behaviors and tend to perform better in school. They have a relatively high sense of well being and use rational thinking rather than impulsive decision making (Kong, 2019). The effects tend to vary across genders with women belonging to low socioeconomic status being at a higher risk of cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality compared to men. The varying effects between men and women are because the two genders portray opposite neutral changes regarding to how they react to stressors (Kong, 2019). When exposed to a stressful event for example, the male hippocampus enhances in spine density while that in the female hippocampus reduces. Women have more stressors compared to their male counterparts and are therefore more likely to suffer from depression originating from social interactions.
In his article, Kong (2019) argues that women are more likely to be affected by the socioeconomic status compared to men. Although all genders are affected, women are more likely to fall into depression especially those that belong to the low social class in society’s social structure. They are also more likely to live in poverty and experience lower memory and cognitive functions compared to men.
In his article ‘the psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings and behavior’ Antony S. Manstead (2018) argues that the environment that a person grows up in and the experiences they go through have a lasting impact on their social and personal identities. A person’s social behavior can therefore be influenced by the socioeconomic status in which one grows up in and could even affect the attitudes they have towards their social environment (Manstead, 2018). People that belong to the lower working class for instance do not define themselves in relation to their socioeconomic status because they do not want to be associated with the low working class. They also tend to rely on situational terms when explaining social events and have a high tendency to develop interdependent self concepts resulting from their low sense of how much control they have over their lives and events that transpire around them.
Individuals in the middle working class on the other hand tend to have more empathy and are more likely to help others when they need assistance. People in the middle working class are however said to be prejudiced towards those in the lower working class and ethnic minorities (Manstead, 2018). Although the same can be said about people in the upper working class, the negative attitude towards people from low socioeconomic status is because those in the middle working class consider them an economic threat that could prevent them from rising up to the upper working class.
Manstead’s (2018) argument that the existence of middle working class norms in the workplace, schools and other prestigious institutions in society has led to people in the middle working class developing negative attitudes towards such institutions is backed by well researched information. Individuals that belong to the middle working class are said to be reluctant to apply for employment or educational positions in institutions that rely on middle class norms (Manstead, 2018). They are also less likely to be selected and even when they do get selected, most are likely to leave after a short time.
In addition, the differences that exist in people’s social economic status make it difficult for people to utilize resources and take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves. The differences that exist between people in terms of identity, behavior, cognition and other social class differences determine whether an individual will benefit from access to education and employment opportunities (Manstead, 2018). This creates an environment where social cohesion is threatened as some individuals are denied opportunities because they belong to a specific social class in society.
According to Ina Fassbender and Birgit Leyendecker (2018), people with high financial resources, better access to education and a higher socioeconomic status are more likely to have a better psychological well being. Since issues such as lack of access to good quality education results in unemployment and poverty, people living in the lower working class are more likely to live in poverty and suffer from depression (Fassbender & Leyendecker, 2018). Other than poverty, lack of employment is also a contributing factor for depression among adults. In their article ‘socioeconomic status and psychological well being in a sample of Turkish immigrant mothers in Germany’ the authors convincingly explain the effect that the socioeconomic status has on an individual varies across geographical boundaries.
In a study assessing the impact that socioeconomic factors have on immigrants, Fassbender and Leyendecker (2018) pointed out that Moroccan and Turkish immigrants have a different attitude towards income and how satisfied they are with their lives. For Moroccans, the level of satisfaction with the type of life one lives is dependent on the absolute income they receive. Turkish immigrants however rely on their relative income to determine their level of satisfaction with the life they live. Moroccans perceive life as being satisfactory when they have enough money to afford most of the amenities they need to lead a good life (Fassbender & Leyendecker, 2018). Their aspirations focus more on salary rather than job position and most feel more fulfilled when they get good salaries rather than promotion to a high position. Turkish immigrants on the other hand are more satisfied with life when they secure good positions in society.
From their findings, it is evident that individuals that belong to a high socioeconomic status achieved through education and income are more likely to be satisfied with the quality of life lived. A low socioeconomic status is can have a negative impact on an individual’s well being and greatly increases the chances of the individual falling into depression (Fassbender & Leyendecker, 2018). Although migrants tend to have varying opinions and attitudes towards the quality of life lived, the differences are as a result of their socioeconomic status rather than their country of origin. This is especially because immigrants who settle in the new country and have a higher socioeconomic status tend to be more satisfied with the quality of life compared to those with lower socioeconomic status.
References
Fassbender I and Leyendecker B, (2018) “The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings and behavior” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, retrieved from, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01586
Kong F, (2019). “The effects of family socioeconomic status on psychological and neural mechanisms as well as their sex differences” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, retrieved from, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00543
Manstead S, (2018). “Socioeconomic status and psychological well being in a sample of Turkish immigrant mothers in Germany” British Journal of Social Psychology, retrieved from, https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12251
