Lacking socio‐economic status reduces subjective well‐being through perceptions of meta‐dehumanization

Author(s):  
Mario Sainz ◽  
Rocío Martínez ◽  
Miguel Moya ◽  
Rosa Rodríguez‐Bailón ◽  
Jeroen Vaes
Author(s):  
Katrin Steinvoord ◽  
Astrid Junge

Abstract Background It is well known that the socio-economic status (SES) has a great impact on adult and childhood well-being. Comparatively little research has been conducted on the relationship of adolescents’ subjective well-being to SES. Recent studies though, display a tendency for a strong relationship between adolescences’ subjective physical, mental and social well-being to SES. We therefore wanted to find out whether an association exists between SES and subjective physical, mental and social well-being among adolescents as well as between SES and individual school marks. Methods The cross-sectional data of 450 German adolescent students (average age 11 years old) were analysed. The data included socio-demographic variables, school marks and selected subscales of three well-established questionnaires [KIDSCREEN, Kid-Kindl® and the German version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ-deu)]. The Hamburg Social School Index (HSSI) was used as an indicator of SES. Results Significant differences between SES and physical (T = −2.04; p < 0.05) as well as social well-being (‘Social Support and Peers’ with T = −2.04; p < 0.05) of adolescents were found. Generally, no relations between SES and mental well-being were found. School marks also differed between low and high school SES [German (T = 3.13; p < 0.05), English (T = 5.38; p < 0.01), Mathematics (T = 3.16; p < 0.05) and Sports (T = 2.10; p < 0.05)]. Conclusion As health in adolescence is a predictor for health in adulthood, health promotion and prevention need to start early (primary school) to improve physical and social well-being in low SES families and schools.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-160
Author(s):  
Indah Rizki Ramadani ◽  
Herman Nirwana

One of the factors that influence subjective well-being (SWB) is socioeconomic status and gender. This study aims to analyze the differences in SWB of Minang adolescents based on socioeconomic status and gender. The research method used quantitative descriptive comparative with a sample of 182 Minang teenagers (9 people with high socioeconomic status, 76 moderate, and 97 people with low socioeconomic status, or 48 men and 134 women). The instruments used are the Socio-Economic Status List and the SWB Filling List. The data were analyzed using the Kolmogorov Smirnov test and the T test. The results showed that there was no difference in the SWB of Minang adolescents based on the socioeconomic status of their parents and by gender.


Urban Studies ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (7) ◽  
pp. 1692-1714 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yafei Liu ◽  
Martin Dijst ◽  
Stan Geertman

As a rapidly ageing population becomes an increasingly serious social challenge for Chinese megacities, issues affecting older adults’ subjective well-being (SWB) attract greater concern. However, it is difficult to gain a comprehensive understanding of older adults’ SWB, since most SWB theories focus only on specific factors. Moreover, residential environmental factors are hardly considered in studies of older adults’ SWB. In this paper we therefore investigate the effects of residential environment and individual resources on the SWB of older adults in Shanghai, using the integrative theoretical framework proposed by Lindenberg. We investigate the relationships between resources (residential environment and individual resources), needs satisfaction and SWB using multiple regression analysis. Our results show that the residential environment exerts a stronger impact on SWB than individual resources. Good quality residential building, good accessibility to medical and financial facilities, higher economic status of a neighbourhood, and a lower proportion of older adults in a neighbourhood are important environmental correlates of SWB. Health appears to be the most significant individual resource; other important individual resources include household income, a high-skilled occupation, a job in the public sector and living with grandchildren. Comfort is the most important basic need for older adults.


2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanwal Shahbaz ◽  
Dr. Kiran Shahbaz

The study was aimed to find the relationship between Spiritual Wellbeing and Quality of Life among chronically ill individuals. Likewise, relationship between demographic variables with Quality of Life and Spiritual Wellbeing were also reconnoitered. Non probability purposive sampling technique was used with chronically ill patients of 15yrs to 80yrs. For measuring spiritual wellbeing Urdu version of “Spiritual Wellness Inventory” (SWI-URDU) (Hanif, 2010) was used. Alternatively, for the measurement of Quality of life WHO Quality of Life Questionnaire (WHO-QOL-BREF) was used. A sample of 200 chronically ill patients were taken from four different hospitals of Rawalpindi and Islamabad. Reliabilities of both the instruments were computed as 0.90 for SWI and 0.74 for WHO-QOL-BREF. Findings show that quality of life and Spiritual wellbeing is positively related among chronically ill individuals. Males found to score high on spiritual wellbeing than females. Individuals with less education are more spiritually inclined as compared to individuals with high education. Quality of life was scored high by individuals with higher education as compared to less education. Married individuals were having better quality of life than unmarried, separated widow and divorced. Patients with middle socio-economic status were having better quality of life than higher and lower. Quality of life was high among individuals with better monthly income than those who have low and middle monthly incomes. Spiritual well being is higher in middle adolescents (15-17) than in late (18-20) adolescents. The current research can be implemented in designing the intervention plans for the betterment of chronically ill patients. It may also help us to develop an insight that each patient with same disease but in different age group and socio-economic status has different needs and plans of treatment and care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document