Socio-economic Status and Life satisfaction of Adolescents
Pooja Singh, Research Scholar, Banaras Hindu University
DOI - 10.5281/zenodo.10999163
Abstract
Satisfaction with life is determined by many factors in which socio-economic status is a major factor which has great impact on psychological well-being and life satisfaction of an individual. Previous studies showed the importance of educational, income and social status in determining the quality of life and well-being of human being. The present study examined the relationship of socio-economic status with life satisfaction of adolescents. A sample of 197 participants age ranged 14-18 years was taken from government schools of Varanasi City. Socio-economic status and satisfaction with life scale were administered to examine the participants. Findings of the present study revealed that socio-economic status is significantly and positively correlated with life satisfaction of adolescents. The findings and its implications will be discussed in the light of theoretical explanations.
Key words: socio-economic status, life-satisfaction, adolescents.
Introduction
Human beings are striving to fulfil their desires and wishes for the betterment of their life. It can be said that the ultimate aim of each human being is to get happiness. In the corporate world, the psychological sense of happiness is lost for mostly people. In fact, it is confined with materialistic things, for instance; “Diamond is forever” this famous advertisement indicates that individuals could be satisfied with life through the monetary success because it is the indicator of higher social status and happy life.
According to Diener (1984) life satisfaction refers to the person’s judgement of well-being and quality of life on the basis of the criteria which is defined by one’s own self. It is also conscious and cognitive judgement of one’s life in which criteria are determined by individual (Pavot & Diener, 1993). Thus, it is a process that goes on throughout one's life that determined by several criteria. Socioeconomic status is one of them which is very crucial for individual’s satisfaction with life, as wealthier people are more satisfied with their life than non-wealthier or poor one (Kahneman & Deaton, 2010).
Socio-economic Status and Life-satisfaction
Kaplan, Shema, Claudia and Leite (2008) found in their study that income over three decades was strongly associated with psychological well-being such as purpose in life, self-acceptance, personal growth, environmental mastery and autonomy, and psychological well-being increased with as income increases over time. Studies showed that along with many factors such as gender, age, absence of chronic health care needs, high social support, higher family income were also positively associated with better health related quality of life (Ginnakopoulos et. al, 2009). Furthermore, people with lower SES have more depressive symptoms than those who belong from higher SES (Miller & Taylor, 2012) and also higher level of social connectedness predicts well-being (Jose, Ryan & Pryor, 2012). A study conducted with female domestic worker of Mysore, Daraei and Mohajery (2013) found positive correlation between socioeconomic status and life satisfaction. Yan, Yang, Wang, You & Kong (2020) examined the relationship among subjective family socio-economic status (FSES), self-esteem (SE), social-support (SS) and life-satisfaction (LS) in Chinese adolescents. The mediational analysis revealed that subjective family socio-economic-status predicted life satisfaction through self-esteem, social support. The mediating role of health and subjective social status in the relationship of SES and life-satisfaction in old age among three (Finland, Poland and Spain) European countries revealed that health and subjective social status invariantly mediated the relationship between SES and life satisfaction (Moreno-Agostino et. al, 2019). Recently, Chen, Lin and Yan (2021) also studied the effect of social connectedness, cultural intelligence and socioeconomic status on life satisfaction of overseas students and reported that cultural intelligence mediate the relation between social connectedness and life satisfaction and furthermore socioeconomic status significantly moderated the relationship of social connectedness with cultural intelligence.
However, Biswas Diener and Diener (2001) examined the state of satisfaction in slum of Calcutta (India) and found that they did not report any kind of suffering, they reported that they had satisfactory social lives. Clemente and Sauer (1976) also reported negligible relationship between socioeconomic status and life satisfaction. Studies showed inconsistent findings in regard with the association of socioeconomic status with life satisfaction. Thus, the present study was aimed to assess the relationship of socio-economic status with life-satisfaction of adolescents.
Methodology
Sample:
The study was carried out with 197 participants age ranged 14-18 years (n=97male, n=100female) from government school of Varanasi. Socio-economic status scale (Dubey & Nigam, 2005) and satisfaction with life scale developed (Diener, Emmons, Larson & Griffin, 1985) were used to examine the participants.
Measures:
Satisfaction with Life Scale: This scale was developed by Diener, Emmons, Larsen and Griffin (1985) and contains 5 items. All items were keyed in positive direction and test-retest reliability of this scale wass 0.84. The Hindi adapted version was used in the present study and sample item of this scale was: “My life is almost close to my ideal life”. The participants were asked to rate their responses on seven-point scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree.
Socio-economic Status Scale: This scale was developed by Dubey and Nigam (2005) to measure socio-economic status of participants belonging to urban areas in Hindi language. It examined three important areas of life namely economic status, educational status, social status. It consisted of total 30 items and each domain have 10 items with four appropriate options. The reliability of the scale was 0.81 and the sample item of this scale was: “What is approximate total monthly income of your family?”
Results and Discussion
Product moment correlation was computed to examine the relationship between socio-economic condition and life satisfaction among adolescents and t-test was also computed to examine the significant difference between male and female on life satisfaction and socioeconomic status.
Table 1: Mean, SD, significant difference between male and female on life satisfaction and Socioeconomic status
Variable MALE FEMALE t-test
Life satisfaction
Mean 21.58 21.81 0.317
SD 4.84 5.00
Socioeconomic status
Mean 69.05 70.33 0.732
SD 12.91 11.57
Table 1, present mean, SD, and significant difference (t-test) of male and female participants on life-satisfaction. Finding revealed that both male and female have similar mean score but slightly different and t-value showed no significant difference. So, there is no significant difference was found on life-satisfaction and socioeconomic status between male and female.
Variables Life satisfaction
Socio-economic status 0.210**
Table 2: Correlation coefficient of life satisfaction with socio-economic status
**P<.01
Table 2, present correlation between socio-economic status and life satisfaction of adolescents. Result showed significant positive correlation between socio-economic status and life-satisfaction (0.210, p<.01).
The present study examined the relationship of socio-economic status with life-satisfaction of adolescents. Finding of the present study revealed significant positive correlation between socio-economic status and life-satisfaction. Previous studies also supported that socio-economic status positively and strongly correlated with life satisfaction (Barger, Donoho & wayment, 2009; Douhitt, Macdonald, & Mullis, 1992) negatively with psychological distress (Kessler & Cleary, 1980). Additionally, socio-economic status, social network, competence was also found positively correlated with subjective well-being, life-satisfaction, happiness and self-esteem (Pinquart & Soresen, 2000). Therefore, studies showed socio-economic status has positive correlation with life satisfaction and well-being which suggests that a good education, income, social status are crucial factors for quality of life and psychological health.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that socio-economic status and life satisfaction are positively associated to each other, suggesting that better socio-economic status and satisfaction with life might be possible component to enhance quality of life in present time. There is need to do more extensive research to find out causal factors for life satisfaction
Implication of the study
Findings of the present study suggests there is need to do more extensive research to find out causal factors for life satisfaction as well as encourage researchers to investigate the underlying mechanism of the relationship of life-satisfaction with socio-economic status.
References
Barger, S. D., Donoho, C. J., Wayment, H. A. (2009). The relative contribution of race/ ethnicity, socioeconomic status, health, and social relationships to life satisfaction the United States. Quality of Life Research, 18(2),179-189.
Biswas-Diener, R., & Diener, E. (2001). Making the best of a bad situation: Satisfaction in the slums of Calcutta. In E. Diener (Eds.), Culture and well-being (pp. 261-278). Springer, Dordrecht.
Chen, A. S. Y., Lin, G. H., & Yan, H. W. (2021). Staying connected: Effects of social connectedness, cultural intelligence, and socioeconomic status on overseas students’ life satisfaction. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 83, 151-162.
Clemente, F.; Sauer, W. J. (1976). Life satisfaction in the United States. Social Forces, 54(3), 621–631.
Daraei, M., Mohajery, A. (2013). The impact of socioeconomic status on life-satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 112, 69-81.
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., & Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 21, 542-546.
Douhitt, R. A., Macdonald, M., & Mullis, R. (1992). The relationship between measures of subjective and economic well-being: A new look. Social Indicators Research, 26, 407-422.
Dubey, L. N., & Nigam, B. (2005). Socio-economic status scale (Urban form). Saraswati Shiksha Mahavidhyalaya: Jabalpur.
George, L. K. (2002). Life satisfaction. In J.R.M. Copeland, M. T. Abou-Saleh, & D. G. Blazer (Eds.), Principles and practice of geriatric psychiatry (2 nd ed., pp.75-77). New York, London: Wiley.
Ginnakopoulos, G., Dimitrakapi, C., Pedeli, X., Kolaitis, G., Rostika, V., Ravensieberer, U., Tountas, Y. ( 2009). Adolescent’s well-being and functioning: Relationship with parents subjective general physical and mental health. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes,7(1), 100. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-7-100
Jose, P. E., Ryan, N. and Pryor, J. (2012). Does Social Connectedness Promote a Greater Sense of Well-Being in Adolescence Over Time? Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22(2), 235–251.
Kahneman, D., Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 107(38),16489-16493.
Kaplan, G., Shema, S. J., Claudia, M., Leite, A. (2008). Socio-economic determinants of psychological well-being. An Epidemoil, 18(7), 531-537.
Kessler, R. C., & Cleary, P. D. (1980). Social class and psychological distress. American Sociological Review, 45, 463-478.
Miller, Taylor. (2012). Racial and socio-economic status differences in depressive symptoms among black and white youth: An examination of the mediating effects of family structure, stress and support. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(4), 426-437.
Moreno-Agostino, D., de la Fuente, J., Leonardi, M., Koskinen, S., Tobiasz-Adamczyk, B., Sánchez-Niubò, A., Chatergee, S., Haro, J. M., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., Miret, M. (2019). Mediators of the socio-economic status and life satisfaction relationship in older adults: A multi-country structural equation modeling approach. Aging & Mental Health.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life-scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164-172.
Pinquart, M., Soresen, S. (2000). Influences of socio-economic status, social network, and competence on subjective well-being in later life: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 15, 187-224.
Yan, W., Yang, K., Wang, Q., You, X., & Kong, F. (2020). Subjective family socio-economic status and life satisfaction in Chinese adolescents: The mediating role of self-esteem and social support. Youth & Society. doi:10.1177/0044118x20941344.