IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v56y2003i6p1321-1333.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subjective social status: its determinants and its association with measures of ill-health in the Whitehall II study

Author

Listed:
  • Singh-Manoux, Archana
  • Adler, Nancy E.
  • Marmot, Michael G.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was twofold--(1) investigate the role of subjective social status as a predictor of ill-health, with a further exploration of the extent to which this relationship could be accounted for by conventional measures of socioeconomic position; (2) examine the determinants of a relatively new measure of subjective social status used in this study. A 10 rung self-anchoring scale was used to measure subjective social status in the Whitehall II study, a prospective cohort study of London-based civil service employees. Results indicate that subjective status is a strong predictor of ill-health, and that education, occupation and income do not explain this relationship fully for all the health measures examined. The results provide further support for the multidimensional nature of both social inequality and health. Multiple regression shows subjective status to be determined by occupational position, education, household income, satisfaction with standard of living, and feeling of financial security regarding the future. The results suggest that subjective social status reflects the cognitive averaging of standard markers of socioeconomic situation and is free of psychological biases.

Suggested Citation

  • Singh-Manoux, Archana & Adler, Nancy E. & Marmot, Michael G., 2003. "Subjective social status: its determinants and its association with measures of ill-health in the Whitehall II study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1321-1333, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:6:p:1321-1333
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(02)00131-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:56:y:2003:i:6:p:1321-1333. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.