Social Comparisons Under Pandemic Stress: Income Reference Groups, Comparison Patterns, and the Subjective Well-Being of German Students

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Antje Jantsch, Gertrud Buchenrieder, Thomas Dufhues, Judith Möllers
{"title":"Social Comparisons Under Pandemic Stress: Income Reference Groups, Comparison Patterns, and the Subjective Well-Being of German Students","authors":"Antje Jantsch, Gertrud Buchenrieder, Thomas Dufhues, Judith Möllers","doi":"10.1007/s10902-024-00790-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>People use social comparisons to reduce uncertainty when facing new or stressful situations. This study explores how a stressful experience, the COVID-19 pandemic, changed how people compare their income. It relates these changes to subjective well-being (SWB). We use a repeated cross-sectional dataset of students at two German universities from before and during the pandemic. A novel survey instrument is employed to identify individualized reference groups used for income comparison and to analyze whether the comparison pattern changed. Our results reveal that, while there was little change in the size of the reference groups, there was some difference in the group composition. During the pandemic, survey respondents were more likely to select two types of individuals into their reference groups: relatives and people they only knew from social media. Income comparisons were beginning to have a negative association with SWB, while the relation had been positive before the pandemic. Moreover, upward income comparisons increased.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00790-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

People use social comparisons to reduce uncertainty when facing new or stressful situations. This study explores how a stressful experience, the COVID-19 pandemic, changed how people compare their income. It relates these changes to subjective well-being (SWB). We use a repeated cross-sectional dataset of students at two German universities from before and during the pandemic. A novel survey instrument is employed to identify individualized reference groups used for income comparison and to analyze whether the comparison pattern changed. Our results reveal that, while there was little change in the size of the reference groups, there was some difference in the group composition. During the pandemic, survey respondents were more likely to select two types of individuals into their reference groups: relatives and people they only knew from social media. Income comparisons were beginning to have a negative association with SWB, while the relation had been positive before the pandemic. Moreover, upward income comparisons increased.

大流行病压力下的社会比较:德国学生的收入参照群体、比较模式和主观幸福感
人们在面对新情况或压力时,会通过社会比较来减少不确定性。本研究探讨了 COVID-19 大流行这一压力经历如何改变了人们比较收入的方式。研究将这些变化与主观幸福感(SWB)联系起来。我们使用了德国两所大学学生在大流行之前和期间的重复横截面数据集。我们采用了一种新颖的调查工具来确定用于收入比较的个性化参照群体,并分析比较模式是否发生了变化。我们的结果表明,虽然参照群体的规模变化不大,但群体构成却有一些差异。在大流行病期间,调查对象更倾向于选择两类人作为参照群体:亲戚和只在社交媒体上认识的人。收入比较开始与 SWB 呈负相关,而在大流行之前,这种关系一直是正的。此外,向上的收入比较有所增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
6.50%
发文量
110
期刊介绍: The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信