The Role of Social Capital in Subjective Well-being among Rural Populations across Income Groups: A Study from Vietnam

IF 3.7 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2026-08-07 DOI:10.1007/s10902-026-01084-6

Trang Nguyen, Anh Thi Le

{"title":"The Role of Social Capital in Subjective Well-being among Rural Populations across Income Groups: A Study from Vietnam","authors":"Trang Nguyen, Anh Thi Le","doi":"10.1007/s10902-026-01084-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although numerous studies have emphasized the significant role of social capital in relation to subjective well-being, there remains limited understanding of the moderating role of income in the relationship between different forms of social capital and subjective well-being. This paper examines how different forms of social capital, namely bonding social capital, bridging social capital and linking social capital, affect subjective well-being among rural populations across income groups. Using data from the Vietnam Access to Resources Household Survey (VARHS) for the 2016–2020 period and Fixed-effects ordered logit model, the analysis reveals that income significantly moderates the relationship between social capital and subjective well-being. Notably, bonding social capital plays a more significant role for low-income individuals, whereas bridging and linking social capital are more influential among higher-income groups. The study contributes to the theoretical understanding of the relationship between social capital and subjective well-being under income heterogeneity in rural contexts and offers policy implications tailored to different income strata to improve well-being among rural residents.","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","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/s10902-026-01084-6","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

Although numerous studies have emphasized the significant role of social capital in relation to subjective well-being, there remains limited understanding of the moderating role of income in the relationship between different forms of social capital and subjective well-being. This paper examines how different forms of social capital, namely bonding social capital, bridging social capital and linking social capital, affect subjective well-being among rural populations across income groups. Using data from the Vietnam Access to Resources Household Survey (VARHS) for the 2016–2020 period and Fixed-effects ordered logit model, the analysis reveals that income significantly moderates the relationship between social capital and subjective well-being. Notably, bonding social capital plays a more significant role for low-income individuals, whereas bridging and linking social capital are more influential among higher-income groups. The study contributes to the theoretical understanding of the relationship between social capital and subjective well-being under income heterogeneity in rural contexts and offers policy implications tailored to different income strata to improve well-being among rural residents.

查看原文本刊更多论文

社会资本在不同收入群体农村人口主观幸福感中的作用：来自越南的研究

尽管许多研究都强调了社会资本在主观幸福感中的重要作用，但人们对收入在不同形式的社会资本和主观幸福感之间的关系中的调节作用的理解仍然有限。本文考察了不同形式的社会资本，即结合社会资本、桥接社会资本和连接社会资本，如何影响不同收入群体农村人口的主观幸福感。利用2016-2020年越南资源获取家庭调查（VARHS）数据和固定效应有序logit模型，分析发现收入显著调节了社会资本与主观幸福感之间的关系。值得注意的是，结合性社会资本对低收入人群的影响更大，而桥接性社会资本对高收入人群的影响更大。该研究有助于从理论上理解农村收入异质性背景下社会资本与主观幸福感的关系，并为提高农村居民幸福感提供针对性的政策启示。

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

Journal of Happiness Studies Multiple-

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?