Possible
Explanations for Links Between Low Socioeconomic Status (SES) and Psychopathology
Research in many societies has revealed higher rates of psychopathology
among people of lower SES than people of higher SES. For adults, SES
is typically measured in terms of the adults' educational and/or occupational
attainments. The importance of SES is not merely as an index of income,
as higher rates of psychopathology are associated with low educational
and occupational attainment even in societies where incomes are fairly
uniform. The following hypotheses have been proposed to explain elevated
rates of major psychopathology, such as schizophrenia, among lower SES
adults: (a) The downward- drift (or social-selection)
hypothesis, which posits that disturbed adults drift down the SES ladder
because their psychopathology prevents them from attaining and maintaining
SES levels that would be expected from their parents' SES levels; and
(b) the social-causation hypothesis, which posits that
low SES environments increase risks for psychopathology. The downward-drift
hypothesis and social-causation hypotheses are not mutually exclusive:
Each hypothesis could help to explain elevated rates of different kinds
of psychopathology among lower SES adults. However, downward drift cannot
explain elevated rates of psychopathology among lower SES children,
because their SES levels are not dependent on their own educational
or occupational attainments. Consequently, social causation factors
can be tested more directly by tracking psychopathology from childhood
to young adulthood than in adulthood. Wadsworth and Achenbach (2005)
did this in a U.S. national sample of children and adolescents who were
initially assessed at ages 8 to 17 years and were then reassessed at
3-year-intervals for 9 years. Parents initially rated the subjects on
the ACQ Behavior Checklist, which included 115 problem items from the
CBCL. At subsequent reassessments, parents rated the subjects on the
CBCL until age 18 and then on the Young Adult Behavior Checklist (YABCL).
For low SES subjects, standardized problem scores rose significantly
across the subsequent assessments for all syndromes except Withdrawn.
By contrast, the problem scores of higher SES subjects did not change
significantly. Equally important, all significant increases in the proportions
of subjects with clinically elevated scores (>1 standard deviation
above the mean) were in the low-SES group. This means that the new incidence
of clinically elevated scores on all syndromes was significantly greater
for low SES than higher SES subjects. Over the 9 years of the study,
the cumulative prevalence of clinically elevated scores was significantly
higher for low SES subjects than for higher SES subjects on the Withdrawn,
Thought Problems, Attention Problems, Delinquent (now called Rule-Breaking)
Behavior, and Aggressive Behavior syndromes. In addition, significantly
lower remission rates were found for low SES subjects on the Withdrawn
and Somatic Complaints syndromes. Although genetic liabilities and other
factors are apt to contribute to psychopathology, the findings indicate
that low SES was associated with progressive increases and lower remission
rates for several forms of psychopathology from childhood to adulthood.
The lower remission rates might be explained by the finding that the
elevated incidence of psychopathology among lower SES subjects was not
accompanied by higher rates of mental health service usage.
Reference:
Wadsworth, M.E., & Achenbach, T.M. (2005). Explaining the Link Between
Low Socioeconomic Status and Psychopathology: Testing Two Mechanisms
of the Social Causation Hypothesis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 73,1146-1153.