Socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: The mediating role of class identity and social activities

Baoqin Wang; Hang Zhao; Hao Shen; Yi Jiang

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0291325

. 2023 Sep 15;18(9):e0291325. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291325

Socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: The mediating role of class identity and social activities

Baoqin Wang ^1,^2,^#, Hang Zhao ^1,^2,^#, Hao Shen ^1,², Yi Jiang ^1,^2,^*

Editor: Petri Böckerman³

PMCID: PMC10503752 PMID: 37713386

Abstract

Background

Subjective well-being has a significant impact on an individual’s physical and mental health. Socioeconomic status, class identity, and social activity participation play important roles in subjective well-being. Therefore, the aim of this study was to uncover the mechanisms through which these factors influence subjective well-being.

Methods

A total of 1926 valid samples were recruited using the Chinese General Social Survey 2021 (CGSS 2021). The Chinese Citizen’s Subjective Well-Being Scale (SWBS-CC) was employed to assess subjective well-being. Socioeconomic status was measured using income and education, and class identity and social activity participation were measured using Likert scales. Pearson correlation analysis and the chain mediation model were conducted to explore the relationship between these factors. Finally, the Bootstrap method was used to examine the path coefficients.

Results

A significant correlation was found between socioeconomic status, class identity, social activity, and subjective well-being (p < 0.01). The indirect effect of socioeconomic status on subjective well-being mediated by class identity was 0.351 (95% CI: 0.721, 1.587), while the indirect effect of socioeconomic status on subjective well-being mediated by social activity was 0.380 (95% CI: 0.059, 0.240). The effect mediated by both class status and social activities was 0.011 (95% CI: 0.010, 0.093).

Conclusions

The study showed that socioeconomic status, class identity, and social activity had significant effects on subjective well-being. Class identity and social activity partially mediated the effects of socioeconomic status on subjective well-being, and they had a chain mediating effect between socioeconomic status and subjective well-being. Therefore, policymakers have the opportunity to enhance subjective well-being in lower socioeconomic status groups by promoting individual class identity and encouraging greater social activity participation.

Introduction

Subjective well-being (SWB) and its determinants have garnered extensive scholarly attention, and research in this area is expanding. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union (EU) advocate for prioritizing the well-being of individuals in policy design [1]. Subjective well-being reflects an individual’s social functioning and adaptation to the environment, comprising life satisfaction, the experience of positive emotions, and the absence of negative emotions [2]. Subjective well-being served as a robust predictor of overall health and well-being. Research has shown that SWB has a protective effect on health [3], and individuals with higher SWB tend to experience better health outcomes and longer life expectancy [4]. Furthermore, SWB was an important indicator of successful aging in a country or region [5]. Therefore, it is necessary to extensively explore the factors and potential pathways influencing SWB.

Socioeconomic status (SES) is an essential influencing factor for SWB. Research has shown that SES could contribute to SWB through various external and internal mechanisms. Stress theory could elaborate on the mechanisms and pathways through which SES can influence well-being, especially the concepts of coping resources and stressors. Individuals with higher SES tended to enjoy better life circumstances and more social resources, buffering the effects of adverse events [6, 7]. Furthermore, individuals with higher SES were exposed less to stressful and uncontrollable life events, which were associated with higher SWB [8]. Subjective class identity is an individual’s perception of their position in the social class structure, reflecting the individual’s internalization, adaptation, and acceptance of the social environment and group [9]. Class identity depends heavily on the degree of individual demand fulfillment. Higher demand fulfillment was associated with higher SWB [10]. Social comparison theory suggests that people determine their values and the realization of their demands by comparing themselves to others [11]. Therefore, the SWB of individuals depends not only on their SES and class identity but also on their perceptions of their position relative to others. Similarly, engaging in social activities played an important role in the well-being of the population. Social support theory emphasizes the importance of social relationships and the support individuals receive from their social networks [12]. Participation in social activities was associated with more active social networks [13, 14]. These social networks provided emotional, informational, and instrumental support that facilitated the reduction of isolation and stress and increased resilience and SWB [15].

Abundant evidence has demonstrated a positive correlation between SES and social class identity. Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital emphasizes the importance of cultural capital in shaping social class identity [16, 17], such as education, cultural resources, and social skills. However, cultural capital acquisition is often influenced by SES [18]. For example, individuals from higher SES backgrounds were more likely to have access to high-quality education, exposure to arts and cultural experiences, and opportunities to develop cultural tastes and skills [19, 20]. The social identity theory also explained the association between SES and class identity. Social identity theory suggests that people tend to categorize themselves based on various social dimensions, especially SES [21]. Individuals with similar SES often have shared experiences and challenges, contributing to the development of a common class identity. Research has shown the significant and positive impact of SES and class identity on individuals’ engagement in social activities [22]. Based on stress theory, higher SES and class identity were associated with more social support and fewer stressors, possibly promoting individuals to engage more in social activities [23]. Individuals with higher SES and class identity typically had access to a wider range of social support and resources, which could facilitate participation in social activities [24, 25].

In conclusion, although the effect of SES on SWB has been explored, few previous scholars have examined the mediating role of class identity and social activities. Therefore, we used the chain mediation model to examine the potential relationship among SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB. The above theories and literature have revealed the interconnections among SES, class identity, and social activities, emphasizing their importance as influences on SWB. Based on these, the conceptual framework (shown in Fig 1) and the following hypotheses were proposed: 1) there is a significant association between SES, class identity, participation in social activities, and SWB; 2) class identity and participation in social activities mediate between SES and SWB; 3) class identity and social activity participation have a chain-mediated role between SES and SWB.

Methods

Data

The data available for this study was from the Chinese General Social Survey of 2021 (CGSS 2021), a nationwide program that commenced in 2003 to investigate various social, political, economic, and cultural changes in Chinese society. This comprehensive and continuous database was collected systematically at multiple levels, ranging from Chinese individuals and families to communities and social groups. In 2021, the CGSS adopted a multi-stage stratified probability sampling method and covered 30 provinces in mainland China to ensure good scientific and national representativeness.

The CGSS was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The Ethics Committees of Renmin University of China and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology are responsible for ethical approval and consent to participate. We received authorization to use the publicly accessible CGSS. This study was conducted based on de-identified publicly available CGSS data, which is available at http://cgss.ruc.edu.cn/. Therefore, ethical approval or informed consent was no longer required for this study.

The total number of survey samples was 8,148. The CGSS 2021 collected data on demographic characteristics, SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB, which provided the basis for our study. After excluding observations with important missing data, a total of 1926 participants were included in this study (18 years and above).

Measure

Subjective Well-being was measured using the Subjective Well-Being Scale for Chinese Citizens (SWBS-CC), which was proposed by mainland Chinese scholar Xing Zhanjun [26]. The scale includes 20 items covering dimensions such as mental health, social confidence, growth and progress, goal value, self-acceptance, physical health, mental balance, and interpersonal adjustment, which is a valid measure for studies of urban residents in mainland China [27, 28]. The scale exhibited strong reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.838) and validity (KMO = 0.864). Participants rated the scale using a 6-point Likert scale, and the total score was computed by summing all the responses. The range of SWB was 20–120, with higher total scores indicating better well-being.

The present study employed SES as a key variable. Following relevant studies, we employed education and income as measures of SES [29–31]. Education was categorized as follows: (1) uneducated, (2) primary school and below, (3) middle school, (4) high school, and (5) college and higher. Personal income was stratified into quantities (1–5) based on annual earnings [32]. To create the SES composite score, standardized z-scores for education and income were averaged.

According to social identity theory, social identity derives primarily from group membership or qualifications and is rooted in people’s subjective perceptions of their class identity. To measure class identity, self-rated class identity was used based on previous research [33]. The CGSS asked the question about class identity: "In general, where do you personally stand in the current society?" Responses were recorded on a 10-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating higher levels of class identity.

Based on previous studies [34, 35], the social activity of participants in the past year was measured by 12 items with acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.674) and validity (KMO = 0.782). The questions focused on outdoor leisure activities, including watching television or videos, going to the cinema, shopping, reading books/newspapers/magazines, attending cultural events, gathering with relatives, meeting with friends, listening to music at home, participating in physical activity, watching live sports, doing crafts, and surfing the Internet. These entries were rated using a 5-point Likert scale. Answers were set to (1) never, (2) several times a year or less, (3) several times a month, (4) several times a week, and (5) every day. The total score of social activities was calculated by summing the 12 entries. The range of social activities was 12–60, with higher total scores implying higher levels of activity.

We included several control variables to improve the estimation accuracy, including age, gender, ethnicity, marriage, household registration, and self-rated health. Ethnicity was divided into Han and others, and household registration was divided into urban and rural. Marital status was classified as: unmarried, divorced, and widowed; married and having a spouse. The self-assessment of health was based on the question, "How do you feel about your current state of health?", with values from 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good).

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses were conducted in STATA version 17.0. A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical descriptions were described by the mean and standard deviation (for continuous variables) and frequency and percentages (for categorical variables). Pearson correlation analysis was used to investigate the correlation between key variables. A chain mediation model analysis was employed to explore the relationship between SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB. Control variables were included in all path analyses to improve the reliability of the estimation results. Considering the potential heteroskedasticity problem in the cross-sectional data, we used robust standard errors for estimation. Finally, the total and indirect effects and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were tested using bootstrapping with 1000 iterations.

Results

Descriptive statistics

Table 1 displays the descriptive statistics of the participants. A total of 1926 individuals were selected from the Chinese General Social Survey 2021 (CGSS 2021). Of these, 883 (45.85%) were male and 1043 (54.15%) were female. More than 90% of the participants were of Han Chinese ethnicity. Additionally, approximately 75% were either married or had a spouse, and approximately 68% resided in rural areas. The percentages of participants with very poor, poor, fair, good, and very good health were 4.41%, 12.25%, 28.19%, 36.14%, and 19.00%, respectively. The mean of age, SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB were 49.43, 0.00, 4.35, 28.22, and 86.99, respectively.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of participant characteristics.

Variable	Mean (SD)/ Frequency (%)
Socioeconomic status	0.00 (0.84)
Class identity	4.35(1.86)
Social activities	28.22(6.58)
Subjective well-being	86.99(11.73)
Age (years)	49.93(16.80)
Gender
Female	1043 (54.15)
Male	883(45.85)
Ethnic
Non-Han	130(6.75)
Han	1796 (93.25)
Marriage
Unmarried	479(24.87)
Married	1447(75.13)
Household registration
Rural	1310(68.02)
Urban	616(31.98)
Self-rated health
Very poor	85(4.41)
Poor	236(12.25)
Fair	543(28.19)
Good	696(36.14)
Very good	366(19.00)

Open in a new tab

Correlation analysis

As shown in Table 2, the results of the correlation analysis indicated the mutually significant correlations between SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB (p < 0.001). Consistent with our hypotheses, SES showed positive correlations with class identity (r = 0.130, p < 0.001), social activity (r = 0.486, p < 0.001), and SWB (r = 0.180, p < 0.001). Class identity was positively associated with social activity (r = 0.154, p < 0.001) and SWB (r = 0.276, p < 0.001), while social activity was positively related to SWB (r = 0.191, p < 0.001). Based on the correlation analysis, we further conducted a chain mediation model analysis to explore the possible associations among these variables.

Table 2. The results of Pearson correlation analysis.

Variable	Socioeconomic status	Class identity	Social activities	Subjective well-being
Socioeconomic status	1
Class identity	0.130^***	1
Social activities	0.486^***	0.154^***	1
Subjective well-being	0.180^***	0.276^***	0.191^***	1

Open in a new tab

Note

* p < 0.05

** p < 0.01

*** p < 0.001

Mediating effect analysis

The analysis of the chain mediation model included four multiple linear regressions, each accounting for covariates. Table 3 and Fig 2 present the results of the chain mediation analysis for this study. In the total effects model, SES was a significant predictor of residents’ SWB (β = 1.583, p < 0.01). This relationship remained significant when class identity and social activity were also considered (β = 0.841, p < 0.05). Furthermore, SES has a significant effect on class identity (β = 0.289, p < 0.01) and social activity (β = 2.699, p < 0.01). Class identity and social activity were also significant predictors of SWB, with corresponding coefficients of 1.213 (p < 0.01) and 0.141 (p < 0.01). Class identity was a significant predictor of social activity, with a coefficient of 0.274 (p < 0.05). Using these path coefficients, the corresponding indirect effects were calculated. The indirect effects of SES on SWB, mediated by class identity and social activity, were 0.351 and 0.380, respectively. The chain mediation effect was 0.011, indicating that the effect of SES on SWB was transmitted between the mediating variables.

Table 3. Multiple stepwise regression results.

Variable	Subjective well-being	Class identity	Social activity	Subjective well-being
Socioeconomic status	1.583^*** (0.858, 2.308)	0.289^*** (0.178, 0.401)	2.699^*** (2.339, 3.059)	0.841^** (0.090, 1.592)
Class identity			0.274^*** (0.133, 0.415)	1.213^*** (0.948, 1.478)
Social activity				0.141^*** (0.053, 0.228)
Age	0.099^*** (0.064, 0.133)	0.014^*** (0.009, 0.020)	-0.077^*** (-0.095, -0.058)	0.091^*** (0.057, 0.125)
Gender
Female
Male	-0.124 (-1.127, 0.879)	-0.406^*** (-0.571, -0.242)	-0.803^*** (-1.316, -0.291)	0.497 (-0.488, 1.482)
Ethnic
Non-Han
Han	0.106 (-1.737, 1.949)	-0.275^* (-0.593, 0.043)	-0.009 (-0.914, 0.896)	0.451 (-1.355, 2.258)
Marriage
Married or have a spouse
Unmarried, divorced or widowed	1.419^** (0.226, 2.611)	0.028 (-0.174, 0.230)	-0.181 (-0.765, 0.403)	1.409^** (0.256, 2.562)
Hukou
Rural
Urban	0.228 (-0.923, 1.379)	0.163^* (-0.011, 0.338)	1.210^*** (0.636, 1.784)	-0.146 (-1.277, 0.984)
Health	4.399^*** (3.890, 4.907)	0.339^*** (0.249, 0.429)	0.729^*** (0.468, 0.990)	3.872^*** (3.371, 4.373)
Constant	65.353^*** (62.169, 68.538)	2.799^*** (2.238, 3.359)	28.414^*** (26.742, 30.086)	57.854^*** (53.700, 62.008)
Observations	1926	1926	1926	1926
R-Square	0.171	0.065	0.311	0.212

Open in a new tab

Note

* p < 0.1

** p < 0.05

*** p < 0.01

Finally, we used the bootstrap method to verify the total, direct, and indirect effects. As shown in Table 4, all the pathways were significant (p < 0.05). Specifically, the indirect effect of SES mediated by class identity on the SWB of residents was 0.351 (95% CI: 0.721, 1.587), whereas the indirect effect of SES on residents’ SWB mediated by social activity was 0.380 (95% CI: 0.059, 0.240). The chain mediation effect, which was mediated by both class identity and social activity, was 0.011 (95% CI: 0.010, 0.093). The total indirect, direct, and total effects of SES on SWB were 0.742 (95% CI: 0.891, 1.784), 0.841 (95% CI: 1.670, 3.148), and 1.583 (95% CI: 3.168, 4.281), respectively. All path effects were significant, suggesting the robustness of the mediation model results.

Table 4. Bootstrap test results for multiple intermediary models.

Paths	Observed Coefficient	Bootstrap Standard Error	P	Lower	Upper
Indirect effect via class identity	0.351	0.080	0.000	0.721	1.587
Indirect effect via social activities	0.380	0.123	0.002	0.059	0.240
Indirect effect via class identity and social activities	0.011	0.005	0.032	0.010	0.093
Total indirect effect	0.742	0.152	0.000	0.891	1.784
Direct effect	0.841	0.389	0.030	1.670	3.148
Total effect	1.583	0.374	0.000	3.168	4.281

Open in a new tab

Note: LLCI, lower level for confidence interval; ULCI, upper level for confidence interval.

Discussion

In this study, we employed a chain mediation model to explore the relationship between SES, class identity, social activity participation, and SWB. As hypothesized, both class identity and social activity partially mediated the relationship between SES and SWB. Moreover, class identity and social activity participation exhibited a chain mediating effect in connecting SES with SWB. The robustness of the mediation analysis was confirmed through Bootstrap analyses.

The findings of this study supported both the direct effect (53.13%) and the indirect effect (46.87%) of SES on SWB, consistent with previous research [36, 37]. Several possible explanations could elaborate on the mechanism underlying this effect. Individuals with lower SES have experienced more negative emotions and stress, which may impair life satisfaction and SWB [38]. Moreover, lower SES was associated with unhealthy behaviors and limited leisure time, both of which can contribute to impaired SWB [39]. Conversely, favorable SES could facilitate access to more social support, educational resources, and material conditions, leading to increased personal resilience and coping capacity [40, 41]. Therefore, it is necessary to prioritize vulnerable groups with low SES and provide them with more material and spiritual support to enhance their SWB.

The result of the chain mediation model suggested that class identity served as a mediator between SES and SWB, accounting for 22.17% of the total effect. Class identity was rooted in socioeconomic resources and was a subjective mapping of SES [42]. Specifically, prior research suggested that higher SES is associated with greater political, cultural, and economic support, which potentially reinforces class identity [43]. Furthermore, class identity was influenced by subjective emotions, personality, values, and expectations, all of which exerted a consistent influence on SWB [44]. For instance, Pettit et al. found that class identity probably impacted SWB by shaping personal expectations and overall satisfaction [45]. Meanwhile, individuals with a stronger class identity were vulnerable to respect, recognition, and support, which positively impacted SWB through increased self-esteem, belonging, and social connectedness [46].

Similarly, the results from the mediation modeling showed that social activity participation mediated between SES and SWB, accounting for 24.01% of the total effect. Besides, the presence of a chain-mediated effect of class identity and social activity participation between SES and SWB was confirmed. Both SES and class identity are essential determinants of participation in social activities [47]. Scholars have found that individuals with higher SES usually possess better resources, social networks, and communication opportunities, which foster a supportive environment for participation in social activities [48, 49]. As stated in Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital, social class identity is associated with educational and cultural resources [50], contributing to a broader scope of activities and qualifications for participation. Furthermore, social activities play a crucial role in combating feelings of loneliness and social isolation [51]. It provided opportunities for positive interaction, emotional support, self-fulfillment, and the development of intimate relationships. As an example, Zhang et al. found that positive feedback (e.g., praise, respect, and appreciation) received during social interactions positively influenced mental health and self-esteem [52]. Moreover, active participation in activities contributed not only to the development of a sense of belonging and social connectedness but also to social adaptation and psychological resilience [53]. All of these benefits could mitigate the negative impacts of SES and perceived class disadvantage, thereby contributing to increased SWB.

Based on the chain mediator model, we verified the conceptual framework and the three hypotheses. Notably, class identity and social activity had similar mediating effects, suggesting that both make meaningful contributions to how SES affects SWB (22.13% and 24.01%). These findings underscore the multifaceted dimension of SWB and the necessity to consider factors other than economic resources when addressing individual and community well-being. Incorporating social identity and participation in social activities into well-being improvement programs could lead to a more holistic and inclusive approach to improving SWB.

This study has several advantages. Firstly, as far as we know, this is the first study to examine the chain mediating effects of class identity and social activity participation on SES and SWB. This comprehensive exploration sheds light on the sequential mediation of the relationship between SES and SWB by class identity and social activity participation. Secondly, the study benefits from the use of well-represented and scientifically sound CGSS data, facilitating an examination of the mechanism between SES and SWB within a specific cultural context. Thirdly, by integrating class identity and participation in social activities as a mediator, this study provides a novel perspective on the psychological mechanisms through which SES influences SWB. However, the present study has several limitations. Firstly, this study adopts a cross-sectional design, possibly limiting the causal relationship between critical variables. A longitudinal design investigating causal effects could be conducted in future studies. Secondly, the mediating effect is approximately 46.87%, which suggests potentially unobserved roles and mechanisms. Future research should explore additional potential factors. Finally, the reliability of our results may be undermined due to potential bias in the self-reported data.

Conclusion

Based on nationally representative data and the chain mediation model, this study investigated the mechanisms between SES, class identity, social activities, and SWB. The findings reveal a positive relationship between these four factors. Class identity and social activity partially mediated the effect of SES on SWB, and they had a chain mediating effect between SES and SWB. The results of this study have implications for improving residents’ SWB. This positive mediation mechanism suggests that policymakers have the opportunity to enhance SWB in lower SES groups by promoting individual class identity and encouraging greater social activity participation. For instance, policymakers and practitioners can design empowerment programs that foster a sense of belonging and community while also providing opportunities for social engagement and support.

Acknowledgments

We thank Chinese General Social Survey for their excellent work in database design and data collection and for allowing free access to the data.

Data Availability

All data files are available from the Chinese General Social Survey 2021 database(URL:http://www.cnsda.org/index.php?r=projects/view&id=65635422).

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

1.John Helliwell RL, Sachs Jeffrey D., Jan-Emmanuel De Neve, Aknin Lara B., Shun Wang. World Happiness Report Sustainable Development Solutions Network 2023. [Google Scholar]
2.Diener E. Subjective well-being. The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. The American psychologist. 2000;55(1):34–43. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.34 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3.Martin-Maria N, Miret M, Felix Caballero F, Alejandra Rico-Uribe L, Steptoe A, Chatterji S, et al. The Impact of Subjective Well-being on Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies in the General Population. Psychosomatic Medicine. 2017;79(5):565–75. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000444 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4.Lasselin J, Alvarez-Salas E, Grigoleit J-S. Well-being and immune response: a multi-system perspective. Current Opinion in Pharmacology. 2016;29:34–41. doi: 10.1016/j.coph.2016.05.003 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5.Tovel H, Carmel S. Maintaining Successful Aging: The Role of Coping Patterns and Resources. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2014;15(2):255–70. doi: 10.1007/s10902-013-9420-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
6.George LK. Still Happy After All These Years: Research Frontiers on Subjective Well-being in Later Life. Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. 2010;65(3):331–9. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbq006 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7.Simone PM, Haas AL. Frailty, Leisure Activity and Functional Status in Older Adults: Relationship With Subjective Well Being. Clinical Gerontologist. 2013;36(4):275–93. doi: 10.1080/07317115.2013.788114 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
8.Zhao S, Du H, Li Q, Wu Q, Chi P. Growth mindset of socioeconomic status boosts subjective well-being: A longitudinal study. Personality and Individual Differences. 2021;168:110301. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110301 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9.Yang C, Li Z, Liu W. Chinese residents’ subjective class identity and physical activity participation mechanism. Frontiers in Public Health. 2022;10:852683. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.852683 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8907615. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10.Wiese CW, Kuykendall L, Tay L. Get active? A meta-analysis of leisure-time physical activity and subjective well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 2018;13(1):57–66. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2017.1374436 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
11.Paul S, Guilbert D. Income–happiness paradox in Australia: Testing the theories of adaptation and social comparison. Economic Modelling. 2013;30:900–10. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.08.034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
12.Maier C, Laumer S, Eckhardt A, Weitzel T. Giving too much social support: social overload on social networking sites. European Journal of Information Systems. 2015;24(5):447–64. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2014.3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
13.Litwin H. Activity, social network and well-being: An empirical examination. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement. 2000;19(3):343–62. doi: 10.1017/s0714980800015038 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
14.Luo M, Ding D, Bauman A, Negin J, Phongsavan P. Social engagement pattern, health behaviors and subjective well-being of older adults: an international perspective using WHO-SAGE survey data. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):1–10. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7841-7 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15.Denovan A, Macaskill A. Building resilience to stress through leisure activities: A qualitative analysis. Annals of Leisure Research. 2017;20(4):446–66. doi: 10.1080/11745398.2016.1211943 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
16.Farkas G. Family, schooling, and cultural capital. Handbook of the Sociology of Education in the 21st Century. 2018:3–38. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-76694-2_1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
17.France A, Bottrell D, Haddon E. Managing everyday life: the conceptualisation and value of cultural capital in navigating everyday life for working-class youth. Journal of Youth Studies. 2013;16(5):597–611. doi: 10.1080/13676261.2012.733814 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
18.Uphoff EP, Pickett KE, Cabieses B, Small N, Wright J. A systematic review of the relationships between social capital and socioeconomic inequalities in health: a contribution to understanding the psychosocial pathway of health inequalities. International journal for equity in health. 2013;12:1–12. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-12-54 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3726325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19.Bone JK, Bu F, Fluharty ME, Paul E, Sonke JK, Fancourt D. Who engages in the arts in the United States? A comparison of several types of engagement using data from The General Social Survey. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):1349. Epub 2021/07/10. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11263-0 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8264486. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20.Zhou M. Segmented assimilation and socio-economic integration of Chinese immigrant children in the USA. Belonging to the Nation. 2016:15–26. doi: 10.1080/01419870.2014.874566 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
21.Magee JC, Galinsky AD. 8 social hierarchy: The self‐reinforcing nature of power and status. The academy of management annals. 2008;2(1):351–98. doi: 10.1080/19416520802211628 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
22.Deng Q, Liu W. Physical Exercise, Social Interaction, Access to Care, and Community Service: Mediators in the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Health Among Older Patients With Diabetes. Front Public Health. 2020;8:589742. Epub 2020/11/10. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.589742 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7581780. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23.Hamamura T. Social class predicts generalized trust but only in wealthy societies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2012;43(3):498–509. doi: 10.1177/0022022111399649 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
24.Ursache A, Noble KG, Blair C. Socioeconomic status, subjective social status, and perceived stress: Associations with stress physiology and executive functioning. Behavioral Medicine. 2015;41(3):145–54. doi: 10.1080/08964289.2015.1024604 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4722863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
25.Oliveira AJ, Lopes CS, de Leon ACP, Rostila M, Griep RH, Werneck GL, et al. Social support and leisure-time physical activity: longitudinal evidence from the Brazilian Pró-Saúde cohort study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2011;8:1–10. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-77 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3199735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
26.Xing Z. Developing the brief subjective well-being scale for Chinese citizen. Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medical Science. 2003;12(6):703–5. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-6554.2003.06.054 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
27.Zhang J, Zheng Y, Wen T, Yang M. The impact of built environment on physical activity and subjective well-being of urban residents: A study of core cities in the Yangtze River Delta survey. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022;13:1050486. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1050486 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9773078. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28.Li X, Ren Z, Ji T, Shi H, Zhao H, He M, et al. Associations of sleep quality, anxiety symptoms and social support with subjective well-being among Chinese perimenopausal women. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2022;302:66–73. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2022.01.089 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29.Murayama H, Liang J, Bennett JM, Shaw BA, Botoseneanu A, Kobayashi E, et al. Socioeconomic status and the trajectory of body mass index among older Japanese: a nationwide cohort study of 1987–2006. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. 2016;71(2):378–88. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu183 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5926508. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30.Lindberg MH, Chen G, Olsen JA, Abelsen B. Combining education and income into a socioeconomic position score for use in studies of health inequalities. BMC public health. 2022;22(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13366-8 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31.Wu HF, Tam T. Economic development and socioeconomic inequality of well-being: A cross-sectional time-series analysis of urban China, 2003–2011. Social Indicators Research. 2015;124:401–25. doi: 10.1007/s11205-014-0803-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
32.Rabi DM, Edwards AL, Svenson LW, Sargious PM, Norton P, Larsen ET, et al. Clinical and medication profiles stratified by household income in patients referred for diabetes care. Cardiovascular Diabetology. 2007;6:1–8. doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-6-11 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1852090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
33.Cheng P, Zhou J, Jiang P, Zhang Z. What Dominates the Female Class Identification? Evidence From China. Front Psychol. 2021;12:627610. Epub 2021/03/12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.627610 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7937799. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34.Li X, Zhang J, Hou R, Zheng M, Singh M, Li H, et al. Bidirectional associations of intellectual and social activities with cognitive function among middle-aged and elderly adults in China. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2022;319:83–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2022.09.031 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35.Hansdottir H, Jonsdottir MK, Fisher DE, Eiriksdottir G, Jonsson PV, Gudnason V. Creativity, leisure activities, social engagement and cognitive impairment: The AGES-Reykjavík study. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2022;34(5):1027–35. doi: 10.1007/s40520-021-02036-1 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
36.Yang F, Pang JS. Socioeconomic status, frailty, and subjective well-being: A moderated mediation analysis in elderly Chinese. Journal of health psychology. 2018;23(7):961–70. doi: 10.1177/1359105316675211 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
37.Muhammad T, Kumar P, Srivastava S. How socioeconomic status, social capital and functional independence are associated with subjective wellbeing among older Indian adults? A structural equation modeling analysis. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1836. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14215-4 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9523926. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
38.Dunkel Schetter C, Schafer P, Lanzi RG, Clark-Kauffman E, Raju TN, Hillemeier MM, et al. Shedding light on the mechanisms underlying health disparities through community participatory methods: The stress pathway. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2013;8(6):613–33. doi: 10.1177/1745691613506016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
39.Matthews KA, Gallo LC, Taylor SE. Are psychosocial factors mediators of socioeconomic status and health connections? A progress report and blueprint for the future. Annals of the New York academy of sciences. 2010;1186(1):146–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05332.x . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
40.Vera-Villarroel P, Celis-Atenas K, Lillo S, Contreras D, Díaz-Pardo N, Torres J, et al. Towards a Model of Psychological Well-Being. The Role of Socioeconomic Status and Satisfaction with Income in Chile. Universitas Psychologica. 2015;14(3):1055–66. doi: 10.11144/javeriana.upsy14-3.tmpw [DOI] [Google Scholar]
41.Huang S, Hou J, Sun L, Dou D, Liu X, Zhang H. The effects of objective and subjective socioeconomic status on subjective well-being among rural-to-urban migrants in China: The moderating role of subjective social mobility. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:819. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00819 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5439243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
42.Kraus MW, Piff PK, Mendoza-Denton R, Rheinschmidt ML, Keltner D. Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: how the rich are different from the poor. Psychol Rev. 2012;119(3):546–72. Epub 2012/07/11. doi: 10.1037/a0028756 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
43.Yu S, Blader SL. Why does social class affect subjective well-being? The role of status and power. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2020;46(3):331–48. doi: 10.1177/0146167219853841 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
44.O’Brien KM. Healthy, wealthy, wise? Psychosocial factors influencing the socioeconomic status-health gradient. J Health Psychol. 2012;17(8):1142–51. Epub 2012/02/09. doi: 10.1177/1359105311433345 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
45.Pettit NC, Sivanathan N. The eyes and ears of status: How status colors perceptual judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2012;38(5):570–82. doi: 10.1177/0146167211431166 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
46.Durante F, Fiske ST. How social-class stereotypes maintain inequality. Curr Opin Psychol. 2017;18:43–8. Epub 20170804. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.07.033 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6020691. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
47.Ponce MS, Rosas RP, Lorca MB. Social capital, social participation and life satisfaction among Chilean older adults. Rev Saude Publica. 2014;48(5):739–49. Epub 2014/11/06. doi: 10.1590/s0034-8910.2014048004759 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4211572. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
48.Katagiri K, Kim J-H. Factors determining the social participation of older adults: A comparison between Japan and Korea using EASS 2012. PloS one. 2018;13(4):e0194703. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194703 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5889058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49.Manstead ASR. The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour. Br J Soc Psychol. 2018;57(2):267–91. Epub 2018/03/02. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12251 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5901394. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
50.Choi Y, Kim J-H, Park E-C. The effect of subjective and objective social class on health-related quality of life: new paradigm using longitudinal analysis. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2015;13(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/s12955-015-0319-0 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4529728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
51.Sun J, Lyu S. Social participation and urban-rural disparity in mental health among older adults in China. Journal of affective disorders. 2020;274:399–404. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.05.091 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
52.Zhang W, Feng Q, Liu L, Zhen Z. Social engagement and health: Findings from the 2013 survey of the Shanghai elderly life and opinion. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development. 2015;80(4):332–56. doi: 10.1177/0091415015603173 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
53.Rajabi Gilan N, Khezeli M, Zardoshtian S. The effect of self-rated health, subjective socioeconomic status, social capital, and physical activity on life satisfaction: a cross-sectional study in urban western Iran. BMC public health. 2021;21:1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10261-6 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7845033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291325.r001

Decision Letter 0

Petri Böckerman

26 Jul 2023

PONE-D-23-18471Socioecnomic status and subjective well-being: The mediating and role of class identity and social activitiesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jiang,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

The revised version should address all comments.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 09 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Petri Böckerman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Additional Editor Comments:

The revised version should address all comments.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This is an interesting study that attempts to evaluate how much of the relationship between SES and subjective well-being is mediated by two psychosocial constructs: perceived social class identity and engagement in social activities.

Although the authors make the attempt to provide an important contribution to understanding the mechanisms behind SES on well-being, there are some gaps to be filled to be considered a technically sound scientific piece that supports the conclusions stated. In this line, some of the aspects concluded should be corroborated with some further analyses, considering some of the methodological limitations that this study has. Below, I provide some specific comments regarding these points:

- It is not clear what theory underlies the eventual relationship between SES, social class identity, and social activities. For instance, it sounds like authors are trying to connect intuitive relationships among variables rather than illustrate a causal theoretical framework that they want to test through a study. It would be ideal for the paper to frame a theory that clearly justifies the relationship among these three variables.

- The hypotheses proposed seem pertinent but basic and with low scientific risk. It would be recommended to state a stronger hypothesis according to the study and conclusions proposed.

- The fact that SES was measured in a subjective way and not using objective indicators (e.g., income level, neighborhood SES) is methodologically problematic. The way that SES is measured can be considered a measure of perceiver social status rather than SES. This is methodologically problematic as perceived social status and social class identity may be highly interrelated because they are part of the same measured construct. In that regard, social class identity could influence the perceived SES too.

- The discussion rephrases and expands on similar points already illustrated in the introduction. It would be expected to provide more discussion about the novelty of the analysis performed and how much of the effect of SES is mediated by these two mediators (class identity, social activity). From your analysis, only 1/3 of the total effect of perceived SES on SWB is explained by these two mediator variables. Why does this happen? What would explain the other 2/3? What this says about the effect of SES on SWB and if it is possible to mitigate this effect by targeting these two mediators?

- Lines 300 - 302: The conclusion stated is not necessarily supported by the analysis and the data analyzed. Sub-group and other types of analyses are required to elaborate such conclusions.

Reviewer #2: The authors aimed to investigate the impact of socioeconomic status, class identity, and social activity on Subjective well-being. There are some concerns about this study that need to be addressed.

Declarations:

1- Since this study was conducted on human samples, it is necessary to provide necessary and sufficient explanations in the Ethics Statement.

Introduction

2- The objectives and hypotheses of the study should be written as a continuous text and not as separate cases at the end of the Introduction section.

Methods:

3- The authors should either describe the sampling method completely and in detail or provide the necessary reference to a valid study in this regard.

4- Limited information has been provided regarding the development of SWBS-CC and its subscales and validating the scale.

5- Measuring socioeconomic status and class identity, which are two complex indicators, is almost impossible with only two questions, and the validity of the results is highly questionable.

6- Limited information has been provided regarding the development of social activity questionnaire and its subscales and validating the scale.

7- What do the authors mean by the word “residents” at the first paragraph of the Discussion section.

Reviewer #3: The study examines the relationship between subjective well-being and socioeconomic status, class identity and participation in social activities. They found that subjective well-being correlates significantly to these other factors. Additionally, they found that the effect of socioeconomic status on subjective well-being was mediated by social activity participation and class identity.

Please see below comments and suggestions based on my review:

1. It is not clear what the effect size measures and the 95% CI reported in the study represents.

2. Page 3, Line 43 - SWB should be written in full (sentences should not start with acronym). Other parts of the manuscript should be corrected as well.

3. Page 3, Line 50 - 52. The justification does not flow with the previous statement. Consider deleting or reframing.

4. Page 3, Line 53. is instead of was and for instead of in.

5. Page 4, Line 63. depends instead of depended

6. Page 4, Line 72. delete the and change relationship to correlation (correlation is more specific)

7. Page 6, Line 111 - 112. "After excluding observations with important missing data..."

8. Page 6, Line 114. SWB - see comment 2 above

9. Page 7, Line 125 - 126. What were the options on the Likert scale?

10. Page 8, Line 147. The word "illiterate" may not be appropriate in this scenario. Consider using "no formal education".

11. Page 8, Line 152. Frequency instead of number

12. Page 8, Line 153. Were the assumptions for Pearson's correlation met?

13. Page 9, Line 168. Illiteracy - see comment 10 above.

14. Page 9, Line 170. The mean age not mean scores for age

15. Table 1 (Age (years))

16. Table 1 (illiterate - see comment 10)

17. Page 11, Line 197 - 198. The statement on confirmation of previously stated hypotheses should be moved to discussion

18. Page 15. The first paragraph of the discussion is verbose. I suggest providing a more succinct summary of the results here.

Thank you.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Yaser Sarikhani

Reviewer #3: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 Sep 15;18(9):e0291325. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291325.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0

12 Aug 2023

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thank you for offering us an opportunity to improve the quality of our submitted manuscript. We appreciated very much the reviewers’ constructive and insightful comments. These comments are essential to improving the rigor and scientific quality of the manuscript. We have taken all these comments and suggestions into account and have carefully revised this manuscript. Changes are shown in red in the revised version. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviewers.

Kind regards,

Yi Jiang

Responds to the reviewers' comments

Reviewer 1

1. It is not clear what theory underlies the eventual relationship between SES, social class identity, and social activities. For instance, it sounds like authors are trying to connect intuitive relationships among variables rather than illustrate a causal theoretical framework that they want to test through a study. It would be ideal for the paper to frame a theory that clearly justifies the relationship among these three variables.

Response: We sincerely appreciate the valuable advice from the reviewer. We attempt to elucidate the potential association between socioeconomic status, social class identity, social activities, and subjective well-being through the relevant literature. In this way, we proposed our research framework and hypothesized potential pathways. Although we have referenced the literature based on certain theories, we recognize the need to complement and refine these theories to bolster the rationality and scientific validity of this manuscript. We conducted extensive inquiries and found several theoretical bases to support our research hypotheses. Specifically, we employed stress theory, Bourdieu's theory of cultural capital, and social identity theory to elaborate on the associations between socioeconomic status, class identity, and participation in social activities. The relationship between socioeconomic status, class identity, social activity participation, and subjective well-being was elaborated using stress theory, social comparison theory, and social support theory. Furthermore, we have adjusted some descriptions and expressions based on the previous version. The detailed modifications are as follows:

Socioeconomic status (SES) is an essential influencing factor for SWB. Research has shown that SES could contribute to SWB through various external and internal mechanisms. Stress theory could elaborate on the mechanisms and pathways through which SES can influence well-being, especially the concepts of coping resources and stressors. Individuals with higher SES tended to enjoy better life circumstances and more social resources, buffering the effects of adverse events [6, 7]. Furthermore, individuals with higher SES were exposed less to stressful and uncontrollable life events, which were associated with higher SWB [8]. Subjective class identity is an individual's perception of their position in the social class structure, reflecting the individual's internalization, adaptation, and acceptance of the social environment and group [9]. Class identity depends heavily on the degree of individual demand fulfillment. Higher demand fulfillment was associated with higher SWB [10]. Social comparison theory suggests that people determine their values and the realization of their demands by comparing themselves to others [11]. Therefore, the SWB of individuals depended not only on their SES and class identity but also on their perceptions of their position relative to others. Similarly, engaging in social activities played an important role in the well-being of the population. Social support theory emphasizes the importance of social relationships and the support individuals receive from their social networks [12]. Participation in social activities was associated with more active social networks [13, 14]. These social networks provided emotional, informational, and instrumental support that facilitated the reduction of isolation and stress and increased resilience and SWB [15].

Abundant evidence has demonstrated a positive correlation between SES and social class identity. Bourdieu's theory of cultural capital emphasizes the importance of cultural capital in shaping social class identity [16, 17], such as education, cultural resources, and social skills. However, cultural capital acquisition is often influenced by SES [18]. For example, individuals from higher SES backgrounds were more likely to have access to high-quality education, exposure to arts and cultural experiences, and opportunities to develop cultural tastes and skills [19,20]. The social identity theory also explained the association between SES and class identity. Social identity theory suggests that people tend to categorize themselves based on various social dimensions, especially SES [21]. Individuals with similar SES often have shared experiences and challenges, contributing to the development of a common class identity. Research has shown the significant and positive impact of SES and class identity on individuals' engagement in social activities [22]. Based on stress theory, higher SES and class identity were associated with more social support and fewer stressors, possibly promoting individuals to engage more in social activities [23]. Individuals with higher SES and class identity typically had access to a wider range of social support and resources, which could facilitate participation in social activities [24, 25]. (Line 57-96)

2. The hypotheses proposed seem pertinent but basic and with low scientific risk. It would be recommended to state a stronger hypothesis according to the study and conclusions proposed.

Response: Thank you for your helpful comments. Taking your comments into account, we have adjusted the assumptions. We emphasized the main conclusions and framework of the article in our hypothesis. The details are as follows:

In conclusion, although the effect of SES on SWB has been explored, few previous scholars have examined the mediating role of class identity and social activities. Therefore, we used the chain mediation model to examine the potential relationship among SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB. The above theories and literature have revealed the interconnections among SES, class identity, and social activities, emphasizing their importance as influences on SWB. Based on these, the conceptual framework (shown in Figure 1) and the following hypotheses were proposed: 1) there is a significant association between SES, class identity, participation in social activities, and SWB; 2) class identity and participation in social activities mediate between SES and SWB; 3) class identity and social activity participation have a chain-mediated role

between SES and SWB. (Line 97-107)

Fig 1. The conceptual model based on previous research and theory.

3. The fact that SES was measured in a subjective way and not using objective indicators (e.g., income level, neighborhood SES) is methodologically problematic. The way that SES is measured can be considered a measure of perceiver social status rather than SES. This is methodologically problematic as perceived social status and social class identity may be highly interrelated because they are part of the same measured construct. In that regard, social class identity could influence the perceived SES too.

Response: We sincerely appreciate your valuable comments, as they significantly enhance the scientific validity and rigor of our article. We clearly recognize the problem in measurement, ignoring the similarity between subjective socioeconomic status and subjective class identity. In response, we conducted an extensive literature search and ultimately adopted a composite measure of education and income as an indicator of socioeconomic status. Consequently, we reperformed the relevant analyses, and the corresponding results were updated in the revised manuscript. The specific methodology is elucidated in the paper as follows:

The present study employed SES as a key variable. Following relevant studies, we employed education and income as measures of SES [29,30,31]. Education was categorized as follows: (1) uneducated, (2) primary school and below, (3) middle school, (4) high school, and (5) college and higher. Personal income was stratified into quintiles (1-5) based on annual earnings [32]. To create the SES composite score, standardized z-scores for education and income were averaged. (Line 141-146)

Furthermore, we adjusted the description of the control variables as education became a SES indicator. The specifics are as follows:

We included several control variables to improve the estimation accuracy, including age, gender, ethnicity, marriage, household registration, and self-rated health. Ethnicity was divided into Han and others, and household registration was divided into urban and rural. Marital status was classified as: unmarried, divorced, and widowed; married and having a spouse. The self-assessment of health is based on the question, "How do you feel about your current state of health?", with values from 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). (Line 164-170)

4. The discussion rephrases and expands on similar points already illustrated in the introduction. It would be expected to provide more discussion about the novelty of the analysis performed and how much of the effect of SES is mediated by these two mediators (class identity, social activity). From your analysis, only 1/3 of the total effect of perceived SES on SWB is explained by these two mediator variables. Why does this happen? What would explain the other 2/3? What this says about the effect of SES on SWB and if it is possible to mitigate this effect by targeting these two mediators?

Response: We honestly appreciate your comments and questions. The corresponding changes and responses are listed below:

(1) We have added the strengths of the article in the discussion section to illustrate the innovation of this study. The details are shown as follows:

This study has several advantages. Firstly, as far as we know, this is the first study to examine the chain-mediated effects of class identity and social activity participation on SES and SWB. This comprehensive exploration sheds light on the sequential mediation of the relationship between SES and SWB by class identity and social activity participation. Secondly, the study benefits from the use of well-represented and scientifically sound CGSS data, facilitating an examination of the mechanism between SES and SWB in the specific cultural context of China. Thirdly, by integrating class identity and participation in social activities as mediators, this study provides a novel perspective on the psychological mechanisms through which SES influences SWB. However, the present study has several limitations. Firstly, this study adopts a cross-sectional design, possibly limiting the causal relationship between critical variables. A longitudinal design investigating causal effects could be conducted in future studies. Secondly, the mediating effect is approximately 46.87%, which suggests potentially unobserved roles and mechanisms. Future research should explore additional potential factors. Finally, the reliability of our results may be undermined due to potential bias in the self-reported data. (Line 296-311)

(2) We have adjusted the interpretation of mediating roles in our discussion and emphasized the extent to which the effect of socioeconomic status on subjective class identity is influenced by class identity and social activity. The details are provided as follows:

Similarly, the results from the mediation modeling showed that social activity participation mediated between SES and SWB, accounting for 24.01% of the total effect. Besides, the presence of a chain-mediated effect of class identity and social activity participation between SES and SWB was confirmed. Both SES and class identity are essential determinants of participation in social activities [47]. Scholars have found that individuals with higher SES usually possess better resources, social networks, and communication opportunities, which foster a supportive environment for participation in social activities [48, 49]. As stated in Bourdieu's theory of cultural capital, social class identity is associated with educational and cultural resources [50], contributing to a broader scope of activities and qualifications for participation. Furthermore, social activities play a crucial role in combating feelings of loneliness and social isolation [51]. It provided opportunities for positive interaction, emotional support, self-fulfillment, and the development of intimate relationships. As an example, Zhang et al. found that positive feedback (e.g., praise, respect, and appreciation) received during social interactions positively influenced mental health and self-esteem [52]. Moreover, active participation in activities contributed not only to the development of a sense of belonging and social connectedness but also to social adaptation and psychological resilience [53]. All of these benefits could mitigate the negative impacts of SES and perceived class disadvantage, thereby contributing to increased SWB.

Notably, class identity and social activity had similar mediating effects, suggesting that both make meaningful contributions to how SES affects SWB (22.13% and 24.01%). These findings underscore the multifaceted dimension of SWB and the necessity to consider factors other than economic resources when addressing individual and community well-being. Incorporating social identity and participation in social activities into well-being improvement programs could lead to a more holistic and inclusive approach to improving SWB. (Line 245-295)

(3) Since we changed the measure of socioeconomic status, the interpretation of the relationship between socioeconomic status and subjective well-being by the two mediating variables (class identity and social activity participation) has been altered.

The study revealed that about 47% of the effect of socioeconomic status on subjective well-being was mediated by class identity and social activity, indicating that other mediating factors or confounding variables were not accounted for in the analysis. For instance, unexplained portions of the effect (about 53%) might be influenced by factors such as personal values, cultural differences, living environment, job satisfaction, social support, and coping mechanisms. Limited by data accessibility and analytical methods, we were unable to include all potential factors for analysis to increase the level of model explanation. Therefore, future studies could explore more potential pathways to complement the mechanisms of the effects of socioeconomic status on subjective well-being.

(4) Our findings suggest that class identity and social activity participation, as important mediating variables, can partially mediate the effect of SES on SWB. This positive mediating mechanism suggests that policymakers can improve the SWB of vulnerable groups by increasing individuals' class identity and participation in social activities. For example, policymakers and practitioners can design programs that empower individuals, foster a sense of belonging and community, and provide opportunities for social engagement and support.

5. Lines 300 - 302: The conclusion stated is not necessarily supported by the analysis and the data analyzed. Sub-group and other types of analyses are required to elaborate such conclusions.

Response: We appreciate you pointing out the problems. We have adjusted the description in the conclusion section to accurately present the findings and suggestions. The specific modifications are described as follows:

Based on nationally representative data and a chained mediation model, this study investigated the mechanisms between SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB. The findings reveal a positive relationship between these four factors. Class identity and social activity partially mediated the effects of SES on SWB, and they had a chain mediating effect between SES and SWB. This positive mediation mechanism suggests that policymakers have the opportunity to enhance SWB in lower SES groups by promoting individual class identity and encouraging greater social activity participation. For instance, policymakers and practitioners can design empowerment programs that empower individuals, foster a sense of belonging and community, and provide opportunities for social engagement and support. (Line 313-323)

Reviewer 2

1. Since this study was conducted on human samples, it is necessary to provide necessary and sufficient explanations in the Ethics Statement.

Response: Thank you for pointing out our shortcomings here. The CGSS was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The Ethics Committees of Renmin University of China and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology are responsible for ethical approval and consent to participate. After ensuring that the information was understood by the respondents, each potential respondent was fully informed about the purpose of the study, the methodology, the source of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, any discomfort that the study might cause, and any other information relevant to the study. We received authorization to use the publicly accessible CGSS. This study was conducted based on de-identified publicly available CGSS (http://cgss.ruc.edu.cn/) data. Therefore, ethical approval or informed consent was no longer required for this study.

2. The objectives and hypotheses of the study should be written as a continuous text and not as separate cases at the end of the Introduction section.

Response: Thank you for your helpful comments. Taking your comments into account, we have adjusted the assumptions. The modifications are as follows:

In conclusion, although the effect of SES on SWB has been explored, few previous scholars have examined the mediating role of class identity and social activities. Therefore, we used the chain mediation model to examine the potential relationship among SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB. The above theories and literature have revealed the interconnections among SES, class identity, and social activities, emphasizing their importance as influences on SWB. Based on these, the conceptual framework (shown in Figure 1) and the following hypotheses were proposed: 1) there is a significant association between SES, class identity, participation in social activities, and SWB; 2) class identity and participation in social activities mediate between SES and SWB; 3) class identity and social activity participation have a chain-mediated role between SES and SWB. (Line 97-107)

Fig 1. The conceptual model based on previous research and theory.

3.The authors should either describe the sampling method completely and in detail or provide the necessary reference to a valid study in this regard.

Response: Thank reviewer 2 for the critical comments. The Chinese General Social Survey (CGSS) is a large-scale nationwide survey program that covers both urban and rural residents nationwide. The survey was conducted using stratified three-stage probability sampling. Depending on the sampling stratum, the sampling units at each stage are slightly different, as shown in Table 1. Specifically, the survey population is divided into two main categories: the first is the mandatory layer, which consists of households in the municipal districts of the selected large cities; the second is the lottery layer, which consists of all households in the country excluding the mandatory layer of municipal districts. Information obtained from: http://cgss.ruc.edu.cn/xmwd/cysj.htm

Table 1 Sampling units for each stage

First-stage sampling units Second-stage sampling units Third-stage sampling units

Mandatory layer Street Neighborhood councils Households

Lottery Layer Districts, County-level cities, Counties Neighborhood councils, Village councils Households

4.Limited information has been provided regarding the development of SWBS-CC and its subscales and validating the scale.

Response: Thank Reviewer 2 for the critical comments. In the study, subjective well-being was measured with the Subjective Well-being Scale for Chinese Citizens (SWBS-CC) by scholar Xing Zhanjun from the Chinese Mainland. With a reliability of 0.838 and a validity of 0.864, the scale is an effective measurement in research on urban citizens in the Chinese Mainland. The scale was based on a six-point Likert scale, with values ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 6 (completely agree). It consists of 20 items (10 dimensions), including satisfaction and abundance, mental health, confidence in society, growth and progress, goals and personal values, self-acceptance, physical health, psychological balance, adjustment to interpersonal relationships, and family climate. Total scores range from 20 to 120, with higher scores indicating higher subjective well-being. The DOI numbers of the references are as follows: doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1050486 and doi:10.1016/j.jad.2022.01.089.

5.Measuring socioeconomic status and class identity, which are two complex indicators, is almost impossible with only two questions, and the validity of the results is highly questionable.

Response: We sincerely appreciate the valuable advice from the reviewer 2. Based on the suggestions made by you and reviewer 1, and after careful consideration, we have decided to make the following changes:

According to social identity theory, social identity derives primarily from group membership or qualifications and is rooted in people's subjective perceptions of their class identity. To measure class identity, self-rated class identity was used based on previous research (doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.627610). The CGSS asked the question about class identity: "In general, where do you personally stand in the current society?" Responses were recorded on a 10-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating higher levels of class identity. (Line 141-152)

We have adjusted these descriptions to support the plausibility and scientific validity of this manuscript. Additionally, we performed the data analysis again due to a change in the way the measurements were taken. All results are updated in the revised manuscript.

6.Limited information has been provided regarding the development of social activity questionnaire and its subscales and validating the scale.

Response: Thank Reviewer 2 for the critical comments. In this study, we referred to several studies to measure social activities. Social activity is measured by the question "How often in the past year have you engaged in the following activities". Answers included watching television, going to the movies, shopping, reading, going to shows, meeting with relatives, meeting with friends, listening to music, exercising, watching sports, doing handicrafts, and surfing the Internet. Answers to each question ranged from 1 to 5. 1 = never, 2 = several times a year, 3 = several times a month, 4 = several times a week, and 5 = daily. In addition, reliability and validity analyses were conducted to determine the reliability and validity of the social activity measures in this study. The results of reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.674) and validity (KMO = 0.782) showed that the questions responded well to social activities.

The DOI numbers for the references are doi:10.3389/fpubh.2022.967170, doi:10.1016/j.jad.2022.09.031, and doi:10.1007/s40520-021-02036-1.

7.What do the authors mean by the word “residents” at the first paragraph of the Discussion section.

Response: Thank you for pointing this out. The word refers to individuals in the study population. We recognize that the use of this term is inappropriate and have changed it to “individual”.

Reviewer 3

1.It is not clear what the effect size measures and the 95% CI reported in the study represents.

Response: In regression analysis, effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals are important statistical measures that help you understand the strength and precision of the relationship between variables. Effect sizes quantify the strength and direction of the relationship between variables. For example, the total effect of SES on SWB in this study was 1.583. This suggests that one unit change in socioeconomic status leads to an average change in SWB of 1.583 units in the same direction, keeping all other variables unchanged. However, we use unstandardized coefficients and cannot directly compare the magnitude of individual path coefficients because these variables have different magnitudes, ranges of values, and degrees of variability. The 95% confidence interval (CI) provides a range within which you are reasonably confident that the true population parameter lies. The 95% CI indicates that if we were to repeat the study multiple times and compute CIs for each sample, about 95% of those CIs would contain the true population parameter. For example, a regression analysis yields an effect size of β = 1.583 with a 95% CI of [0.858, 2.308], which means that we are 95% sure that the true effect size is between 0.858 and 2.308. A wider CI indicates greater uncertainty, while a narrower CI indicates a more precise estimate.

2.Page 3, Line 43 - SWB should be written in full (sentences should not start with acronym). Other parts of the manuscript should be corrected as well.

Response: We appreciate Reviewer 3 pointing this out. We apologize for our carelessness. We have completed the changes at the appropriate places in the manuscript. (Line 48-49)

3.Page 3, Line 50 - 52. The justification does not flow with the previous statement. Consider deleting or reframing.

Response: Thank reviewer 3 for the critical comments. The previous description was intended to emphasize the importance of subjective well-being. The last sentence is intended to emphasize the importance of research on subjective well-being and the factors that influence it. We adjusted the description appropriately and changed it to “Therefore, it is necessary to extensively explore the factors and potential pathways influencing SWB.” (Line 55-56)

4.Page 3, Line 53. is instead of was and for instead of in.

Response: We were really sorry for our careless mistakes. Thank you for your reminder. We have corrected the “was” into “is” .and “in” into “for” (Line 57)

5.Page 4, Line 63. depends instead of depended

Response: We sincerely thank the reviewer for careful reading. As suggested by the reviewer, we have corrected the “depended” into “depends”. (Line 67)

6.Page 4, Line 72. delete the and change relationship to correlation (correlation is more specific)

Response: Thank reviewer 3 for the useful comments. We have made changes at the correct places in the text. (Line 79)

7.Page 6, Line 111 - 112. "After excluding observations with important missing data..."

Response: Thank reviewer 3 for the useful comments. We have used your suggestions to make changes in the text. (Line 128)

8.Page 6, Line 114. SWB - see comment 2 above

Response: We apologize for our carelessness. We have completed the changes at the appropriate places in the manuscript.

9. Page 7, Line 125 - 126. What were the options on the Likert scale?

Response: Thank you for your question. The options here included 1 (very poor), 2 (poor), 3 (fair), 4 (good), and 5 (very good). Because Reviewer 1 and Reviewer 2 questioned the subjective measure of socioeconomic status, we used education and income as measures of socioeconomic status. We have taken your comments and the approach of the relevant literature and re-described the measurement. Details of the changes are as follows:

10.Page 8, Line 147. The word "illiterate" may not be appropriate in this scenario. Consider using "no formal education".

Response: Thanks to Reviewer 3 for careful checks. We are sorry for our carelessness. Based on your comments, we have made the corrections to make the word harmonized within the whole manuscript. We have changed illiterate to uneducated. (Line 143)

11.Page 8, Line 152. Frequency instead of number

Response: We feel sorry for our carelessness. In our resubmitted manuscript, it is revised. Thanks for your correction. (Line 175)

12.Page 8, Line 153. Were the assumptions for Pearson's correlation met?

Response: The Pearson test requires that the data meet normality or asymptotic normality. Related studies have shown that a distribution is called approximate normal if skewness or kurtosis of the data are between − 1 and + 1 (DOI: 10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18). Therefore, we calculated the skewness and kurtosis of socioeconomic status, class identity, social activity, and subjective well-being using STATA. All skewnesses and kurtosis are less than 1, as shown in Table 2. Accordingly, we hold that the Pearson test is satisfied.

Table 2 Skewness and kurtosis of the variables

Variable Skewness Kurtosis

Socioeconomic status 0.526 0.000

Class identity 0.006 0.015

Social activity 0.597 0.000

Subjective well-being 0.000 0.154

13.Page 9, Line 168. Illiteracy - see comment 10 above.

Response: Thanks for your careful checks. We are sorry for our carelessness. Based on your comments, we have made the corrections to make the word harmonized within the whole manuscript.

14.Page 9, Line 170. The mean age not mean scores for age

Response: We are very grateful for the comments made by Review 3, which we have replaced with the following: “The mean of age, SES, class identity, social activity, and SWB were 49.43, 0.00, 4.35, 28.22, and 86.99, respectively.” (Line 191-193)

15.Table 1 (Age (years))

Response: Thanks for your correction. In our resubmitted manuscript, it is revised.

16.Table 1 (illiterate - see comment 10)

Response: Thanks for your careful checks. We included education as one of the indicators of socioeconomic status and added self-rated health as a covariate. Therefore, Table 1 is not showing education.

As a result of changing the SES measurements, we re-performed the data analysis and updated the relevant results in the revised manuscript.

17.Page 11, Line 197 - 198. The statement on confirmation of previously stated hypotheses should be moved to discussion

Response: We are very appreciative of the comments made by Review 3 and we have removed this statement and moved it to the discussion section.

18.Page 15. The first paragraph of the discussion is verbose. I suggest providing a more succinct summary of the results here.

Response: We are very grateful for Review 3's comments, and we have revised the paragraph as follows:

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.^{(61.8KB, docx)}

PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291325.r003

Decision Letter 1

Petri Böckerman

21 Aug 2023

PONE-D-23-18471R1Socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: The mediating role of class identity and social activitiesPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jiang,

Please submit your revised manuscript by Oct 05 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Petri Böckerman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #2: Based on the changes made to the Manuscript by the authors, it appears that the text has undergone an acceptable upgrade. Therefore, there is no more comment in this regard.

Reviewer #3: Thank you for your previous detailed responses to my comments. While I appreciate the explanation to point one, it is still unclear to a reader what those numbers represent. It is not immediately clear in the abstract and results that this was a multivariate linear regression analysis. The authors can consider reporting as: "For each unit increase in socioeconomic status score, the subjective well-being score was expected to increase by 0.351 (95% CI 0.721, 1.587)..."

The indirect effect of

socioeconomic status on subjective well-being mediated by class identity was 0.351

(95% CI: 0.721, 1.587)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: Yes: Yaser Sarikhani

Reviewer #3: No

**********

PLoS One. 2023 Sep 15;18(9):e0291325. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291325.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1

23 Aug 2023

Dear Editor,

We appreciate your reply. We apologize for the incorrect formatting of the references due to our mistake. We have adjusted the reference format to ensure it is complete and correct. And all of the cited literature is published. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to the comments raised by the reviewers. Changes are shown in red in the revised version.

Kind regards,

Yi Jiang

Responds to the reviewers' comments

Reviewer 2

1 Based on the changes made to the Manuscript by the authors, it appears that the text has undergone an acceptable upgrade. Therefore, there is no more comment in this regard.

Response: Thank you very much for your valuable suggestions and comments.

Reviewer 3

1 Thank you for your previous detailed responses to my comments. While I appreciate the explanation to point one, it is still unclear to a reader what those numbers represent. It is not immediately clear in the abstract and results that this was a multivariate linear regression analysis. The authors can consider reporting as: "For each unit increase in socioeconomic status score, the subjective well-being score was expected to increase by 0.351 (95% CI 0.721, 1.587)..."

Response: We appreciate your comments very much. We apologize for not clearly showing that the chain mediation analysis is based on several multiple linear regressions (as shown in Table 3). We have adapted pertinent elucidations within the manuscript to explicitly expound that the chain-mediated model comprises the four multiple linear regressions presented in Table 3. Furthermore, we utilized Figure 2 to present the connection between socioeconomic status, class identity, participation in social activities, and subjective well-being more visually. Regarding the query that the various coefficients (β) and p values we report may be difficult for the reader to understand, we inquired about how these coefficients are reported in the relevant literature. We found that the presentation of the chain-mediated modeling results in the manuscript is consistent with other relevant literature (DOI numbers are displayed at the end), expressed as the effect of A on B (coefficients and p-values, or 95% CI). This mode of presentation indicates the direction, degree, and precision of the connection between the two-by-two variables, which may not affect the reader's understanding of the results. The reader can interpret the coefficients (β) and p-values as reported by the multiple linear regression. For example, "socioeconomic status was a significant predictor of individuals' subjective well-being (β = 1.583, p < 0.01)" can be interpreted as "for every one-unit increase in socioeconomic status score, the subjective well-being score was expected to increase by 1.583 (p < 0.01)." Moreover, we believe that this presentation is concise and clear, thereby reducing the reading burden on the reader.

The various indirect effects are products of the corresponding path coefficients. The magnitude of the indirect effect indicates how much of the total effect between the independent variable (X) and the dependent variable (Y) is explained by the mediating variable (M). The significance, along with the 95% confidence interval, of an indirect effect determines whether the observed indirect effect may have occurred at random. Furthermore, 95% confidence intervals for indirect, direct, and total effects were tested using the Bootstrap method to ensure that these findings were not coincidental (as shown in Table 4). Therefore, the interpretation of the magnitude of the indirect effect may differ from the preceding regression coefficients.

The details of the modifications are shown as follows:

The analysis of the chain mediation model included four multiple linear regressions, each accounting for covariates. Table 3 and Figure 2 present the results of the chain mediation analysis for this study. In the total effects model, SES was a significant predictor of individuals' SWB (β = 1.583, p < 0.01). This relationship remained significant when class identity and social activity were also considered (β = 0.841, p < 0.05). Furthermore, SES has a significant effect on class identity (β = 0.289, p < 0.01) and social activity (β = 2.699, p < 0.01). Class identity and social activity were also significant predictors of SWB, with corresponding coefficients of 1.213 (p < 0.01) and 0.141 (p < 0.01). Class identity was a significant predictor of social activity, with a coefficient of 0.274 (p < 0.05). Using these path coefficients, the corresponding indirect effects were calculated. The indirect effects of SES on SWB, mediated by class identity and social activity, were 0.351 and 0.380, respectively. The chain mediation effect was 0.011, indicating that the effect of SES on SWB was transmitted between the mediating variables. (Line 209-222)

The DOI numbers of the references for the reporting style are specified below:

(1) 10.1371/journal.pone.0122128

(2) 10.1371/journal.pone.0231628

(3) 10.1371/journal.pone.0280701

(4) 10.1186/s12889-022-14711-7

(5) 10.1371/journal.pone.0289092

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.^{(13.6KB, docx)}

PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291325.r005

Decision Letter 2

Petri Böckerman

29 Aug 2023

Socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: The mediating role of class identity and social activities

PONE-D-23-18471R2

Dear Dr. Jiang,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Petri Böckerman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed. I have no further edits or clarifications to make. Thank you very much.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: Yes: Yaser Sarikhani

Reviewer #3: No

**********

PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291325.r006

Acceptance letter

Petri Böckerman

7 Sep 2023

PONE-D-23-18471R2

Socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: The mediating role of class identity and social activities

Dear Dr. Jiang:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Professor Petri Böckerman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.^{(61.8KB, docx)}

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.^{(13.6KB, docx)}

Data Availability Statement

All data files are available from the Chinese General Social Survey 2021 database(URL:http://www.cnsda.org/index.php?r=projects/view&id=65635422).

[pone.0291325.ref001] 1.John Helliwell RL, Sachs Jeffrey D., Jan-Emmanuel De Neve, Aknin Lara B., Shun Wang. World Happiness Report Sustainable Development Solutions Network 2023. [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref002] 2.Diener E. Subjective well-being. The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. The American psychologist. 2000;55(1):34–43. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.34 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref003] 3.Martin-Maria N, Miret M, Felix Caballero F, Alejandra Rico-Uribe L, Steptoe A, Chatterji S, et al. The Impact of Subjective Well-being on Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies in the General Population. Psychosomatic Medicine. 2017;79(5):565–75. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000444 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref004] 4.Lasselin J, Alvarez-Salas E, Grigoleit J-S. Well-being and immune response: a multi-system perspective. Current Opinion in Pharmacology. 2016;29:34–41. doi: 10.1016/j.coph.2016.05.003 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref005] 5.Tovel H, Carmel S. Maintaining Successful Aging: The Role of Coping Patterns and Resources. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2014;15(2):255–70. doi: 10.1007/s10902-013-9420-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref006] 6.George LK. Still Happy After All These Years: Research Frontiers on Subjective Well-being in Later Life. Journals of Gerontology Series B-Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. 2010;65(3):331–9. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbq006 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref007] 7.Simone PM, Haas AL. Frailty, Leisure Activity and Functional Status in Older Adults: Relationship With Subjective Well Being. Clinical Gerontologist. 2013;36(4):275–93. doi: 10.1080/07317115.2013.788114 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref008] 8.Zhao S, Du H, Li Q, Wu Q, Chi P. Growth mindset of socioeconomic status boosts subjective well-being: A longitudinal study. Personality and Individual Differences. 2021;168:110301. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2020.110301 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref009] 9.Yang C, Li Z, Liu W. Chinese residents’ subjective class identity and physical activity participation mechanism. Frontiers in Public Health. 2022;10:852683. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.852683 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8907615. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref010] 10.Wiese CW, Kuykendall L, Tay L. Get active? A meta-analysis of leisure-time physical activity and subjective well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology. 2018;13(1):57–66. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2017.1374436 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref011] 11.Paul S, Guilbert D. Income–happiness paradox in Australia: Testing the theories of adaptation and social comparison. Economic Modelling. 2013;30:900–10. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.08.034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref012] 12.Maier C, Laumer S, Eckhardt A, Weitzel T. Giving too much social support: social overload on social networking sites. European Journal of Information Systems. 2015;24(5):447–64. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2014.3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref013] 13.Litwin H. Activity, social network and well-being: An empirical examination. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement. 2000;19(3):343–62. doi: 10.1017/s0714980800015038 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref014] 14.Luo M, Ding D, Bauman A, Negin J, Phongsavan P. Social engagement pattern, health behaviors and subjective well-being of older adults: an international perspective using WHO-SAGE survey data. BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):1–10. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7841-7 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref015] 15.Denovan A, Macaskill A. Building resilience to stress through leisure activities: A qualitative analysis. Annals of Leisure Research. 2017;20(4):446–66. doi: 10.1080/11745398.2016.1211943 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref016] 16.Farkas G. Family, schooling, and cultural capital. Handbook of the Sociology of Education in the 21st Century. 2018:3–38. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-76694-2_1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref017] 17.France A, Bottrell D, Haddon E. Managing everyday life: the conceptualisation and value of cultural capital in navigating everyday life for working-class youth. Journal of Youth Studies. 2013;16(5):597–611. doi: 10.1080/13676261.2012.733814 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref018] 18.Uphoff EP, Pickett KE, Cabieses B, Small N, Wright J. A systematic review of the relationships between social capital and socioeconomic inequalities in health: a contribution to understanding the psychosocial pathway of health inequalities. International journal for equity in health. 2013;12:1–12. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-12-54 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3726325. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref019] 19.Bone JK, Bu F, Fluharty ME, Paul E, Sonke JK, Fancourt D. Who engages in the arts in the United States? A comparison of several types of engagement using data from The General Social Survey. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):1349. Epub 2021/07/10. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11263-0 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8264486. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref020] 20.Zhou M. Segmented assimilation and socio-economic integration of Chinese immigrant children in the USA. Belonging to the Nation. 2016:15–26. doi: 10.1080/01419870.2014.874566 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref021] 21.Magee JC, Galinsky AD. 8 social hierarchy: The self‐reinforcing nature of power and status. The academy of management annals. 2008;2(1):351–98. doi: 10.1080/19416520802211628 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref022] 22.Deng Q, Liu W. Physical Exercise, Social Interaction, Access to Care, and Community Service: Mediators in the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Health Among Older Patients With Diabetes. Front Public Health. 2020;8:589742. Epub 2020/11/10. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.589742 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7581780. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref023] 23.Hamamura T. Social class predicts generalized trust but only in wealthy societies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 2012;43(3):498–509. doi: 10.1177/0022022111399649 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref024] 24.Ursache A, Noble KG, Blair C. Socioeconomic status, subjective social status, and perceived stress: Associations with stress physiology and executive functioning. Behavioral Medicine. 2015;41(3):145–54. doi: 10.1080/08964289.2015.1024604 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4722863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref025] 25.Oliveira AJ, Lopes CS, de Leon ACP, Rostila M, Griep RH, Werneck GL, et al. Social support and leisure-time physical activity: longitudinal evidence from the Brazilian Pró-Saúde cohort study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2011;8:1–10. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-77 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3199735. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref026] 26.Xing Z. Developing the brief subjective well-being scale for Chinese citizen. Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medical Science. 2003;12(6):703–5. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-6554.2003.06.054 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref027] 27.Zhang J, Zheng Y, Wen T, Yang M. The impact of built environment on physical activity and subjective well-being of urban residents: A study of core cities in the Yangtze River Delta survey. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022;13:1050486. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1050486 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9773078. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref028] 28.Li X, Ren Z, Ji T, Shi H, Zhao H, He M, et al. Associations of sleep quality, anxiety symptoms and social support with subjective well-being among Chinese perimenopausal women. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2022;302:66–73. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2022.01.089 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref029] 29.Murayama H, Liang J, Bennett JM, Shaw BA, Botoseneanu A, Kobayashi E, et al. Socioeconomic status and the trajectory of body mass index among older Japanese: a nationwide cohort study of 1987–2006. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. 2016;71(2):378–88. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu183 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5926508. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref030] 30.Lindberg MH, Chen G, Olsen JA, Abelsen B. Combining education and income into a socioeconomic position score for use in studies of health inequalities. BMC public health. 2022;22(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-13366-8 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref031] 31.Wu HF, Tam T. Economic development and socioeconomic inequality of well-being: A cross-sectional time-series analysis of urban China, 2003–2011. Social Indicators Research. 2015;124:401–25. doi: 10.1007/s11205-014-0803-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref032] 32.Rabi DM, Edwards AL, Svenson LW, Sargious PM, Norton P, Larsen ET, et al. Clinical and medication profiles stratified by household income in patients referred for diabetes care. Cardiovascular Diabetology. 2007;6:1–8. doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-6-11 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1852090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref033] 33.Cheng P, Zhou J, Jiang P, Zhang Z. What Dominates the Female Class Identification? Evidence From China. Front Psychol. 2021;12:627610. Epub 2021/03/12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.627610 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7937799. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref034] 34.Li X, Zhang J, Hou R, Zheng M, Singh M, Li H, et al. Bidirectional associations of intellectual and social activities with cognitive function among middle-aged and elderly adults in China. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2022;319:83–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2022.09.031 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref035] 35.Hansdottir H, Jonsdottir MK, Fisher DE, Eiriksdottir G, Jonsson PV, Gudnason V. Creativity, leisure activities, social engagement and cognitive impairment: The AGES-Reykjavík study. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2022;34(5):1027–35. doi: 10.1007/s40520-021-02036-1 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref036] 36.Yang F, Pang JS. Socioeconomic status, frailty, and subjective well-being: A moderated mediation analysis in elderly Chinese. Journal of health psychology. 2018;23(7):961–70. doi: 10.1177/1359105316675211 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref037] 37.Muhammad T, Kumar P, Srivastava S. How socioeconomic status, social capital and functional independence are associated with subjective wellbeing among older Indian adults? A structural equation modeling analysis. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1836. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14215-4 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9523926. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref038] 38.Dunkel Schetter C, Schafer P, Lanzi RG, Clark-Kauffman E, Raju TN, Hillemeier MM, et al. Shedding light on the mechanisms underlying health disparities through community participatory methods: The stress pathway. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2013;8(6):613–33. doi: 10.1177/1745691613506016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref039] 39.Matthews KA, Gallo LC, Taylor SE. Are psychosocial factors mediators of socioeconomic status and health connections? A progress report and blueprint for the future. Annals of the New York academy of sciences. 2010;1186(1):146–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05332.x . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref040] 40.Vera-Villarroel P, Celis-Atenas K, Lillo S, Contreras D, Díaz-Pardo N, Torres J, et al. Towards a Model of Psychological Well-Being. The Role of Socioeconomic Status and Satisfaction with Income in Chile. Universitas Psychologica. 2015;14(3):1055–66. doi: 10.11144/javeriana.upsy14-3.tmpw [DOI] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref041] 41.Huang S, Hou J, Sun L, Dou D, Liu X, Zhang H. The effects of objective and subjective socioeconomic status on subjective well-being among rural-to-urban migrants in China: The moderating role of subjective social mobility. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:819. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00819 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5439243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref042] 42.Kraus MW, Piff PK, Mendoza-Denton R, Rheinschmidt ML, Keltner D. Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: how the rich are different from the poor. Psychol Rev. 2012;119(3):546–72. Epub 2012/07/11. doi: 10.1037/a0028756 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref043] 43.Yu S, Blader SL. Why does social class affect subjective well-being? The role of status and power. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2020;46(3):331–48. doi: 10.1177/0146167219853841 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref044] 44.O’Brien KM. Healthy, wealthy, wise? Psychosocial factors influencing the socioeconomic status-health gradient. J Health Psychol. 2012;17(8):1142–51. Epub 2012/02/09. doi: 10.1177/1359105311433345 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref045] 45.Pettit NC, Sivanathan N. The eyes and ears of status: How status colors perceptual judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2012;38(5):570–82. doi: 10.1177/0146167211431166 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref046] 46.Durante F, Fiske ST. How social-class stereotypes maintain inequality. Curr Opin Psychol. 2017;18:43–8. Epub 20170804. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.07.033 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6020691. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref047] 47.Ponce MS, Rosas RP, Lorca MB. Social capital, social participation and life satisfaction among Chilean older adults. Rev Saude Publica. 2014;48(5):739–49. Epub 2014/11/06. doi: 10.1590/s0034-8910.2014048004759 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4211572. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref048] 48.Katagiri K, Kim J-H. Factors determining the social participation of older adults: A comparison between Japan and Korea using EASS 2012. PloS one. 2018;13(4):e0194703. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194703 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5889058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref049] 49.Manstead ASR. The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour. Br J Soc Psychol. 2018;57(2):267–91. Epub 2018/03/02. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12251 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5901394. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref050] 50.Choi Y, Kim J-H, Park E-C. The effect of subjective and objective social class on health-related quality of life: new paradigm using longitudinal analysis. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2015;13(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/s12955-015-0319-0 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4529728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref051] 51.Sun J, Lyu S. Social participation and urban-rural disparity in mental health among older adults in China. Journal of affective disorders. 2020;274:399–404. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.05.091 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref052] 52.Zhang W, Feng Q, Liu L, Zhen Z. Social engagement and health: Findings from the 2013 survey of the Shanghai elderly life and opinion. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development. 2015;80(4):332–56. doi: 10.1177/0091415015603173 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

[pone.0291325.ref053] 53.Rajabi Gilan N, Khezeli M, Zardoshtian S. The effect of self-rated health, subjective socioeconomic status, social capital, and physical activity on life satisfaction: a cross-sectional study in urban western Iran. BMC public health. 2021;21:1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-10261-6 ; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7845033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

PERMALINK

Socioeconomic status and subjective well-being: The mediating role of class identity and social activities

Baoqin Wang

Hang Zhao

Hao Shen

Yi Jiang

Roles

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Introduction

Fig 1. The conceptual model based on previous research and theory.

Methods

Data

Measure

Statistical analysis

Results

Descriptive statistics

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of participant characteristics.

Correlation analysis

Table 2. The results of Pearson correlation analysis.

Mediating effect analysis

Table 3. Multiple stepwise regression results.

Fig 2. Chain mediation model of socioeconomic status and subjective well-being through class identity and social activity.

Table 4. Bootstrap test results for multiple intermediary models.

Discussion

Conclusion

Acknowledgments

Data Availability

Funding Statement

References

Decision Letter 0

Petri Böckerman

Roles

Author response to Decision Letter 0

Decision Letter 1

Petri Böckerman

Roles

Author response to Decision Letter 1

Decision Letter 2

Petri Böckerman

Roles

Acceptance letter

Petri Böckerman

Roles

Associated Data

Supplementary Materials

Data Availability Statement

ACTIONS

PERMALINK

RESOURCES

Similar articles

Cited by other articles

Links to NCBI Databases