While some individuals may think that people in a higher socioeconomic class are always happy, people often forget that happiness is a subjective idea, and individuals all over the globe have a different perspective on what happiness is to them. After encountering the question of what is the impact of a socioeconomic class on a person’s happiness, one can begin to explore whether people in a higher SES (“Socioeconomic Status”1) or lower SES are truly more happy than one another. In particular, does a person’s previous SES affect them in the future? Do people who have low opportunity for economic resources have poor well-being? What about globally- do people from other countries disregard wealth in what true happiness is? The remainder of this essay explores the research from a variety of different researchers and sources while also considering possible reasons for the outcome of my research findings.
Socioeconomic status uses a variety of factors that collectively determine an individual’s position within a society. These factors usually include income, education level, occupation, and social standing. SES at times is used as a lens through which individuals have access to resources, opportunities, and privileges within society (“Socio Economic Status” 1). While it is a common idea that income is often the primary indicator of a socioeconomic class, education and occupation are major contributors in shaping someone’s socioeconomic standing as well.
Ahmad Mehri and Vali Baigi investigated the association of someone’s socioeconomic status with their mental health. This study is severely useful in answering the question of what the impact of one’s socioeconomic class is on their happiness. Mehri and Baigi conducted a study using questionnaires that measured the mental health of 2062 employees of Tehran University of Medical Sciences. The participants were asked a total of 42 questions that measured their overall mental health and were also asked about their Childhood socioeconomic status. Studies showed that “a person’s current socioeconomic status and childhood socioeconomic status is related to the state of bad mental health in adulthood” (Mehri et al. 15). One has to take into account that the questionnaire could have had answers “underreporting and overreporting their opinion on their current and past socioeconomic status” (Mehri et al. 15).
This helps answer the question by doing multiple questionnaires of the participants measuring their mental health and providing other studies done in other countries and a cross sectional study on 413 nurses of TUMS that examined their mental health as well. Not only were the participants separated by socioeconomic status but they were also separated by gender, levels of education, and marital status . After analyzing the various studies done on people regarding their childhood SES it shows those with “low childhood SES scored higher than subjects of higher SES regarding their depression” (Mehri et al. 12). One can think that an individual that was raised from a low childhood SES statistically is more depressed in their adulthood because of how they grew up. For example, individuals in Iran consistently grow up in a harsh environment that “leads to it affecting their mental health”( Mehri et al. 11). This source helped me with expanding my idea of how someone’s SES can affect their mental health by showing the impact that one’s adolescence has on their future mental health.
Parbst and Wheaton in their article delved into the relationship between welfare states policies and mental health, focusing on how policies influence the decline of socioeconomic status in mental health. They analyzed the surveys done on 21 countries that had a total pool sample of 113,018 people. Both authors examine the extent to which each government contributes to the inequality of socioeconomic groups. Their research highlights the importance of how much benefit social policies can have on someone such as healthcare, income support, and educational opportunities. Results do in fact demonstrate that social investment reduces that inverse link between socioeconomic status and depression ( Parbst and Wheaton 339). This article shows the perspective of many places of the world while also shining a light on how little help others people in other countries receive. Of course there can be other external factors that can make people happy but for example third world countries don’t have the luck Americans can have for instance like food stamps, medicaid, education, and medicare (Parbst and Wheaton 345). However, one negative aspect of this source is it does not completely answer the question this essay strives to explore; it only helps a little by supporting a subcategory of what other factors can help with happiness.
Rhia Catapano and her colleagues did a study investigating if financial resources relate to how important meaning is for one’s happiness? She did a total of three studies analyzing 500,000 individuals across 123 countries. Each study examined different areas in order to examine how levels of financial resources relate to the meaning of happiness. Study one analyzed the United States, study two analyzed the world, and study three analyzed France. Across all studies there was a consistent pattern of meaning and happiness being less associated for individuals with greater financial resources (Catapano et al. 507). According to study three, one of the biggest reasons for people with low financial resources having a consistent pattern of high meaning and happiness are because it is assumed they have “other external sources of happiness, which allows them to rely less on internally constructed meaning to enjoy happiness” (Catapano et al. 509). Overall this study is great. It will help answer my question from different perspectives around the world, not just the United states. The only thing I wish this study would have done more would be to explain more why people that are in a higher socioeconomic class rank lower. I understand the meaning of happiness is different for everyone, but they are able to use that money in all sorts of ways that could bring them more happiness.
James Fisher and Michael Frechette in their article discussed the intriguing question of if money can buy happiness. In order to find the answer, Fisher and Frechette used data that proved that income in fact does buy happiness. They used two charts, one of them studied 70 countries while the other studied 150 and both had basically the same results. Their analysis at the end revealed that while higher income is associated with better life satisfaction it is only up to a certain point. After a person reaches “an annual income of 75,000 it becomes less significant” (Fisher and Frechette 3090). From a reader’s perspective, individuals who are below the 75,000 salary range value their money more than a person that is above the 75,000 dollar salary. For example, let’s say that an individual who is earning 50,000 dollars a year gets a 10,000 dollar salary increase (Fisher and Frechette 3090). That individual will absolutely appreciate that increase compared to an individual who is earning 200,000 dollars a year who got a 10,000 salary increase.
In the article, Fisher and Frechette also highlight the importance of external factors of happiness like relationships and personal values. One thing that caught my attention was how Fisher and Frichette proved this. They noticed that when you asked individuals what they attributed their happiness to they answered money but when they were asked what their happiness depended on they would always answer with family (Fisher and Frechette 3090). Overall, this article can be very useful for my research question: What is the impact of a socioeconomic class on a person’s happiness? This scholarly source does a great job in providing two different points of views on if someones SES affects their Happiness. It shows that money can buy happiness while also suggesting that there are many other factors that can also impact it as much as money. The only thing that I would have loved to see more in the scholarly source would have probably been more statistics of how much non-monetary factors can have on a person’s happiness.
At the start of the essay, I asked what is the impact of a socioeconomic class on a person’s happiness, but not just for individuals in the United States. After many hours spent trying to figure out a possible answer, my research demonstrated that there is a connection between someone’s SES and happiness. However, this technically does not apply to everyone. There are many individuals from other parts of the world who do not value money as a source of happiness and individuals who stop caring for money up to a certain point because there “is no further progress beyond an annual income of 75,000”( Suliman 2) . On the other hand, there are individuals who value money, such as Michael Norton, who says “if you think money can’t buy happiness, you’re not spending it right” (Norton Money can buy happiness: Michael Norton at tedxcambridge 2011 10:48). We can conclude from both points of view that someone’s SES does in fact affect their happiness, but it’s still not clear as to what point of view is the clear answer. As a result, I believe this question can vary person to person, and more research would need to be done in order to come to a clear conclusion.
Work cited
Catapano, Rhia, et al. “Financial resources impact the relationship between meaning and happiness.” Emotion, vol. 23, no. 2, 7 Apr. 2022, pp. 504–511, https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001090.
Fisher, James, and Michael Frechette. “One more Time, does money buy happiness?” Applied Research in Quality of Life, vol. 18, no. 6, 19 Sep. 2023, pp. 3089–3110, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-023-10221-9
Mehri, Ahmad, et al. “Childhood socioeconomic status and adulthood mental health: Results from the survey on employees of Tehran University of Medical Sciences.” Journal of Public Health, vol. 44, no. 1, 22 Feb. 2021, pp. 10–17, https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdab004.
Norton, Michael. “Money Can Buy Happiness: Michael Norton at Tedxcambridge 2011.” YouTube, YouTube, 29 Jan. 2012, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwGEQcFo9RE.
Parbst, Matthew, and Blair Wheaton. “The effect of welfare state policy spending on the equalization of socioeconomic status disparities in mental health.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior, vol. 64, no. 3, 25 Apr. 2023, pp. 336–353, https://doi.org/10.1177/00221465231166334.
Suliman, Adela. “Can Money Buy Happiness? Scientists Say It Can.” Can Money Buy Happiness? Scientists Say It Can., 8 Mar. 2023, www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/03/08/money-wealth-happiness-study/.
Project #3: Exploratory Research Paper
Peer Review Draft:
Rough Draft:
Revised Draft & Portfolio Due:
Context:
One of the important goals of inquiry is to understand the range of positions on a particular issue. A helpful metaphor for the ongoing expression of positions on an issue is that of a conversation. We could say that making an argument of your own is adding your voice to the conversation and that you need to know what is being said by others before you can join in. In projects #1 and #2, you have been listening in to the conversation about your research question that is being carried out by scholars and members of the public. The Exploratory Research Paper is designed for you to bring your audience into the conversation by sharing what you’ve learned throughout your research.
Purpose:
The purpose of this assignment is to develop the following skills:
Synthesize new information into purposeful texts
Evaluate and interpret sources, including understanding arguments and perspectives
Integrate source material using a variety of methods, including summary, quotation, and paraphrase
Incorporate complex methods into compositions, such as analysis, synthesis, critique, interpretation, and argument
Instructions:
You will write an exploratory research paper that answers your research question. The body of the essay should be organized into paragraphs that use multiple sources that respond to your question in similar ways (for example: if my research question was: why does Dr. ey’s 1302 class make me so unhappy? I might organize then write an exploratory (rather than argumentative) research paper that articulates different reasons why that incorporate multiple sources. If my research question was “is social media making people unhappy?” I would write an essay that explains what it is about social media that the experts I’ve read for my research think causes unhappiness or how social media affects our sense of happiness or unhappiness. This paper should be a minimum of 1,250 words (not including the Works Cited page) and should be written to an academic audience. You must incorporate a minimum of 4 scholarly/academic (peer reviewed) and 3 non scholarly sources.
Length:
1,250 words minimum, not including the Works Cited page (this is a minimum; it’s okay to go over some).
Format:
Formal academic research paper in MLA style.
Grading Rubric
Criteria
Excellent
90 – 100%
Good
80 – 89%
Satisfactory
70 – 79%
Developing
0 – 69%
Focus
5% of total grade
90 – 100%
Identifies a relevant research question related to happiness. Presents an exploratory thesis statement that remains the focal point throughout the paper.
80 – 89%
Identifies a relevant research topic related to happiness. Presents an exploratory thesis statement, but one that is more generalized than specific. The research question remains the focal point of the paper for the most part.
70 – 79%
Identifies a research question, but it may be too broad in scope. The thesis is somewhat unclear and needs to be developed further. The focus of the paper is not consistently maintained throughout the paper.
0 – 69%
Fails to identify a relevant research topic related to happiness or is not clearly defined and/or the paper lacks focus throughout.
Synthesis
20% of total grade
Skillful integration of multiple sources to support arguments; demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the material.
Adequate integration of sources to support arguments; shows a solid grasp of the material.
Limited integration of sources; may lack depth or fail to consider alternative perspectives.
Weak or no integration of sources; demonstrates a lack of synthesis or critical analysis. The essay may rely solely on popular (non-scholarly) sources.
Analysis
15% of total grade
90 – 100%
Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding and careful critical analysis of the sources.
80 – 89%
Demonstrates an understanding and some critical analysis of the sources.
70 – 79%
Demonstrates general understanding with limited critical stasis analysis. Summarizes perspectives without providing any broader connections and/or implications.
0 – 69%
Demonstrates a lack of understanding and inadequate stasis analysis. Analysis is superficial based on opinions and preferences rather than critical stasis analysis or merely summarizes the sources.
Critical Thinking
15% of total grade
Sophisticated analysis of sources, exploring connections, contradictions, and implications; demonstrates original thought.
Solid analysis of sources, identifying connections and contradictions; shows a thoughtful approach.
Limited analysis; may lack depth or fail to consider alternative viewpoints adequately.
Weak analysis or no; may rely on surface-level observations without deeper exploration.
Evidence
10% of total grade
90 – 100%
Provides compelling and accurate evidence to support with at least 4 scholarly sources and an additional 3 popular (non-scholarly) sources.
80 – 89%
Provides essential, accurate evidence to support the central position with at least 3 scholarly sources and an additional 2 popular (non-scholarly) sources.
70 – 79%
Provides some evidence to support the central position at least 3 scholarly sources and an additional 1 popular (non-scholarly) sources.
0 – 69%
Lacks sufficient scholarly research sources to support the central position and/or, if included, are generally not relevant, accurate, or reliable. Contains numerous factual mistakes, omissions, or oversimplifications.
Sources & Citation
10% of total grade
90 – 100%
Research sources are effectively referenced and cited throughout the paper.
80 – 89%
Sources are referenced and cited appropriately throughout the paper for the most part.
70 – 79%
Some sources may not be appropriately referenced and cited in the paper.
0 – 69%
Sources, if included, are not properly referenced and cited in the paper.
Organization
10% of total grade
90 – 100%
Paper is effectively organized. Ideas are arranged logically, flow smoothly, with a strong progression of thought from paragraph to paragraph connecting to the central position.
80 – 89%
Paper is adequately organized. Ideas are arranged reasonably with a progression of thought from paragraph to paragraph connecting to the central position.
70 – 79%
Paper is somewhat organized, although occasionally ideas from paragraph to paragraph may not flow well and/or connect to the central position or be clear as a whole.
0 – 69%
Paper lacks logical organization and impedes readers’ comprehension of ideas. Central position is rarely evident from paragraph to paragraph.
Style
5% of total grade
90 – 100%
Paper is well written and clear using MLA guidelines and is characterized by elements of a strong writing style. Basically free from grammar, punctuation, spelling, usage, or formatting errors.
80 – 89%
Paper shows above average writing style and clarity in writing appropriate for the audience and following MLA guidelines. Minor errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, usage, and/or formatting.
70 – 79%
Paper shows an average and/or casual writing style using standard English and following MLA guidelines. Some errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, usage, and/or formatting.
0 – 69%
Paper shows a below average/poor writing style lacking in elements of appropriate the intended audience and following proper MLA guidelines. Frequent errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, spelling, usage, and/or formatting.
Development
10% of total grade
90 – 100%
Paper meets the required length.
80 – 89%
Paper marginally falls short of the required length.
70 – 79%
Paper is somewhat lacking the required length.
0 – 69%
Paper substantially lacks the required length.
