Accessed Status and Health Limitation in Three Societies: Institutional Embeddedness of Social Capital and Social Comparison

• In Event: 2356 - Social Capital and Well-being

Abstract

Does whom you know in the status hierarchy make you prevent or suffer health limitation (life disruption due to health problems)? Does that effect vary by society? Using nationally representative data simultaneously collected from three societies (the United States, urban China, and Taiwan), this study compares the application of two competing theories—social capital and upward comparative reference group—across societies using three institutional explanations: relational dependence, self-evaluation motive, and inequality structure. Social capital theory expects accessed status (network members’ status) to prevent health limitation, while upward comparative reference group theory has the opposite expectation. Furthermore, the relational dependence explanation anticipates social capital theory to apply more to urban China and Taiwan but upward comparative reference group theory to apply more to the United States. The self-evaluation motive explanation predicts the opposite. The inequality structure explanation expects social capital theory to apply more to Taiwan and upward comparative reference group theory to apply more to the United States and urban China. This study measures accessed status on the occupational dimension using the position generator. Results support social capital theory in Taiwan, upward comparative reference group theory in the other two societies, and the inequality structure explanation across the three societies. Accessed occupational status is associated with health limitation negatively in Taiwan but positively in the other two societies.

Authors

• Lijun Song, Vanderbilt University

• Philip J. Pettis, Vanderbilt University

• Chih-Jou Chen, Academia Sinica