1
|
Johnson BN, Freiburger E, Deska JC, Kunstman JW. Social Class and Social Pain: Target SES Biases Judgments of Pain and Support for White Target Individuals. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2024; 50:957-970. [PMID: 36905133 DOI: 10.1177/01461672231156025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/12/2023]
Abstract
Social pain, defined as distress caused by negative interpersonal experiences (e.g., ostracism, mistreatment), is detrimental to health. Yet, it is unclear how social class might shape judgments of the social pains of low-socioeconomic status (SES) and high-SES individuals. Five studies tested competing toughness and empathy predictions for SES's effect on social pain judgments. Consistent with an empathy account, in all studies (Ncumulative = 1,046), low-SES White targets were judged more sensitive to social pain than high-SES White targets. Further, empathy mediated these effects, such that participants felt greater empathy and expected more social pain for low-SES targets relative to high-SES targets. Social pain judgments also informed judgments of social support needs, as low-SES targets were presumed to need more coping resources to manage hurtful events than high-SES targets. The current findings provide initial evidence that empathic concern for low-SES White individuals sensitizes social pain judgments and increases expected support needs for lower class White individuals.
Collapse
|
2
|
Schlander M, van Harten W, Retèl VP, Pham PD, Vancoppenolle JM, Ubels J, López OS, Quirland C, Maza F, Aas E, Crusius B, Escobedo A, Franzen N, Fuentes-Cid J, Hernandez D, Hernandez-Villafuerte K, Kirac I, Paty A, Philip T, Smeland S, Sullivan R, Vanni E, Varga S, Vermeulin T, Eckford RD. The socioeconomic impact of cancer on patients and their relatives: Organisation of European Cancer Institutes task force consensus recommendations on conceptual framework, taxonomy, and research directions. Lancet Oncol 2024; 25:e152-e163. [PMID: 38547899 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00636-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2023] [Revised: 12/03/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 04/02/2024]
Abstract
Loss of income and out-of-pocket expenditures are important causes of financial hardship in many patients with cancer, even in high-income countries. The far-reaching consequences extend beyond the patients themselves to their relatives, including caregivers and dependents. European research to date has been limited and is hampered by the absence of a coherent theoretical framework and by heterogeneous methods and terminology. To address these shortages, a task force initiated by the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI) produced 25 recommendations, including a comprehensive definition of socioeconomic impact from the perspective of patients and their relatives, a conceptual framework, and a consistent taxonomy linked to the framework. The OECI task force consensus statement highlights directions for future research with a view towards policy relevance. Beyond descriptive studies into the dimension of the problem, individual severity and predictors of vulnerability should be explored. It is anticipated that the consensus recommendations will facilitate and enhance future research efforts into the socioeconomic impact of cancer and cancer care, providing a crucial reference point for the development and validation of patient-reported outcome instruments aimed at measuring its broader effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Schlander
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Mannheim Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany; Alfred Weber Institute (AWI), University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany; Institute for Innovation & Valuation (InnoVal(HC)), Wiesbaden, Germany.
| | - Wim van Harten
- Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands; Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, Netherlands
| | - Valesca P Retèl
- Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Phu Duy Pham
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Mannheim Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Julie M Vancoppenolle
- Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Jasper Ubels
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Mannheim Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany
| | - Olaya Seoane López
- The Support Team, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Camila Quirland
- Health Technology Assessment Unit, Arturo López Perez Foundation, Santiago, Chile; School of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Felipe Maza
- Health Technology Assessment Unit, Arturo López Perez Foundation, Santiago, Chile
| | - Eline Aas
- Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Division of Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Agustín Escobedo
- Oncology Care Management, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Nora Franzen
- Department of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Diego Hernandez
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Iva Kirac
- Genetic Counseling Unit, University Hospital for Tumors, Sestre Milosrdnice University Hospital Center, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Artus Paty
- Department of Medical Information, Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France
| | - Thierry Philip
- Organisation of European Cancer Institutes (OECI), Brussels, Belgium; Institut Curie, Paris, France
| | - Sigbjørn Smeland
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; Division of Cancer Medicine, Oslo University Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Oslo, Norway
| | | | - Elena Vanni
- Business Controlling, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Milan, Italy; Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Milan, Italy
| | - Sinisa Varga
- Institute for Gastroenterological Tumours, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Thomas Vermeulin
- Department of Medical Information, Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France
| | - Rachel D Eckford
- Division of Health Economics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
van der Veer A, Madern T, van Lenthe FJ. Tunneling, cognitive load and time orientation and their relations with dietary behavior of people experiencing financial scarcity - an AI-assisted scoping review elaborating on scarcity theory. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2024; 21:26. [PMID: 38439067 PMCID: PMC10910771 DOI: 10.1186/s12966-024-01576-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 03/06/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The concept of a financial scarcity mindset has raised much attention as an explanation for poor decision-making and dysfunctional behavior. It has been suggested that financial scarcity could also impair dietary behavior, through a decline in self-control. Underlying cognitive mechanisms of tunneling (directing attention to financial issues and neglecting other demands), cognitive load (a tax on mental bandwidth interfering with executive functioning) and time orientation (a shift towards a present time horizon, versus a future time horizon) may explain the association between financial scarcity and self-control related dietary behavior. The current scoping review gathers recent evidence on how these mechanisms affect dietary behavior of people experiencing financial scarcity. It builds on a theoretical framework based on insights from behavioral economics and health psychology. METHODS A literature search was executed in six online databases, which resulted in 9.975 papers. Search terms were tunneling, cognitive load and time orientation, financial scarcity, and dietary behavior. Screening was performed with ASReview, an AI-ranking tool. In total, 14 papers were included in the scoping review. We used PRISMA-ScR guidelines for reporting. RESULTS Limited evidence indicates that a scarcity mindset could increase tunneling, through attentional narrowing on costs of food, which then directly impacts dietary behavior. A scarcity mindset involves experiencing financial stress, which can be understood as cognitive load. Cognitive load decreases attentional capacity, which could impair self-control in dietary choices. Financial scarcity is related to a present time orientation, which affects dietary choices by shifting priorities and decreasing motivation for healthy dietary behavior. CONCLUSIONS A scarcity mindset affects dietary behavior in different ways. Tunneling and a shift in time orientation are indicative of an attentional redirection, which can be seen as more adaptive to the situation. These may be processes indirectly affecting self-control capacity. Cognitive load could decrease self-control capacity needed for healthy dietary behavior because it consumes mental bandwidth. How a changing time orientation when experiencing financial scarcity relates to motivation for self-control in dietary behavior is a promising theme for further inquiry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annemarieke van der Veer
- Research Group of Debt and Debt Collection, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Utrecht, PO Box 85397, 3508 AJ, The Netherlands.
| | - Tamara Madern
- Research Group of Debt and Debt Collection, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Utrecht, PO Box 85397, 3508 AJ, The Netherlands
| | - Frank J van Lenthe
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, Rotterdam, 3000 CA, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Button AM, Paluch RA, Schechtman KB, Wilfley DE, Geller N, Quattrin T, Cook SR, Eneli IU, Epstein LH. Parents, but not their children, demonstrate greater delay discounting with resource scarcity. BMC Public Health 2023; 23:1983. [PMID: 37828503 PMCID: PMC10568819 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-16832-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2023] [Accepted: 09/25/2023] [Indexed: 10/14/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Individuals with obesity tend to discount the future (delay discounting), focusing on immediate gratification. Delay discounting is reliably related to indicators of economic scarcity (i.e., insufficient resources), including lower income and decreased educational attainment in adults. It is unclear whether the impact of these factors experienced by parents also influence child delay discounting between the ages of 8 and 12-years in families with obesity. METHODS The relationship between indices of family income and delay discounting was studied in 452 families with parents and 6-12-year-old children with obesity. Differences in the relationships between parent economic, educational and Medicaid status, and parent and child delay discounting were tested. RESULTS Results showed lower parent income (p = 0.019) and Medicaid status (p = 0.021) were differentially related to greater parent but not child delay discounting among systematic responders. CONCLUSIONS These data suggest differences in how indicators of scarcity influence delay discounting for parents and children, indicating that adults with scarce resources may be shaped to focus on immediate needs instead of long-term goals. It is possible that parents can reduce the impact of economic scarcity on their children during preadolescent years. These findings suggest a need for policy change to alleviate the burden of scarce conditions and intervention to modify delay discounting rate and to improve health-related choices and to address weight disparities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alyssa M Button
- Division of Population and Public Health Science, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
| | - Rocco A Paluch
- Department of Pediatrics, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, 3435 Main Street, Building #26, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA
| | - Kenneth B Schechtman
- Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Denise E Wilfley
- Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Nancy Geller
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Teresa Quattrin
- Department of Pediatrics, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, 3435 Main Street, Building #26, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA
| | - Stephen R Cook
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA
| | - Ihouma U Eneli
- Department of Pediatrics, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Leonard H Epstein
- Department of Pediatrics, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, 3435 Main Street, Building #26, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Poluektova O, Efremova M, Breugelmans SM. Psychological patterns of poverty in Russia: Relationships among socioeconomic conditions, motivation, self-regulation and well-being. Int J Psychol 2022; 57:660-675. [PMID: 35596623 DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12845] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2020] [Accepted: 03/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
This article aims to extend our understanding of the link between socioeconomic conditions and psychological variables. It focuses on the effects of five distinct socioeconomic indicators on a range of psychological variables in samples of 162 individuals living below the poverty line and 188 of their more well-off counterparts in Russia. Participants completed a questionnaire containing measures of socioeconomic indicators (i.e., income, education, perceived deprivation, subjective socioeconomic status, and childhood socioeconomic status) and psychological variables representing self-regulation, motivation, and well-being. Our main findings include: (a) significant effects of socioeconomic status on all psychological variables, which are in line with other studies seeking to answer similar questions, (b) varying importance of different socioeconomic indicators for different psychological variables, and (c) centrality of all socioeconomic indicators except childhood socioeconomic status, and of values of openness to change and self-transcendence, satisfaction with life and self-esteem in the network of relationships between socioeconomic indicators and psychological variables.
Collapse
|