↓ Skip to main content

Choice of measure matters: A study of the relationship between socioeconomic status and psychosocial resources in a middle-aged normal population

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Choice of measure matters: A study of the relationship between socioeconomic status and psychosocial resources in a middle-aged normal population
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0178929
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karin Festin, Kristin Thomas, Joakim Ekberg, Margareta Kristenson

Abstract

Psychosocial resources may serve as an important link to explain socioeconomic differences in health. Earlier studies have demonstrated that education, income and occupational status cannot be used interchangeably as indicators of a hypothetical latent social dimension. In the same manner, it is important to disentangle the effect of measuring different constructs of psychosocial resources. The aim of this study was therefore to analyse if associations between socioeconomic status (SES) and psychosocial resources differ depending on the measures used. A cross-sectional population-based study of a random sample (n = 1007) of middle-aged individuals (45-69 years old, 50% women) in Sweden was performed using questionnaire and register data. SES was measured as education, occupation, household income and self-rated economy. Psychosocial resources were measured as social integration, social support, mastery, self-esteem, sense of coherence (SOC) and trust. Logistic regression models were applied to analyse the relationships controlling for the effects of possible confounders. The measures of SES were low or moderately correlated to each other as were the measures of psychosocial resources. After controlling for age, sex, country of birth and employment status, household income and self-rated economy were associated with all six psychosocial resources; occupation was associated with three (social integration, self-esteem and trust) and education with two (social integration and self-esteem). Social integration and self-esteem showed a significant and graded relationship with all SES measures; trust was associated with all SES measures except education, whereas SOC and mastery were only associated with household income and self-rated economy. After controlling for other SES measures, no associations with psychosocial resources remained for education or occupation. In conclusion, associations between SES and psychosocial resources did differ depending on the measures used. The findings illustrate the importance of the choice of measure when investigating SES as well as psychosocial resources.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 21%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 17 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 16%
Social Sciences 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 17 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2017.
All research outputs
#18,569,430
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#156,241
of 196,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,354
of 317,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,120
of 3,981 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 196,056 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,981 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.