تحرک بین نسلی و بهزیستی ذهنی، شواهد از پژوهش اجتماعی عمومی

Abstract We investigate the relationship between intergenerational socio-economic mobility and subjective well-being (SWB) using data from the General Social Survey (GSS). We look at three different measures of intergenerational mobility—social, educational, and income mobility. We find that downward mobility with respect to all three measures has a negative effect on the self-reported level of happiness and subjective health while upward mobility is associated with positive outcomes in subjective well-being. The positive and negative effect of social and educational mobility, however, is entirely through the income and health channels while income mobility has an impact on subjective well-being even after controlling for the current level of income and health. We further find that the effect of income mobility on subjective well-being peaks between the ages of 35–45 years and then slowly dissipates. Finally, the negative effect of downward mobility on subjective well-being is much stronger than the positive effect of upward mobility. This is consistent with the decision theory of loss aversion according to which the experienced disutility from loses outweighs the utility from acquiring proportionate gains. We do not find evidence for loss aversion when it comes to social and educational mobility.

. Introduction Income inequality in the United States has rapidly increased since the 1970s reaching historically high levels in recent years (Piketty and Saez, 2003). An emerging body of evidence1 suggests that higher level of income inequality naturally leads to decline in socio-economic mobility, a relationship that is now commonly referred to as “The Great Gatsby Curve.” According to a report by the OECD (2011, p.40), for example, rising income inequality “can stifle upward mobility, making it harder for talented and hard-working people to get the rewards they deserve.” In the United States, income mobility is already detrimentally low and will continue to decline in the future (Krueger, 2012). This view has been challenged by Chetty et al. (2014) who find that rank-based measures of income mobility in the United States have stayed relatively constant since the 1970s. A recent study by Bjørnskov et al. (2013) also finds that in countries with low upward-mobility the negative effect of income inequality on SWB is much higher than in countries with plenty of economic opportunities that allow people to move quickly up the social ladder. This raises serious concerns about the “American Dream,” which remains the core of the United States identity and promises equal socio-economic opportunities regardless of a person's economic background. In this paper, we examine the effect of intergenerational socio-economic mobility2 on SWB. Although there is by now a large literature on variety of topics related to intergenerational mobility, only a handful of papers explore the topic with respect to subjective measures of well-being. Theoretical evidence suggests that socio-economic mobility can increase the level of SWB through variety of channels. For example, in addition to higher consumption and better access to services such as health care and education, individuals who do better than their parents feel pride and a sense of accomplishment. Higher social status may also make people feel more powerful and socially accepted. On the other hand, individuals may find themselves in a new socio-economic class where expectations for success and consumption are much higher which may lower their life satisfaction. Do people who climb the socio-economic ladder, then, get stuck on a hedonic treadmill or is there a permanent happiness residual in addition to the positive impact of higher income on consumption? Does social status, income, or educational mobility matter more when it comes to subjective well-being and does this effect differ among the different groups of the population? We answer these questions using a pooled cross sectional data from the GSS from 1972 to 2012. We look at three separate measures of intergenerational mobility—social, income, and educational mobility. We find that downward intergenerational mobility with respect to each one of these measures has a negative effect on happiness and subjective health. Similarly, climbing the socio-economic ladder is associated with higher levels of happiness and subjective health. The impact of social and educational mobility, however, is entirely through the income and health channels. These results are robust with respect to several specifications used. Following Gehring (2013), we also examine how the effect of income mobility differs among the different subgroups of the population. Upward income mobility, for example, tends to benefit females, blacks, and people with higher education more than it benefits males, whites, and people with lower education. Downward income mobility, on the other hand, tends to influence more negatively males, whites, and people with lower education. We do not find any significant differences when it comes to social and educational mobility. The effect of income mobility on subjective well-being peaks between the ages of 35–45 and then slowly dissipates. Finally, the negative effect of downward income mobility on SWB is much stronger than the positive effect of upward mobility. This is consistent with the decision theory of loss aversion according to which the experienced disutility from loses outweighs the utility from acquiring proportionate gains. We do not find support of the loss aversion theory when it comes to social and educational mobility where relative gains seem to be valued more than losses. Our study advances the literature in several ways. First, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that looks at three different measures of intergenerational mobility, and the only one that considers the relationship between educational mobility and SWB. Second, we apply the analysis to the United States using data from the GSS which replicates some of the previous evidence that is based on data from Europe. Third, we investigate the effect of intergenerational mobility beyond the income and health channels, i.e., once we account for the positive effect of higher income, and better health and education, we answer if climbing the socio-economic ladder matters. Fourth, we examine how socio-economic mobility differs by sub-groups of the population. For example, given the traditional gender roles in society, do females and males see social mobility similarly? Finally, we examine how the effect of upward or downward intergenerational mobility changes with age.

Conclusions Using data from the GSS from 1972 to 2012, we estimate the effect of three separate measures of intergenerational mobility—social, income, and educational mobility—on two measures of subjective well-being—self-reported level of happiness and health. We find that downward social, income, and educational mobility have negative effect on both of these measures. Similarly, climbing the income ladder is associated with higher levels of happiness and subjective health. The effect of social and educational mobility, however, is entirely through the income and health channels. The effect of income mobility differs among the different subgroups of the population. Upward income mobility benefits females, blacks, and people with higher educational attainment more than it benefits males, whites, and people with lower education. Downward income mobility, on the other hand, tends to affect more negatively males, whites, and people with lower education. We find that the effect of income mobility on subjective well-being peaks between the ages of 35–45 and then slowly dissipates. Finally, the negative effect of downward income mobility on SWB is much stronger than the positive effect of upward mobility. This is consistent with the decision theory of loss aversion according to which the experienced disutility from loses outweighs the utility from acquiring proportionate gains. We do not find support for the loss aversion theory when it comes to social and educational mobility where relative gains seem to be valued more than losses.