SOSYOEKONOMİK STATÜNÜN DUYGU VE DAVRANIŞLARA ETKİSİ

Öz

Sosyoekonomik statü (SES) farklılığının farklı duygu ve davranışlar üzerine yoğunlaştığını belirten çalışmalar son yıllarda hızla artmaktadır. Düşük ve yüksek SES’e sahip bireylerin bazı duygu ve davranışlarının statüleriyle yakından ilişkili olduğu belirtilmektir. SES’teki farklılık nedeniyle belli duygu ve davranışlar insanlar tarafından daha az veya daha çok deneyimlenmektedir. SES farkı nedeniyle oluşan bu duygu ve davranış farklılıkları çeşitli politikalarla dengelenebilmektedir. Bu araştırmanın amacı; SES farkı nedeniyle oluşan duygu ve davranış farklılıklarını ortaya çıkarmak ve SES farkı nedeniyle insanların duygu ve davranış deneyimlerindeki dengesizliği gidermek için teşvik edici politikalar önermektir. Çalışmada ilk olarak, düşük ve yüksek SES’e sahip bireylerin deneyimledikleri olumlu duygular ve bunların kendilerine ve başkalarına odaklı davranışlara yol açması literatürdeki deneyler yoluyla incelenecektir. İkinci olarak, yardımseverlik şemsiyesi altındaki bir davranış olan alturistik davranış ve benmerkezciliğin merkezde olduğu narsisistik kişilik özelliklerinin düşük ve yüksek SES ile ilişkisi literatürdeki deneyler ve anket sonuçlarıyla açıklanıp karşılaştırılacaktır. Son olarak, yüksek ve düşük SES’in etik olmayan davranışlarla ilişkisi literatürdeki çeşitli deney bulgularıyla analiz edilecektir. Çalışma bu yönüyle eşitsizliğin azaltılması için bireylerin duygularını daha iyi anlamaya ve bu yönde politikalar yapılabilmesi için gelecekte yapılacak araştırmalara katkı sağlayacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyoekonomik Statü
• İktisadi Davranış
• Duygular
• Tercihler
• Ekonomik Eşitsizlik

THE EFFECT OF SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS ON EMOTIONS AND BEHAVIORS

Öz

Studies indicating that socioeconomic status (SES) differences concentrate on different emotions and behaviors have been increasing rapidly throughout recent years. It is stated that some emotions and behaviors of individuals with low and high SES are closely related to their status. Certain emotions and behaviors are experienced more or less by people due to differences in SES. These differences in emotions and behaviors that occur due to SES differences can be balanced with various policies. The purpose of this research is to reveal the differences in emotion and behavior that occur due to SES differences. At the same time, policies will be proposed to eliminate the imbalance in people’s emotional and behavioral experiences due to SES differences. Firstly, the positive emotions experienced by individuals with low and high SES, as well as the extent to which they lead to behaviors based on oneself and others, are to be examined through experiments in the literature in the study. Secondly, the relationships between altruistic behavior, which is under the umbrella of prosocial behavior, as well as narcissistic personality traits, in which egocentrism becomes central, and low and high SES are to be explained and compared with the results of experiments and surveys in the literature. Consequently, the relationship of high and low SES with unethical behaviors is to be analyzed with various experimental findings in the literature. In this regard, the study would contribute to future research studies to better comprehend the individuals’ feelings to mitigate inequality and implement policies in such a manner.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Socioeconomic Status
• Economic Behavior
• Emotions
• Preferences
• Economic Inequality

Kaynakça

1. Angner E. (2019). We’re all behavioral economists now. Journal of Economic Methodology, 26(3), 195–207.
2. Akcigit, U., Grigsby, J., & Nicholas, T. (2017). The rise of American ingenuity: innovation and inventors of the golden age, NBER Working Papers 23047, National Bureau of Economic Research Inc.
3. Andersen S. M., & Chen, S. (2002). The relational self: An interpersonal social-cognitive theory. Psychological Review, 109(4), 619-45. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.4.619
4. Andreoni, J. (2001). The economics of philanthropy. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 11369–11376). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
5. Andreoni, J., & Bernheim, B. D. (2009). Social image and the 50-50 norm: a theoretical and experimental analysis of audience effects. Econometrica, 77(5), 1607-1636. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA7384
6. Andreoni, J., Nikiforakis, N., & Stoop, J. (2021). Higher socioeconomic status does not predict decreased prosocial behavior in a field experiment. Nature communications, 12(1), 4266. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24519-5
7. Ariely, D., & Mann, H. (2013). A bird's eye view of unethical behavior: Commentary on Trautmann et al. (2013). Perspective on Psychological Science, 8(5), 498-500. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613498907
8. Balakrishnan, A., Palma, P. A., Patenaude, J., & Campbell, L. (2017). A 4-study replication of the moderating effects of greed on socioeconomic status and unethical behaviour. Scientific data, 4, 160120. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.120

9. Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty, New York: PublicAffairs.
10. Carlo, G., Eisenberg, N., Troyer, D., Switzer, G., & Speer. A. L. (1991). The altruistic personality: In what contexts is it apparent?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 450–458.
11. Chapman, B. P., Fiscella, K., Kawachi, I., & Duberstein, P. R. (2010). Personality, socioeconomic status, and all-cause mortality in the United States. American Journal of Epidemiology, 171(1), 83-92. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwp323
12. Clark, A. E., & Senik, C. (2011). Is happiness different from flourishing? Cross-country evidence from the ESS. Revue D'économie Politique, 121(1), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.211.0017
13. Clerke, A. S., Brown, M., Forchuk, C., & Campbell, L. (2018). Association between social class, greed, and unethical behaviour: A replication study. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.166
14. Côté, S., Stellar, J. E., Willer, R., Forbes, R. C., Martin, S. R., & Bianchi, E. C. (2021). The psychology of entrenched privilege: High socioeconomic status individuals from affluent backgrounds are uniquely high in entitlement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47(1), 70-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220916633
15. Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Money and happiness: Income and subjective well-being across nations. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and Subjective Well-being (pp. 185–218). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
16. Diener, E., Ng, W., Harter, J., & Arora, R. (2010). Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018066
17. Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). Social class, power, and selfishness: When and why upper and lower class individuals behave unethically. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(3), 436–449. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000008
18. Easterlin, R. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In Paul A. David & Melvin W. Reder (Eds.), Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz (pp. 89-125). New York: Academic Press Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-205050-3.50008-7
19. Falk, A., Kosse, F., Pinger, P., Schildberg-Hörisch, H., & Deckers, T. (2021). Socioeconomic status and inequalities in children’s IQ and economic preferences. Journal of Political Economy, 129(9), 2504-2545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/714992
20. Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J. L., Savin, N. E., & Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6(3), 347-369. https://doi.org/10.1006/game.1994.1021
21. Gallo, L. C., & Matthews, K. A. (2003). Understanding the association between socioeconomic status and physical health: do negative emotions play a role?. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 10-51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.10
22. Gardner, J., & Oswald, A. (2001). Does money buy happiness? A longitudinal study using data on windfalls. Warwick University Paper, 1-32.
23. James, R. N., & Sharpe, D. L. (2007). The nature and causes of the u-shaped charitable giving profile. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), 218-238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764006295993
24. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision making under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1914185
25. Kahneman, D., & Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(38), 16489–16493. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011492107
26. Kamilçelebi, H. (2023). Mutluluk iktisadında Easterlin’e karşı Veenhoven: İktisadi büyüme mutluluğu artırır mı?. İktisat Politikası Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(2), 691-720. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1170876
27. Kamilçelebi, H. (2022). Beklenen fayda ve deneyimlenen fayda: Gelir artışı üzerine bir araştırma. 2. Bs. Bursa: Ekin Yay.
28. Kamilçelebi, H. (2020). Will we be happier in the future? Research on the effect of Covid-19 on income and life satisfaction of the US citizens. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19, Covid-19 Special Issue, 541-553. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.787948
29. Kamilçelebi, H. (2019). Davranışsal iktisat. London: IJOPEC Publication.
30. Killingsworth M. A. (2021). Experienced well-being rises with income, even above $75,000 per year. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(4), e2016976118. https://doi. org/10.1073/pnas.2016976118
31. Killingsworth, M. A., Kahneman, D., & Mellers, B. (2023). Income and emotional well-being: A conflict resolved. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 120(10), e2208661120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2208661120
32. Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2011). Social class as culture: The convergence of resources and rank in the social realm. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(4), 246–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411414654
33. Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2009). Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 97(6), 992–1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016357
34. Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., Mendoza-Denton, R., Rheinschmidt, M. L., & Keltner, D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. Psychological review, 119(3), 546–572. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028756
35. Kushlev, K., Dunn, E. W., & Lucas, R. E. (2015). Higher income is associated with less daily sadness but not more daily happiness. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(5), 483–489. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614568161
36. Loewenstein, G. (2000). Emotions in economic theory and economic behavior. The American Economic Review, 90(2), 426–432. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.2.426
37. Loewenstein, G., O'Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (2003). Projection bias in predicting future utility. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1209-1248. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552784
38. Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E., & Zhao, J. (2013). Poverty impedes cognitive function. Science, 341(6149), 976–980. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1238041
39. Manstead A. S. R. (2018). The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour. The British journal of social psychology, 57(2), 267–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12251
40. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
41. Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2013). Scarcity: Why having too little means so much. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
42. Na, J. Grossmann, I., Varnum, M. E. W., Kitayama, S., Gonzalez, R., & Nisbett, R. E. (2010). Cultural differences are not always reducible to individual differences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(14), 6192-6197. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1001911107
43. Oakes, J. M., & Rossi, P. H. (2003). The measurement of SES in health research: Current practice and steps toward a new approach. Social Science & Medicine, 56(4), 769–784. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00073-4
44. Piff, P. K. (2014). Wealth and the inflated self: class, entitlement, and narcissism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(1), 34-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213501699
45. Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., & Keltner, D. (2018). Unpacking the inequality paradox: The psychological roots of inequality and social class. In J. M. Olson (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 53–124). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.10.002
46. Piff, P. K., & Moskowitz, J. P. (2018b). Wealth, poverty, and happiness: Social class is differentially associated with positive emotions. Emotion, 18(6), 902–905. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/emo0000387
47. Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Cheng, B., & Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 99(5), 771-784. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020092
48. Piff, P. K., Stancato, D. M., Côté, S., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Keltner, D. (2012). Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(11), 4086-4091. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118373109
49. Stamos, A., Lange, F., Huang, S., & Dewitte, S. (2020). Having less, giving more? Two preregistered replications of the relationship between social class and prosocial behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 84, 103902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.103902
50. Stellar, J. E., Manzo, V. M., Kraus, M. W., & Keltner, D. (2012). Class and compassion: Socioeconomic factors predict responses to suffering. Emotion, 12(3), 449-59. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026508
51. Trautmann, S. T., van de Kuilen, G., & Zeckhauser, R. J., (2013). Social class and (un)ethical behavior: A framework, with evidence from a large population sample. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(5), 487-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613491272
52. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
53. Van Boven, L., Dunning, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2000). Egocentric empathy gaps between owners and buyers: Misperceptions of the endowment effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(1), 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.1.66
54. Veenhoven, R., & Hagerty, M. (2006). Rising happiness in nations 1946-2004: A reply to Easterlin. Social Indicators Research, 79(3), 421–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-5074-x
55. Veenhoven, R., & Dumludağ, D. (2015). İktisat ve mutluluk: Bugün daha mutlu muyuz?. In D. Dumludağ, Ö. Gökdemir, L. Neyse, & E. Ruben (Eds.), İktisatta Davranışsal Yaklaşımlar (pp. 201-231, 2018) Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
56. Vohls, K. D. (2013). The Poor's poor mental power. Science, 341(6149), 969-970. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1244172
57. Wang, T., Wang, X., Jiang, T., Wang, S., & Chen, Z. (2021). Under the threat of an epidemic: People with higher subjective socioeconomic status show more unethical behaviors. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 3170. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063170