Age differences on the effects of social comparison on

Acta Psychologica Sinica

No. 09

Socioeconomic status and sociometric status: Age differences on the effects of social comparison on subjective well-being HUANG Tingting1, LIU Liqian2, WANG Dahua1, ZHANG Wenhai3 1. Institute of Developmental Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China; 2. Beijing Industry and Trade Technicians College, Beijing 100089, China; 3. Centre for Mental Health Education, Yancheng Institute of Technology, Yancheng 400715, China

Abstract: Social status refers to the position of an individual in the society, generally indicated by socioeconomic status (SES) or sociometric status (SMS). Despite growing research interest in examining relationships between SMS and SWB, only a few studies so far have directly compared the two types of social status with regard to their influences on SWB. Available work in the US has generally reported that SMS not SES has a positive impact on SWB among American samples. Given the economic and cultural differences between China and US, we proposed in the present study that both SES and SMS could be closely associated with an individual's SWB among Chinese people. Furthermore, we proposed that SES might have stronger effects on young adults' SWB, whereas SMS have stronger effects on older adults. This age-related hypothesis was grounded in the paradox of SWB with aging and the Social Selectivity Theory (SST). The paradox of SWB assumes that despite of deterioration with aging, older people report higher SWB compared with younger people. To interpret this paradox, SST maintains that individuals' social motivation will gradually shift from knowledge acquirement to emotion regulation with age. Overall, the main purpose of this paper was to examine the impacts of the two types of social status on individuals' SWB in a Chinese sample, while also testing age differences in this relationship. Participants were 120 young (aged 27.26 ± 4.80 years) and 120 older adults (aged 65.12 ± 6.49 years) from Beijing, China. Participants were firstly tested for baseline SWB and some covariates including neuroticism and extraversion. After a 3–7 day interval, participants were then allocated into one of the four conditions of social comparison, namely upward SES, downward SES, upward SMS, and downward SMS based on the MacArthur Ladder priming technique. Participants were asked to a) think of their important social networks and single out someone who has the highest or lowest SES (or SMS) among them; b) imagine this person at the very top/bottom rung of the ladder; c) place their own SES (or SMS) on one of the ladder rungs in comparison with the target person. After completing this grading on the ladder, their SWB were measured once again. An independent sampled t-test showed that there is no difference between young and older adults on the overall scores of baseline SWB (t(237) = 1.55, p = 0.12) while older adults reported higher life satisfaction than young adults (t(237) = 3.43, p < 0.01, Cohen's d = 0.44), which is consistent with the assumption of the paradox of SWB. A three-way ANOVA (comparison direction × status type × age) showed that comparison direction had a significant main effect (F(1, 229) = 133.01, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.37), whereas there was no interaction effect between comparison direction and status type, F(1, 229) = 0.20, p = 0.66. In other words, both SES and SMS have significant impacts on SWB. Most importantly, there existed a significant interaction between comparison direction, status type and age, F(1, 229) = 6.92, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.03. Post-hoc analysis indicated that SES had a stronger effect on younger people's SWB under the downward comparison, whereas SMS had a stronger effect on older people's SWB under the upward comparison. However, participants' ladder grades under different comparison directions did not show differences (F(1, 231) = 0.05, p = 0.82), which failed to validate the priming effect of the McArthur Ladder techniques. We attribute the failing validation to the insensitivity of the Ladder's grading mode. In the supplementary experiment, we used a 10 cm long rectangle without any grading marks instead of the original graded ladder in order to eliminate the anchoring effects. The results showed a significant difference between upward and downward comparison, which proves that the modified grading mode is effective to identify the priming effects of McArthur Ladder,t(57) = −2.06,p < 0.05, Cohen's d = 0.54. In conclusion, consistent with our hypotheses, we found that SWB can be affected by SES and SMS simultaneously, which suggests a cultural specificity in terms of the effects of social status on SWB. It is noteworthy that the present study confirmed the aging paradox of SWB, and shed a new light on the age-related differences in the impacts of social status on SWB. The findings demonstrate that SES has stronger effects on young adults, whereas SMS has stronger effects on older adults, which provides a reasonable interpretation for the paradox of SWB with aging from the perspective of social comparison. In addition, we have modified the grading mode of MacArthur Ladder so as to make it applicable among Chinese samples. Keywords: socioeconomic status; sociometric status; subjective well-being; social comparison; aging

______________________________________

Received: 2015-08-18 Supported by: Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (310400078) Corresponding author: WANG Dahua, E-mail: [email protected]

© 2015 China Academic Journals (CD Edition) Electronic Publishing House Co., Ltd.

1

Introduction

Subjective well-being (SWB) is a composite psychological indicator measuring individuals’ quality of life, and it has important impacts on various aspects of life including individuals’ health, work condition, and social life (Diener & Chan, 2011; Diener & Ryan, 2009). Andrews & Withey (1976) were the first to find through research that SWB can be divided into two independent dimensions: life satisfaction and affect (including positive affect and negative affect). On this basis, Diener (1984) proposed that the definition and measurement of SWB should include individuals’ cognitive evaluation and subjective affective experience of their quality of life. Extensive studies on the impact factors of SWB have shown that individuals’ SWB is largely affected by socioeconomic status (SES) indicators such as their income and education (Anderson, Kraus, Galinsky, & Keltner, 2012; Burr, Santo, & Pushkar, 2011). However, due to the diminishing marginal effect, in countries of different developmental levels, the effects of SES on individuals' SWB are different (Howell & Howell, 2008). Social Comparison Theory (SCT) argues that the nature and level of SWB are usually a result of social comparison (Diner & Fejita, 1997; Eid & Larsen, 2008). Whether the result is good or bad is associated with the direction and content of social comparison. Studies on social comparison direction suggest that upward comparison with individuals better than oneself will have a negative impact on the latter, and will lower one's well-being (Blanton, 2001; Stapel & Suls, 2004; Wood, Taylor, & Lichtman, 1985). On the contrary, downward comparison with individuals in worse conditions than oneself will enhance one's evaluation of oneself (Bauer & Wrosch, 2011 ; Suls, Martin, & Wheeler, 2002 ; Wills, 1981). Furthermore, in terms of social comparison content, individuals may compare their various aspects of life with others'. Among them, comparison of social status is relatively common and is one of the comparisons that have great impacts on individuals’ SWB. Meanwhile, previous studies on social status and well-being mostly focus on the effects of SES on well-being. SES emphasizes an individual's economic status in a society, and is usually measured objectively by such indicators as economic income, level of education, and profession (Bradley & Corwyn, 2002). In recent years, with the rapid development of economy, an increasing number of Western studies have found that SES is a weak predictor of SWB (Diener, Kahneman,Tov, & Arora, 2010; Easterlin, 1974; Louis & Diener, 2011); some studies have even found that those individuals who care about material wealth have lower SWB (Kasser & Ryan, 1993). Therefore, on the basis of SES, Anderson, John, Keltner & Kring (2001) proposed another type of social status, i.e., sociometric status (SMS). This concept originates

from studies on social acceptance among children and adolescents. It emphasizes the status of an individual in his/her group. It is usually measured by such indicators as respect, prominence, and influence among the group members (Anderson et al., 2001). Compared to SES, a higher SMS gives an individual a sense of controllability, acceptance, and influence (Berger, Rosenholtz, & Zelditch, 1980). Therefore, Anderson et al. (2012) argued that SMS is a better predictor of SWB. To verify this hypothesis, Anderson et al. (2012) adopted the MacArthur ladder method to prime the comparison of individuals' social status, and examined the effects of SES comparison and SMS comparison on individuals' SWB and their relative magnitude. The results suggested that SMS is a strong predictor of individuals' SWB, whereas SES cannot predict individuals' SWB (Anderson et al., 2012). Given the economic and cultural differences between China and US, we proposed in the present study that the effects of SES and SMS on SWB might vary across regions; thus it was necessary to repeat the experiment on Chinese samples. Several cross-regional studies showed that the effects of SES on individuals' SWB vary across countries of different development levels (Diener, Ng, Harter, & Arora, 2010). Some researchers conducted the experiment on impoverished people living in Calcutta, India, and found that the correlation between individuals' income and life satisfaction was as high as 0.45; meanwhile, the same experiment on individuals living in developed countries revealed only low correlation between individuals' income and life satisfaction (Biswas-Diener & Diener, 2001). A cross-national study on well-being also found that as compared to the situation in Japan, South Korea, and the United States, the relative income and educational level of the Chinese participants are more effective in predicting their well-being (Oshio, Nozaki, & Kobayashi, 2011). A large amount of studies showed that SES has diminishing marginal effects on individuals' SWB; i.e., in developed countries and regions, SWB increases slightly with economic growth, whereas in developing countries and poverty-stricken areas, SWB increases greatly with economic growth (Tov & Diener, 2013). Thus, we speculated that different from the situation in Western developed countries, Chinese people's SWB is still subject to the influence of SES. However, there was not yet a study in China that examined the effects of both SES and SMS comparisons on individuals' SWB. Therefore, in this study, we attempted to investigate this issue, and hypothesized that both SES and SMS can predict individuals' SWB. A large number of studies on age difference in SWB found that despite the declining health and income level of elderly people with age growth, their SWB remains steady and even increases to some extent (Frijters & Beatton, 2012; Hansen, Slagsvold, & Moum, 2009). This phenomenon is referred to as the paradox of well-being with aging. At first, a study found that elderly people are happier than young


people (Braun, 1977). Later, an increasing number of studies examined the variation of life satisfaction with aging from the perspective of life-span development. A cross-regional study covering 60 countries found that individuals' life satisfaction changes with age growth in a U-shaped curve, and reaches the lowest point at the age of 35–50 (Blanchflower & Oswald, 2008). The studies on individuals aged 40–80 found that their life satisfaction increases continuously with age growth (Hansen & Slagsvold, 2011; Hellevik, 2008). Regarding the cause of the paradox of well-being, the two-process model of control presents a reasonable explanation: to withstand the harm arising from aging, elderly people tend to adopt secondary control strategies such as downward social comparison so as to maintain perceived control and protect oneself (Wang, Shen, & Chen, 2002). A large number of studies on social comparison found that downward social comparison plays a very important role in maintaining the physical and psychological health and well-being of elderly people (Bailis, Chipperfield, & Perry, 2005; Wrosch, Bauer, Miller, & Lupien, 2007; Stephan, Chalabaev, Kotter-Grühn, & Jaconelli, 2013). Therefore, it is necessary to further understand the characteristics of the social comparison of elderly people, and to explore the internal mechanism by which elderly people maintain SWB from the perspective of social comparison. We speculated in this study that although SES and SMS both have effects on individuals' SWB, there may still be age difference in the relative magnitude of the effects for individuals at different ages. The Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (SST) argues that as one ages, one perceives that the remaining life is limited and gradually shifts the main goals and motivations of life: in one's youth, the main life goals are to acquire knowledge and to pursue development (i.e., acknowledge motivation); in one's later life, the main life goals are to acquire well-being, satisfaction, and to adapt to the aging process (i.e., emotion motivation) (Carstensen, Isaacowitz, & Charles, 1999; Carstensen, 2006). Thus, it can be inferred that with the growth of age, the SMS indicators (such as respect and influence), which focus on emotions, will have greater impact on elderly people's SWB; whereas the SES indicators (such as economic income and level of education), which focus on materials and knowledge, will have greater impact on young people's SWB. A study on 2 592 American participants examined the age difference in the effects of SES indicators such as education, income and work on psychological well-being, and found that the factors such as education, income and work become less effective in predicting psychological well-being as the age increases (Cheung & Lucas, 2015). Another meta-analysis study on the impact factors of elderly people’s SWB also found that some of the best predictors of elderly people’s SWB are, from good to less so, one’s own capability, quality of interpersonal relations, and income; whereas the quantity of social relations and level of education

contribute less to SWB (Pinquart & Sörensen, 2000). Thus, it can be drawn that elderly people’s SWB is less influenced by material and economic factors such as work and income, and is more influenced by affective and psychological factors such as one’s own capability and social relations. To testify this conclusion, it is necessary to examine simultaneously the relative magnitude of the effects of SES and SMS on elderly and young people’s SWB as well as the age difference. The study on this issue can help us understand the age difference in social comparison orientation, as well as the way in which elderly people shift their social comparison strategies to maintain their SWB. Based on SST and the related studies, we hypothesized in this study that young people’s SWB is more affected by SES, and elderly people’s SWB is more affected by SMS. So far, only Anderson et al. (2012) have simultaneously examined the effects of SES and SMS on SWB. In order to provide a comparison with the foreign study, we adopted the same priming technique, i.e., the MacArthur ladder, to prime the participants to conduct social status comparison. Previous studies on the Big Five personality traits and SWB showed that extraversion and neuroticism respectively predict SWB in the positive and negative direction (Librán, 2006; Lucas & Fujita, 2000; Vittersø & Nilsen, 2002), whereas the effects of the other three personality traits on SWB are seldom studied and are still controversial. Therefore, we made some improvements on the research process based on the previous study. One week before the priming, we measured the general-level SWB of individuals, while controlling the personality trait variable that may affect SWB such as neuroticism and extraversion. Regarding the test of priming validity, Anderson et al. (2012) used the ladder grade that the participants choose to represent their own social status after being primed as the testing indicator for priming validity. Similarly, we hypothesized in this study that if the priming is valid, the ladder grade chosen by the upward comparison group should be significantly lower than that chosen by the downward comparison group. To sum up, in this study, we attempted to adopt the MacArthur ladder technique to prime individuals’ social comparison while controlling the general-level SWB of individuals and other variables such as neuroticism and extraversion. We aimed to examine the relative magnitude of the effects of two comparison types, SES and SMS, on young and old people’s SWB and the age difference. We hypothesized that: 1) The paradox of well-being applies in China; in other words, elderly people’s SWB is equivalent to or even higher than young people’s SWB. 2) SWB is simultaneously affected by two comparison types, i.e., SES and SMS; in other words, social comparison direction (upward comparison, downward comparison) shows significant main effects, and has no interaction with social comparison type (SES, SMS). Specifically, whether in SES comparison or in SMS comparison, individuals primed to conduct upward comparison will have significantly lower SWB than


those primed to conduct downward comparison. 3) The two social status comparison types show age difference in their effects on individuals’ SWB; in other words, there is third-order interaction among age, social comparison type, and social comparison direction. Specifically, young people’s SWB is more affected by SES, and elderly people’s SWB is more affected by SMS. 4) The MacArthur ladder technique applies to the priming of social status comparison among Chinese individuals. Setting a comparison target can trigger one’s evaluation of one’s own social status and thus affect one’s SWB. Priming validity is specifically shown in that the average ladder grade chosen by the upward comparison group is significantly lower than that chosen by the downward comparison group.

2 2.1

Methods Samples

The samples included both a young adults group and an elderly adults group. They were selected by convenience sampling. The participants of the young group were recruited from communities, schools, enterprises, and government-affiliated institutions in Beijing, and the participants of the elderly group were recruited from communities and colleges for the elderly. The young group consisted of 120 participants including 58 females, aged 27.26 ± 4.80 years, with the average level of education ranging between technical secondary schooling and junior college schooling, and the average monthly income between 3 000 and 5 000 CNY. The elderly group consisted of 120 participants aged above 60, including 85 females. They were aged 65.12 ± 6.49 years, with the average level of education ranging between senior and technical secondary schooling, and the average monthly income between 3 000 and 5 000 CNY. The participants of the young group and elderly group were randomly divided into 4 groups, each containing 30 members. These groups were respectively primed to conduct SES upward comparison, SES downward comparison, SMS upward comparison, and SMS downward comparison.

2.2

Research tools

SWB was measured in terms of three parts: positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction (Diener, 1984). The SWB score was obtained by adding up the positive affect standard score and the life satisfaction standard score and subtracting the negative affect standard score (Kifer, Heller, Perunovic, & Galinsky, 2013). The score ranged between −1 and 1. A higher score represented a higher SWB level among the overall samples. The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) was originally compiled by Watson, Clark & Tellegen (1988), while this study adopted its Chinese version revised by Qiu, Zheng, and Wang (2009). It includes 20 questions, with 10 positive affect

descriptors and 10 negative affect descriptors, and uses the 5-point scale from ―very lightly‖ to ―extremely so‖. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the PANAS scale in the pretest and posttest were 0.717 and 0.709 respectively. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) was originally compiled by Pavot & Diener (1993), while this study adopted its Chinese version revised by Xiong & Xu (2009). It includes 5 questions and uses the 7-point scale from ―strongly disagree‖ to ―strongly agree‖. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the SWLS scale in the pretest and posttest were 0.864 and 0.881 respectively. Extraversion and neuroticism as controlled variables were measured by the extraversion and neuroticism sub-scales of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). This scale was originally compiled by McCrae and Costa (1989), while this study adopted its Chinese version revised by Yao and Liang (2010). There are 12 questions for each dimension, with a 5-point scale from ―strongly disagree‖ to ―strongly agree‖, including 8 reverse scored questions. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the extraversion and neuroticism scales were 0.696 and 0.770 respectively. Depression as a screening variable was measured by the Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) (Zung, Richards, & Short, 1965); this study adopted the Chinese version revised by Zhang (1998). It includes 20 questions and uses the 4-point scale from ―a little of the time‖ to ―most of the time‖, including 10 reverse scored questions. The final score was a rounded value of the original score multiplied by 1.25. According to the Chinese norm results, for SDS, the cut-off score is 53, while 53–62 points indicate mild depression, 63–72 moderate depression, and ≥ 72 severe depression. In light of this standard, an elderly adult conducting SES downward comparison (SDS = 54) was removed from the study. In this study, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient for this scale was 0.578. Lastly, the elderly people’s cognitive function was tested by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scale (Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975); this study adopted its Chinese version revised by Zhang (1998). This scale has 11 questions, including two questions on orientation, one on memory, six on linguistic capacity, one on attention and one on calculation capacity. The total score is 30 points, and individuals with different educational levels have different cut-off scores, which are 17 for illiterates, 20 for primary school education, and 24 for secondary school education and above. People scoring lower than the cut-off may have cognitive impairment. In this study, all the elderly participants scored higher than 24 points in the MMSE.

2.3

Procedure

The experiment procedure included three parts: pretest, social status comparison priming, and posttest.


Pretest: The participants were collectively tested in a classroom, working place or community activity room. The experimenter gave instructions to guide them to answer the questionnaires. First, MMSE was used to screen the elderly participants; those qualified would participate in the formal experiment. The participants filled in the Basic Information Questionnaire, SDS, Extraversion Scale, Neuroticism Scale, PANAS, and SWLS in turn. The basic information included gender, age, education, marital status, and income level. After filling in these questionnaires, the experimenter and the participant would determine the specific time and place to conduct the test after a 3–7 day interval. Social status comparison priming: The participants were shown a ladder with 10 rungs (Kraus, Côté, & Keltner, 2010), as is shown in Figure 1. For participants primed to conduct SES comparison, the instruction was: The ladder rung represents one’s social status among one’s social networks. A higher rung means a higher social status. Please think of your important social networks and single out someone who has the highest/lowest economic status, highest/lowest education, and best/worst working condition. If this person is at the very top/bottom rung of the ladder, please compare yourself with this person, especially in terms of your economic status, education, and working condition. For participants primed to conduct SMS comparison, the ―economic status‖, ―education‖ and ―working condition‖ in the instruction were substituted into ―respect‖, ―prominence‖ and ―influence‖.

To test whether the participants had conducted effective social status comparison, the experimenter would ask the participants after priming, ―in comparison with the person at the very top/bottom rung of the ladder, which one of the ladder rungs do you place yourself on?‖ The participants would choose one from the 10 ladder rungs. Posttest: After the social status comparison priming, the experimenter would guide the participants to fill in the PANAS and SWLS.

2.4

SPSS 20.0 was used to manage and process the data.

3

Ladder shown to the participants

Results

Table 1 shows the SWB scores of the elderly people and young people in the 4 priming conditions in the pretest and posttest as well as the ladder grade they selected after being primed.

3.1

Homogeneity test

The Chi-squared test showed significant differences in the gender, education, and personal monthly income of the eight groups of participants (χ²(7, 239) = 16.00, p < 0.05; χ²(28, 239) = 74.00, p < 0.01; χ²(21, 239) = 59.88, p < 0.01). But the variance analysis showed that gender, education level, and personal monthly income had no influence on the SWB level in the posttest (F(1, 237) = 0.18, p > 0.05; F(4, 234) = 2.17, p > 0.05; F(3, 235) = 0.84, p > 0.05), therefore there was no need to control these three factors. The variance analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the neuroticism scores of the eight groups of participants (F(7, 231) = 1.09, p > 0.05), but there was significant difference in the extraversion scores of the eight groups (F(7, 231) = 2.12, p < 0.05, η2p = 0.06), and the extraversion score can significantly predict the SWB posttest score (β = −0.45, b = −0.16, SE = 0.02, p < 0.01). Therefore, it was necessary to control the extraversion factor in the following analysis.

3.2

Figure 1

Data processing

Age difference in SWB

The SWB pretest scores of the young and elderly participants were put through a t-test. The results showed no significant difference in the SWB of the two groups of participants, t(237) = 1.55, p = 0.12. A further t-test was conducted on the PANAS pretest scores and SWLS pretest scores of the young and elderly participants, and the results showed no significant difference in the positive and negative affect of the two groups of participants (t(237) = 1.32, p = 0.24; t(237) = 1.27, p = 0.20), but there was significant difference in their life satisfaction level (t(237) = 3.43, p < 0.01, Cohen’s d = 0.44), in that the elderly participants’ life satisfaction (M = 25.23, SD = 4.23) was significantly higher than that of the young participants (M = 22.36, SD = 4.44).


Table 1

Elderly and young people’s SWB pretest and posttest scores and the selected ladder grade (M ±SD)

The above results indicate that the SWB of elderly people is equivalent to that of young people, whereas the life satisfaction of elderly people is significantly higher than that of young people.

3.3

Test on validity of priming

A three-way ANCOVA of 2 (age groups) × 2 (social comparison directions) × 2 (social comparison types) was performed on the ladder grade selected by the participants. The results showed that social comparison direction had no significant main effect, F(1, 231) = 0.05, p = 0.82; but social comparison type had a significant main effect, F(1, 231) = 9.94, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.04; and there was significant interaction between age group and social comparison type, F(1, 231) = 13.83, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.06. A further simple-effect test showed that the ladder grade selected by elderly participants in the SMS comparison priming group (M = 5.94, SD = 0.19) was significantly higher than the ladder grade selected by elderly participants in the SES comparison priming group (M = 4.92, SD = 0.19), F(1, 230) = 13.70, p < 0.001; whereas the ladder grades selected by young participants in the SES and SMS comparison priming groups showed no significant difference, F(1, 230) = 0.001, p = 0.997. The results showed no significant difference in the ladder grades selected by participants in the upward comparison group and those in the downward comparison group. However, the ladder grade selected by elderly participants after SMS comparison priming was significantly higher than that after SES comparison priming. This also indicates that elderly people think themselves having higher SMS than SES.

3.4 Impact of the two social status types on young and elderly people’s SWB and the age difference A three-way ANCOVA of 2 (age groups) × 2 (social comparison directions) × 2 (social comparison types) was performed on the SWB posttest scores of the participants, with SWB pretest score and extraversion score as covariables. The results are as follows: 1) Social comparison direction had a significant main effect, F(1, 229) = 133.01, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.37. The SWB

posttest score of the participants in the upward comparison priming group was significantly lower than that of the participants in the downward comparison priming group. This result indicates that the MacArthur ladder priming can change individuals' SWB. 2) Social comparison type × social comparison direction had no significant interaction effect, F(1, 229) = 0.20, p = 0.66. This result indicates that the two social status types had no difference in their impact on SWB; in both cases, the SWB posttest score of the participants in the upward comparison priming group was significantly lower than that of the participants in the downward comparison priming group. 3) Age group × social comparison direction × social comparison type had significant interaction effects, F(1, 229) = 6.92, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.03. The simple-effect analysis showed that the elderly participants in the upward comparison group reported different SWB across the two social status types. Specifically, the SWB score in the SES comparison condition was higher than the score in the SMS comparison condition, and the difference was marginally significant, F(1, 229) = 3.64, p = 0.06. The young participants in the downward comparison group also reported different SWB across the two social status types. Specifically, the SWB score in the SES comparison condition was significantly higher than the score in the SMS comparison condition, F(1, 229) = 4.14, p < 0.05. The young participants in the upward comparison group and the elderly participants in the downward comparison group showed no significant difference in their SWB across the two social status types (F(1, 229) = 1.02, p = 0.31; F(1, 229) = 0.07, p = 0.79).

4 Supplementary experiment on validity of priming The formal experiment successfully changed individuals’ SWB by the MacArthur ladder priming method, but the ladder grades selected by the participants were not significantly different between the upward and downward


comparison priming groups. No matter in upward comparison or in downward comparison, the social status selected by individuals after being primed tended to concentrate around the intermediate grade ―5‖. This result may have something to do with the Chinese people’s reverence for ―reconciliation‖. Wang (2001) found that Chinese individuals tend to follow the herd in social communications, and despise standing out. Such reverence for ―reconciliation‖ will cause individuals to be inclined to withhold their innermost real thoughts, and to probably hide their real thoughts in self-evaluation. Therefore, for Chinese participants, in the interpersonal situation of social comparison, although their perceived social status and well-being have been enhanced, they still tend to choose the intermediate ladder grade. In the formal experiment, the explicitly marked ladder may easily make the participants anchored to the intermediate grade ―5‖, and thus weaken the expression of priming validity. Therefore, in this study we conducted a supplementary experiment in an attempt to adopt a more implicit means to quantify the priming effect with an unmarked rectangle as the measuring tool. In the studies on subjective age (Hughes, Geraci, & de Forrest, 2013), in order to prevent elderly participants from being anchored to the subjective age they had selected in the pretest and thus affecting their choice in the posttest, the researchers changed the measuring tool for subjective age in the posttest into an unmarked slip of paper that was 120 mm long. Inspired by their study, in this study we changed the explicitly graded ladder into an unmarked rectangle that was 10 cm long, so as to weaken individuals’ anchoring to the intermediate grade ―5‖ as a result of their reverence for ―reconciliation‖. Since both SES and SMS have impacts on elderly and young people’s SWB, considering the research time and costs, we only chose the SES of young people as the object of the supplementary experiment to test the validity of priming. To sum up, the supplementary experiment was intended to verify whether the improved grade measuring method can effectively test the effect of social status priming.

4.1

Methods

4.1.1 Participants The samples were recruited from Beijing Industry and Trade Technicians College by the convenience sampling method. There were 59 participants including 29 females, aged 19.42 ± 0.81 years, with an average educational level of junior college or above, and an average monthly income below CNY 1 000. The participants were randomly divided into 2 groups, with 30 people primed to conduct SES upward comparison and 29 people primed to conduct SES downward comparison.

4.1.2 Procedure

Figure 2 Unmarked rectangle scale and schematic of participants’ reply

Similar to the priming part of the formal experiment, the experiment was conducted collectively. The participants were shown an unmarked rectangle that was 10 cm long. The instruction was the same as that in the formal experiment, except that the ―ladder‖ was substituted with ―rectangle‖. After the priming, the participants were asked, ―in comparison with the individuals at the very top/bottom, where would you place yourself on the rectangle‖. The participants would draw a short horizontal line at the right side of the rectangle as a representation of their own SES, as is shown in Figure 2.

4.2

Results

The experimenter took the bottom of the rectangle as the starting point 0 cm, and used a standard ruler (with an accuracy of 1 millimeter) to measure the position selected by the participants (in centimeters), with values rounded to the 2nd decimal point. Finally, the measured values were transformed into grade scores for statistical analysis; for example, 3.55 cm was transformed into grade score 3.55. The t-test results showed that the ladder grade selected by the SES downward comparison priming group (M = 5.30, SD = 1.61) was significantly higher than the ladder grade selected by the SES upward comparison priming group (M = 4.18, SD = 2.47), t(57) = −2.06, p < 0.05, Cohen’s d = 0.54. This result indicates that the improved measuring method can effectively test the priming effect of social status comparison.

5

Discussion

In this study, after controlling the general SWB level and extraversion of individuals, we adopted the MacArthur ladder priming method to prime young and elderly participants to conduct SES comparison and SMS comparison, and


investigated their SWB change. This study has verified Hypothesis 1, i.e., elderly people’s SWB is equivalent to young people’s SWB, indicating that the paradox of subjective well-being exists in Chinese context. This study has found that elderly people’s affect is no different from young people’s, but the former’s life satisfaction is significantly higher than the latter’s. This result is similar to the findings of previous studies (Frijters & Beatton, 2012; Hansen et al., 2009), indicating that elderly people and young people have similar affect in daily life, but elderly people give higher evaluations to life satisfaction. More importantly, this study has found that both SES and SMS have impacts on SWB, but the magnitude of their impacts shows age difference. In addition, this study has improved the measuring method for one’s own social status in the grade evaluation by the MacArthur ladder, and has made it more suitable for the Chinese context.

5.1

Effects of SES and SMS on individuals’ SWB

This study has verified Hypothesis 2, i.e., elderly and young people’s SWB is not only affected by SMS comparison, but also affected by SES comparison. This result is different from the research finding of Anderson et al. (2012). Is it possible that this difference is caused by the difference in relative income level of the samples in this study and in the foreign study? The samples in Anderson et al. (2012) were recruited through an online platform, with an average annual income of 35 001–50 000 dollars, which was consistent with the average income in the United States; therefore they were representative to some extent. The samples in this study came from Beijing, with an average monthly income of 3 000–5 000 CNY. According to the statistics of Beijing Municipal Bureau of Statistics, the per-capita total annual household income of urban residents in Beijing was 49 730 yuan in 2014 (Beijing Statistical Information Net, 2014). Hence, the samples in these two studies have similar relative income level in comparison with the situation in their respective region, and thus were comparable. Therefore, the different findings of these two studies were not caused by the difference in the representativeness of the samples; instead, they were caused by the difference in macroeconomic and cultural background. A study has examined the different impacts of social status on American and Japanese individuals’ well-being, and has found that SES indicators such as educational level are more effective in predicting the well-being of Japanese participants than of American participants (Curhan et al., 2014). This result indicates that, as compared to American individuals, the well-being of Japanese individuals is more susceptible to the effect of SES, and the reason behind this difference is probably associated with a nation's developmental level. Hagerty (1999) proposed on the basis of the hierarchical theory of needs that the satisfaction of needs influences quality of life in a certain order. When one’s lower-level needs have been satisfied, one’s quality of life

will improve; then one will seek satisfaction of their higher-level needs, and thus gradually improve one's quality of life. On the contrary, when one’s needs are deprived, one’s quality of life will decline. Diener & Chan (2011) have partially verified this theory through research. The effect of the satisfaction of needs on well-being conforms to the hierarchical theory of needs to some extent. The satisfaction of needs at different levels tends to influence well-being in a progressively increasing manner. As a developing country, China is still lagging behind the developed countries in terms of some SES indicators such as national income level and educational level. Therefore, Chinese people’s SWB is not only affected by higher-level needs such as the SMS indicator of respect; it is also affected by lower-level needs such as the SES indicator of income.

5.2 Difference between the effects of SES and SMS on young and elderly people’s SWB Although both young and elderly people’s SWB is simultaneously affected by SES and SMS, yet as elderly people and young people have different social motivations (Carstensen & Charles, 1998; Carstensen, 2006), there is age difference in the effects of social status on their SWB. First, there is age difference in the effect of upward comparison priming on SWB. Specifically, elderly people suffer greater loss of SWB in SMS upward comparison than in SES comparison, whereas young people suffer equivalent loss of SWB in SES and SMS upward comparisons. Thus it can be seen that in comparison with the SES that focuses on materials, elderly people attach more importance to the SMS that focuses on psychological emotions; therefore it is difficult to avoid their SWB loss from SMS upward comparison. Second, there is also age difference in the effect of downward comparison priming on SWB. Specifically, young people have greater gain of SWB after SES downward comparison than after SMS comparison, whereas elderly people have equivalent gain of SWB in SES and SMS downward comparisons. This result indicates that young people attach more importance to the SES that focuses on materials rather than the SMS that focuses on psychological sentiments; therefore, they are more likely to obtain self-improvement and SWB increase from SES downward comparison. Similar to the result about young people in this study, Cheung and Lucas (2015) studied the relationship between the income and life satisfaction of individuals of different ages, and found that income has the greatest effects on the life satisfaction of individuals aged 30–40. Based on the results about both young and elderly people, this study has partially verified Hypothesis 3, i.e., elderly people are more affected by SMS when conducting upward comparison, and young people are more affected by SES when conducting downward comparison. This research result is consistent with the SST (Carstensen & Charles, 1998). As young people have greater acknowledge motivation, they will obtain greater


self-improvement and more SWB increase after conducting SES downward comparison. As their age increases, elderly people have lower perception of future time, and their emotion motivation gradually takes the place of acknowledge motivation and becomes dominant. Elderly people with higher emotion motivation will have less stress and more social satisfaction (Lang & Carstensen, 2002). A major behavioral expression of elderly people’s transition of social motivation to emotion motivation is the deepening of relations. Therefore, the quality and quantity of social relations can significantly predict elderly people’s health (Cheon, 2010), well-being (Fiori, Smith, & Antonucci, 2007), and longevity (Heffner, Waring, Roberts, Eaton, & Gramling, 2011). In this study, the elderly people’s emphasis on SMS fully conforms to elderly people’s transition of social motivation. This is because a higher SMS means being respected and admired by others while having greater influence. It can give elderly people a strong sense of control and is conducive to improving elderly people’s well-being (Cardarelli, Vernon, Baumler, Tortolero, & Low, 2007; Gale, Batty, & Deary, 2008). Therefore, to maintain their own SWB, elderly people will cut down their pursuit of SES and meanwhile attach more importance to acquisition of SMS. In this study, it is shown in that elderly people suffer greater loss of SWB after SMS upward comparison than after SES comparison. In addition, in the formal experiment, the ladder grade selected by elderly participants during the SMS comparison was significantly higher than that during the SES comparison. Since the ladder grade represents individuals’ evaluation of their own social status (Adler, Epel, Castellazzo, & Ickovics, 2000), this result indicates that elderly people have higher evaluation of their own SMS than of their own SES. It also indicates that with the transition of social motivation (Carstensen & Charles, 1998; Carstensen, 2006), elderly people tend to be more satisfied with the acquisition of SMS.

the intermediate grade ―5‖, and eventually verified the validity of social comparison priming. Cross-cultural studies suggest that Eastern and Western individuals have very different self-personality, which may affect the sensitivity of the ladder grades as an indicator of validity of priming. Many cross-cultural studies on self-personality have found that most Asian cultures emphasize one's mutual connection with others, accommodation and harmony; therefore, individuals’ self-personality encompasses a high level of dependence, and is accustomed to adjusting and restraining oneself so as to be in line with others. On the contrary, Western cultures emphasize expression and demonstration of one’s idiosyncrasy; therefore Western individuals’ self-personality encompasses a high level of independence, and is accustomed to expressing one’s inner thoughts and character (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Some studies in China at present adopted the MacArthur ladder for the participants to evaluate the grade of their own social status (Chen, Zhang, Shen, 2009; Chen, Cheng, Guan, Zhang, 2014), and proved the MacArthur ladder was applicable for Chinese participants to evaluate their own grade. Nevertheless, such evaluation was not conducted in the interpersonal situation of social comparison. The Japanese scholars Seike & Takata (1997) found that in a situation where interpersonal relations are not stressed, individuals are able to conduct accurate and effective self-evaluation, but in a situation where interpersonal relations are stressed, the individuals’ self-evaluations are clearly biased. Thus it can be inferred that for the Chinese participants with a high level of dependence in their personality and reverence for ―reconciliation‖, the ladder grades excessively highlighted the participants’ self-evaluation, and therefore were prone to trigger their defense mechanism and cause them to be anchored to the intermediate grade ―5‖. Therefore, for the Chinese participants in a social comparison situation, an unmarked rectangle is more suitable than an explicitly graded ladder to measure their own social status.

5.3

5.4

Discussion on validity of priming

This study adopted the MacArthur ladder priming method in the formal experiment, and found that the SWB of the social status upward comparison group is significantly lower than that of the downward comparison group, but the ladder grades selected by the individuals after the upward or downward comparison did not show significant difference. This result has failed to verify Hypothesis 4, and is inconsistent with the research result of Anderson et al. (2012). Regarding this seemingly contradictory result, we argue that the MacArthur ladder priming was actually successful, because it changed individuals’ SWB. But it did not yield significant results in the test on validity of priming, probably because the reverence for ―reconciliation‖ in the Chinese culture (Wang, 2001) lowered the measuring sensitivity of ladder grades. Therefore, the supplementary experiment adopted an unmarked rectangle to measure individuals’ own social status so as to eliminate the participants’ anchoring to

Research limitations and future prospect

In this study, we have successfully changed individuals’ evaluation of their own social status and, by doing so, affected their SWB using the MacArthur ladder priming method, and have found that elderly people attach more importance to SMS while young people to SES. The research results have theoretical implications for explaining the social comparison mechanism of the paradox of well-being, and have made explicit contributions to the understanding of the effects of social status on SWB in different cultures. But this study also has the following limitations: The research samples were all collected from Beijing. Considering the diminishing marginal effects of SES on individuals’ SWB (Tov & Diener, 2013), prudence is required if the research results were to be generalized to poverty-stricken areas or the high-income population. In addition, although the supplementary experiment has successfully improved the MacArthur ladder, its reliability still requires further verification.


Mussweiler (2003) argued that social comparison is a process of hypothesis testing, which may be conducted by dissimilarity testing to produce the contrast effect, or by similarity testing to produce the assimilation effect. Therefore, future studies may aim at distinguishing social status comparison information of different strengths, and examining the possible contrast or assimilation effects of social status comparison on individuals’ SWB. In addition, there are certain individual differences in the effects of social comparison on individuals. Many studies have found that social comparison information usually only works on frail old persons with low perceived controllability (Frieswijk, Buunk, Steverink, & Slaets, 2004; Stewart, Chipperfield, Ruthig, & Heckhausen, 2013). Future studies may cover more moderating variables such as one’s own social status and social comparison orientation, and examine the effects of social status comparison information on the SWB of different individuals. Currently most of the studies on social comparison adopt such methods as questionnaire and behavioral experiment. Only a few studies adopt the method of event-related potential to examine the social comparison of the amount of gain and loss in the reward process (Wu, Zhang, Elieson, & Zhou, 2012). Future studies may consider using neurophysiological methods to discuss the age difference in brain mechanism in the process of social status comparison.

6

Conclusion

In this study, we used the MacArthur ladder priming method to prime young and elderly people to conduct social comparison of their SES and SMS, and found that the SWB of both young and elderly people is simultaneously affected by SES comparison and SMS comparison. Regarding age difference, we found that elderly people attach more importance to SMS and are less able to modulate their SWB loss in the SMS upward comparison, whereas young people attach more importance to SES and can more easily obtain SWB improvement in the SES downward comparison. In addition, we found that the original explicitly marked ladder rungs are not suitable for measuring the social status after priming; instead, the improved unmarked rectangle is a more sensitive indicator suitable for studies in the Chinese cultural context.

References Adler, N. E., Epel, E. S., Castellazzo, G., & Ickovics, J. R. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, white women. Health Psychology, 19(6), 586–592. Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 116–132. Anderson, C., Kraus, M. W., Galinsky, A. D., & Keltner, D. (2012). The local-ladder effect: Social status and subjective well-being. Psychological

Science, 23(7), 764–771. Andrews, F. M., &Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: America's perception of life quality. New York: Plenum Press. Bailis, D. S., Chipperfield, J. G., & Perry, R. P. (2005). Optimistic social comparisons of older adults low in primary control: A prospective analysis of hospitalization and mortality. Health Psychology, 24(4), 393–401. Bauer, I., & Wrosch, C. (2011). Making up for lost opportunities: The protective role of downward social comparisons for coping with regrets across adulthood. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(2), 215–228. Beijing Statistical Information Net. (2014). Per-capita income for urban residents increased with year-on-year growth of 8.9% in 2014. Retrieved from http://www.bjstats.gov.cn/sjjd/jjxs/201501/t20150122_287246.htm Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1980). Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 479–508. Biswas-Diener, R., & Diener, E. (2001). Making the best of a bad situation: Satisfaction in the slums of Calcutta. Social Indicators Research, 55(3), 329–352. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2008). Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle?. Social Science & Medicine, 66(8), 1733–1749. Blanton, H. (2001). Evaluating the self in the context of another: The three-selves model of social comparison assimilation and contrast. In G. B. Moskowitz (Ed.), Cognitive social psychology: The Princeton symposium on the legacy and future of social cognition (pp.75–87). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371–399. Braun, P. W. (1977). Psychological well-being and location in the social structure (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California. Burr, A., Santo, J. B., & Pushkar, D. (2011). Affective wellbeing in retirement: The influence of values, money, and health across three years. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(1), 17–40. Cardarelli, K. M., Vernon, S. W., Baumler, E. R., Tortolero, S., & Low, M. D. (2007). Sense of control and diabetes mellitus among U.S. adults: A cross-sectional analysis. Biopsychosocial Medicine, 1(1), 19. Carstensen, L. L.( 2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312(5782), 1913–1915. Carstensen, L. L., & Charles, S. T. (1998). Emotion in the second half of life. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(5), 144–149. Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socio emotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165–181. Chen, L., Zhang, L. J., & Shen, J. (2009). The effect of parenthood of left-behind children in rural areas on their subjective well-being. Chinese Journal of Special Education, (3), 8–12, 32. Chen, Y. H., Cheng, G., Guan, Y. S., & Zhang, D. J. (2014). The mediating effects of subjective social status on the relations between self-esteem and socioeconomic status for college students. Psychological Development and Education, 30(6), 594–600. Cheon, E. Y. (2010). Correlation of social network types on health status of Korean elders. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing, 40(1), 88–98. Cheung, F., & Lucas, R. E. (2015).When does money matter most? Examining the association between income and life satisfaction over the life course. Psychology and Aging, 30(1), 120–135. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1989). The NEO-PI/NEO-FFI manual supplement. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Curhan, K. B., Levine, C. S., Markus, H. R., Kitayama, S., Park, J., Karasawa, M., …Ryff, C. D. (2014). Subjective and objective hierarchies and their relations to psychological well-being: A U.S./Japan comparison. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 855–864. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575. Diener, E., & Chan, M. Y. (2011). Happy people live longer: Subjective well-being contributes to health and longevity. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 3(1), 1–43. Diener, E., Fujita, F. (1997). Social comparisons and subjective well-being. In B. Buunk & R. Gibbons (Eds.), Health, coping, and well-being. (pp.329–357). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Diener, E., Kahneman, D., Tov, W., & Arora, R. (2010). Income’s association with judgments of life versus feelings. In E. Diener, J. F. Helliwell, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), International differences in well-being


(pp.3–15). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press. 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 & Social Psychology, 99(1), 52–61. Diener, E., & Ryan, K. (2009). Subjective well-being: A general overview. South African Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 391–406. Easterlin, R. A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In Nations and households in economic growth (pp.89–125). New York: Academic Press. Eid, M., & Larsen, R. J. (2008). The science of subjective well-being. New York: Guilford Press. Fiori, K. L., Smith, J., & Antonucci, T. C. (2007). Social network types among older adults: A multidimensional approach. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 62(6), P322–P330. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). ―Mini–mental state‖: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3), 189–198. Frieswijk, N., Buunk, B. P., Steverink, N., & Slaets, J. P. J. (2004). The effect of social comparison information on the life satisfaction of frail older persons. Psychology & Aging, 19(1), 183–190. Frijters, P., & Beatton, T. (2012). The mystery of the U-shaped relationship between happiness and age. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82(2–3), 525–542. Gale, C. R., Batty, G. D., & Deary, I. J. (2008). Locus of control at age 10 years and health outcomes and behaviors at age 30 years: The 1970 British Cohort study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 70(4), 397–403. Hagerty, M. R. (1999). Testing Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: National quality-of-life across time. Social Indicators Research, 46(3), 249–271. Hansen, T., & Slagsvold, B. (2011). Alder. In S. Næss, T. Moum, & J. Eriksen (Eds.), Livskvalitet: Forskning om det gode liv (pp.137–154). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Hansen, T., Slagsvold, B., & Moum, T. (2009). Childlessness and psychological well-being in midlife and old age: An examination of parental status effects across a range of outcomes. Social Indicators Research, 94(2), 343–362. Heffner, K. L., Waring, M. E., Roberts, M. B., Eaton, C. B., & Gramling, R. (2011). Social isolation, C-reactive protein, and coronary heart disease mortality among community dwelling adults. Social Science & Medicine, 72(9), 1482–1488. Hellevik, O. (2008). Jakten påden norske lykken. Norsk Monitor 1985–2007. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget. Howell, R. T., & Howell, C. J. (2008). The relation of economic status to subjective well-being in developing countries: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 536–560. Hughes, M. L., Geraci, L., & De Forrest, R. L. (2013). Aging 5 years in 5 minutes: The effect of taking a memory test on older adults' subjective age. Psychological Science, 24(12), 2481–2488. Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). A dark side of the American dream: Correlates of financial success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(2), 410–422. Kifer, Y., Heller, D., Perunovic, W. Q. E., & Galinsky, A. D.(2013). The good life of the powerful: The experience of power and authenticity enhances subjective well-being. Psychological Science, 24(3), 280–288. Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., & Keltner, D. (2010). Social class, contextualism, and empathic accuracy. Psychological Science, 21, 1716–1723. Lang, F. R., & Carstensen, L. L. (2002). Time counts: Future time perspective, goals, and social relationships. Psychology and Aging, 17(1), 125–139. Librán, E. C. (2006). Personality dimensions and subjective well-being. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 38–44. Louis, T., & Diener, E. (2011). Needs and subjective wellbeing around the world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 354–365. Lucas, R. E., & Fujita, F. (2000). Factors influencing the relation between extraversion and pleasant affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 1039–1056. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253.

Mussweiler, T. (2003). When egocentrism breeds distinctness—comparison processes in social prediction: Comment on karniol (2003). Psychological Review, 110(190), 1–5. Oshio, T., Nozaki, K., & Kobayashi, M. (2011). Relative income and happiness in Asia: Evidence from nationwide surveys in China, Japan, and Korea. Social Indicators Research, 104(3), 351–367. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5(2), 164–172. Pinquart, M., & Sörensen, S. (2000). Influences of socioeconomic status, social network, and competence on subjective well-being in later life: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 15(2), 187–224. Qiu, L., Zheng, X., & Wang, Y. F. (2009). Revision of the positive affect and negative affect scale. Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology, 14(3), 249–254. Seike, M., & Takata, T. (1997). Cultural views of self and self-assessment behavior: Empirical findings in Japanese culture. Japanese Journal of Social Psychology, 13(1), 23–32. Stapel, D. A., & Suls, J. (2004). Method matters: Effects of explicit versus implicit social comparisons on activation, behavior, and self-views. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 860–875. Stephan, Y., Chalabaev, A., Kotter-Grühn, D., & Jaconelli, A. (2013). ―Feeling younger, being stronger‖: An experimental study of subjective age and physical functioning among older adults. Journals of Gerontology, 68(1), 1–7. Stewart, T. L., Chipperfield, J. G., Ruthig, J. C., & Heckhausen, J. (2013). Downward social comparison and subjective well-being in late life: The moderating role of perceived control. Aging & Mental Health, 17(3), 375–385. Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect?. Current directions in psychological science, 11(5), 159–163. Tov, W., & Diener, E. (2013). Culture and Subjective Well-Being. Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=2199219. Vittersø, J., & Nilsen, F. (2002). The conceptual and relational structure of subjective well-being, neuroticism, and extraversion: Once again, neuroticism is the important predictor of happiness. Social Indicators Research, 57(1), 89–118. Wang, D. H., Shen, J. L., & Chen, B. (2002). The theory of control: A new viewpoint of life-span development. Advances in Psychological Science, 10(2), 168–177. Wang, F. Y. (2001). To advocate "reconciliation": The collective sub-consciousness of the Chinese. Journal of Jiangxi Normal University (Social Sciences), 34(1), 106–112. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin, 90(2), 245–271. Wood, J. V., Taylor, S. E., & Lichtman, R. R. (1985). Social comparison in adjustment to breast cancer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(5), 1169–1183. Wrosch, C., Bauer, I., Miller, G. E., & Lupien, S.(2007). Regret intensity, diurnal cortisol secretion, and physical health in older individuals: Evidence for directional effects and protective factors. Psychology and Aging, 22(2), 319–330. Wu, Y., Zhang, D. X., Elieson, B., & Zhou, X. L. (2012). Brain potentials in outcome evaluation: When social comparison takes effect. Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology, 85(2), 145–152. Xiong, C. Q., & Xu, Y. L. (2009). Reliability and validity of the satisfaction with life scale for Chinese demos. China Journal of Health Psychology, 17(8), 948–949. Yao, R. S., & Liang, L. Y. (2010). Analysis of the application of simplified NEO-FFI to Undergraduates. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 18(4), 457–459. Zhang, M. Y. (1998). Handbook of rating scales in psychiatry. Changsha, China: Hunan Science and Technology Press. Zung, W. W. K., Richards, C. B., & Short, M. J. (1965). Selfrating depression scale in an outpatient clinic: Further validation of the SDS. Archives of General Psychiatry, 13(6), 508–515. (Translated by GONG NF)
