Studies have shown that individuals with high socioeconomic status (SES) perceive a greater sense of control than those with lower SES. However, no studies have examined how sociocultural contexts affect perceived control of individuals from different SES backgrounds. Studies 1 and 2 found that the association between SES and sense of control was stronger in countries with low relational mobility (e.g. East Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa) compared to those with high relational mobility (e.g. Latin America), largely due to lower perceived control among low-SES individuals in immobile societies. Study 3 demonstrated that self-reported relational mobility mediated the cross-country differences in SES-control associations. Study 4 experimentally manipulated relational mobility to establish its causal effect on the SES-control association. These findings suggest that social environments that afford less-flexible social networks exacerbate SES disparities in perceived control and highlight how social ecology may disproportionately impact individuals with lower SES.
AdlerN. E.EpelE. S.CastellazzoG.IckovicsJ. 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.19.6.586
2.
AjzenI. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x
3.
AuE. W. M.ChiuC.-y.ZhangZ.-X.MallorieL.ChaturvediA.ViswanathanM.SavaniK. (2012). Negotiable fate: Social ecological foundation and psychological functions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(6), 931–942. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111421632
4.
BailisD. S.SegallA.MahonM. J.ChipperfieldJ. G.DunnE. M. (2001). Perceived control in relation to socioeconomic and behavioral resources for health. Social Science & Medicine, 52(11), 1661–1676. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00280-X
5.
BanduraA. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W H Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.
6.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.114610.18637/jss.v067.i01
7.
ButtrickN.ChaY.OishiS. (2024). Shifts in residential mobility predict shifts in culture. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241280998
8.
CareyR. M.MarkusH. R. (2017). Social class shapes the form and function of relationships and selves. Current Opinion in Psychology, 18, 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.031
9.
ChangJ.-H.LinY.-H.HuangK.-J. (2023). Fate belief, social class, and mental health: A study based on the Taiwan social change survey. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 65(2), 109–126. https://doi.org/10.6129/CJP.202306_65(2).0002
10.
ChengC.CheungS. F.ChioJ. H.-m.ChanM.-P. S. (2013). Cultural meaning of perceived control: A meta-analysis of locus of control and psychological symptoms across 18 cultural regions. Psychological Bulletin, 139(1), 152–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028596
11.
CurhanK. B.LevineC. S.MarkusH. R.KitayamaS.ParkJ.KarasawaM.KawakamiN.LoveG. D.CoeC. L.MiyamotoY.RyffC. D. (2014). Subjective and objective hierarchies and their relations to psychological well-being: A U.S./Japan comparison. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(8), 855–864. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614538461
12.
GalloL. C.BogartL. M.VranceanuA.-M.MatthewsK. A. (2005). Socioeconomic Status, Resources, Psychological Experiences, and Emotional Responses: A Test of the Reserve Capacity Model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(2), 386–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.2.386
GrossmannI.VarnumM. E. W. (2011). Social class, culture, and cognition. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(1), 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550610377119
15.
HaerpferC.InglehartR.MorenoA.WelzelC.KizilovaK.Diez-MedranoJ.LagosM.NorrisP.PonarinE.PuranenB. (Eds.). (2022). World Values Survey: Round Seven – Country-Pooled Datafile Version 5.0. JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat. https://doi.org/10.14281/18241.20
HofstedeG. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
18.
HornseyM. J.GreenawayK. H.HarrisE. A.BainP. G. (2018). Exploring cultural differences in the extent to which people perceive and desire control. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218780692
19.
HuangK.-J.de AlmeidaI.UchidaY.OishiS. (2025). Low relational mobility fosters interpersonal indecision through increased sensitivity to social rejection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672241312260
JohnsonW.KruegerR. F. (2005). Higher perceived life control decreases genetic variance in physical health: Evidence from a national twin study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(1), 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.165
22.
JohnsonW.KruegerR. F. (2006). How money buys happiness: Genetic and environmental processes linking finances and life satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 680–691. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.680
23.
KitoM.YukiM.ThomsonR. (2017). Relational mobility and close relationships: A socioecological approach to explain cross-cultural differences. Personal Relationships, 24(1), 114–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12174
24.
KrausM. W.CôtéS.KeltnerD. (2010). Social class, contextualism, and empathic accuracy. Psychological Science, 21(11), 1716–1723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610387613
25.
KrausM. W.PiffP. K.KeltnerD. (2009). Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 992. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016357
26.
KrausM. W.PiffP. K.Mendoza-DentonR.RheinschmidtM. L.KeltnerD. (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
27.
KrysK.de AlmeidaI.WasielA.VignolesV. L. (2024). WEIRD–Confucian comparisons: Ongoing cultural biases in psychology’s evidence base and some recommendations for improving global representation. American Psychologist. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001298
28.
KuznetsovaA.BrockhoffP. B.ChristensenR. H. B. (2017). LmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
29.
KwanJ. L. Y.ChanW. (2018). Variable system: An alternative approach for the analysis of mediated moderation. Psychological Methods, 23(2), 262–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000160
30.
LachmanM. E.WeaverS. L. (1998). The sense of control as a moderator of social class differences in health and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 763–773. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.763
31.
MinkovM.DuttP.SchachnerM.MoralesO.SanchezC.JandosovaJ.KhassenbekovK.MuddB. (2017). A revision of Hofstede’s individualism-collectivism dimension: A new national index from a 56-country study. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 24(3), 386–404. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCSM-11-2016-0197
32.
MiyamotoY.YooJ.LevineC. S.ParkJ.BoylanJ. M.SimsT.MarkusH. R.KitayamaS.KawakamiN.KarasawaM.CoeC. L.LoveG. D.RyffC. D. (2018). Culture and social hierarchy: Self- and other-oriented correlates of socioeconomic status across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(3), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000133
33.
MoriR.HanakiN.KamedaT. (2024). An outside individual option increases optimism and facilitates collaboration when groups form flexibly. Nature Communications, 15(1), 5520. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-49779-9
34.
MorlingB.KitayamaS.MiyamotoY. (2002). Cultural practices emphasize influence in the United States and adjustment in Japan. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(3), 311–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202286003
35.
OECD (2013). PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework: Mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190511-en
OishiS.SchugJ.YukiM.AxtJ. (2015). The psychology of residential and relational mobilities. In GelfandM. J.ChiuC.-Y.HongY.-Y. (Eds.), Handbook of advances in culture and psychology, Vol. 5, pp. 221–272). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190218966.003.0005
40.
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
RothB.HahnE.SpinathF. M. (2017). Income inequality, life satisfaction, and economic worries. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(2), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616664955
43.
San MartinA.SchugJ.MadduxW. W. (2019). Relational mobility and cultural differences in analytic and holistic thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(4), 495–518. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000142
44.
SchugJ.YukiM.MadduxW. (2010). Relational mobility explains between- and within-culture differences in self-disclosure to close friends. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1471–1478. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610382786
45.
SoltF. (2020). Measuring income inequality across countries and over time: The standardized world income inequality database. Social Science Quarterly, 101(3), 1183–1199. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12795
46.
SommetN.MorselliD.SpiniD. (2018). Income inequality affects the psychological health of only the people facing scarcity. Psychological Science, 29(12), 1911–1921. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618798620
47.
SommetN.WeissmanD. L.CheutinN.ElliotA. J. (2023). How many participants do I need to test an interaction? Conducting an appropriate power analysis and achieving sufficient power to detect an interaction. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 6(3), Article 25152459231178728. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459231178728
48.
StephensN. M.MarkusH. R.TownsendS. S. M. (2007). Choice as an act of meaning: The case of social class. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 814–830. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.814
49.
ThomsonR.YukiM.TalhelmT.SchugJ.KitoM.AyanianA. H.BeckerJ. C.BeckerM.ChiuC.-y.ChoiH.-S.FerreiraC. M.FülöpM.GulP.Houghton-IlleraA. M.JoasooM.JongJ.KavanaghC. M.KhutkyyD.ManziC.. . . VissermanM. L. (2018). Relational mobility predicts social behaviors in 39 countries and is tied to historical farming and threat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(29), 7521–7526. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1713191115
50.
TraynorA.RaykovT. (2013). Household possessions indices as wealth measures: a validity evaluation. Comparative Education Review, 57(4), 662–688. https://doi.org/10.1086/671423
51.
TriandisH. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Westview Press.
52.
YamagishiT.HashimotoH.LiY.SchugJ. (2012). Stadtluft Macht Frei (City Air Brings Freedom). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(1), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111415407
53.
YukiM.SchugJ. (2012). Relational mobility: A socioecological approach to personal relationships. In GillathO.AdamsG.KunkelA. (Eds.), Relationship Science: Integrating Evolutionary, Neuroscience, and Sociocultural Approaches (pp. 137–151). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13489-007
YukiM.SchugJ.HorikawaH., et al (2007). Development of a scale to measure perceptions of relational mobility in society. CERSS Working Paper 75, Center for Experimental Research in Social Sciences, Hokkaido University.
56.
ZhangX.ZhaoX. (2021). Relational mobility promotes subjective well-being through control over interpersonal relationships among the Chinese. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 24(1), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12426
57.
ZhuY.YukiM. (2024, February). The manipulation of relational mobility [Poster presentation]. Society for Personality and Social Psychology’s Annual Convention, San Diego, CA. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.22153.66407
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
