Status incongruence revisited: associations with shame and mental wellbeing

Abstract

Status incongruence has been related to poor health and all-cause mortality, and could be a growing public health problem due to changes in the labour market in later decades. Shaming experiences have been suggested as playing a part in the aetiology. The aim here was to study the risk for shaming experiences, pessimism, anxiety, depressive feelings, and poor mental wellbeing (as measured by the GHQ) with a special focus on shame, in four social status categories: negatively and positively incongruent individuals, and low-status and high-status congruent individuals. Data comprised 14,854 working men and women from a regional sample of randomly selected respondents, 18-79 years of age. Logistic regression was used to study differences in risk for negative emotional outcomes. Results showed that the negative incongruent category persisted as the group most at risk for all negative emotional outcomes (OR 1.5-1.9; p < 0.05-<0.001). When testing the risk for poor mental wellbeing among the status categories with and without shaming experiences, ORs for all groups with shaming experiences were elevated. Among groups without shame, only the negative incongruent category remained at risk (OR 2.7; p < 0.05) after adjustment. Negative incongruent status is associated with adverse emotional outcomes, among them shame, which is a previously unappreciated aspect of status incongruence.

Structural and intermediary determinants of social inequalities in the mental well-being of European workers: a relational approach

“…Among women, expert-level supervisors also reported a worse mental well-being than lower-skilled supervisors. Our findings are consistent with previous research [26] and research on status incongruence [39]. Expert supervisors and managers can be considered high-status congruents, that is workers who simultaneously hold a less exploited, more empowered class location on the organisational control dimension and on the skill dimension.…”

“…Expert supervisors and managers can be considered high-status congruents, that is workers who simultaneously hold a less exploited, more empowered class location on the organisational control dimension and on the skill dimension. According to Lundberg et al [39] high-status congruent individuals show an elevated risk for experiencing shaming, that is the sensation of not being regarded and respected in the way one thinks one deserves to be. Shaming experiences are a primary producer of poor mental well-being [39].…”

“…According to Lundberg et al [39] high-status congruent individuals show an elevated risk for experiencing shaming, that is the sensation of not being regarded and respected in the way one thinks one deserves to be. Shaming experiences are a primary producer of poor mental well-being [39]. Expert managers and supervisors are less exploited.…”

“…They can still experience events of domination, for example being disciplined for a poor performance by their own superiors (their owners or their boards). These disciplinary measures are more likely to offend them and evoke feelings of shame, because of inadequate confirmation of their social location by others [39]. In other words, although expert supervisors and managers are less exploited compared to other employees, the external sanctions they do experience may have a larger impact on their well-being.…”

“…Upward mobility changes the social location of people, but not necessarily their values and expectations. On the contrary, values and expectations will often differ from those of the new socio-cultural context [39]. As a consequence, the expectations of non-expert supervisors and managers about the employment relations could still be similar to the expectations of the lower social classes, and thus be minified.…”