Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2011:62:501-30.
doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.031809.130711.

Psychological perspectives on pathways linking socioeconomic status and physical health

Karen A Matthews  1 , Linda C Gallo
Affiliations
Review

Psychological perspectives on pathways linking socioeconomic status and physical health

Karen A Matthews et al. Annu Rev Psychol. 2011.

Abstract

Low socioeconomic status (SES) is a reliable correlate of poor physical health. Rather than treat SES as a covariate, health psychology has increasingly focused on the psychobiological pathways that inform understanding why SES is related to physical health. This review assesses the status of research that has examined stress and its associated distress, and social and personal resources as pathways. It highlights work on biomarkers and biological pathways related to SES that can serve as intermediate outcomes in future studies. Recent emphasis on the accumulation of psychobiological risks across the life course is summarized and represents an important direction for future research. Studies that test pathways from SES to candidate psychosocial pathways to health outcomes are few in number but promising. Future research should test integrated models rather than taking piecemeal approaches to evidence. Much work remains to be done, but the questions are of great health significance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Morbidity rate by socioeconomic status level. (a) Percent diagnosed osteoarthritis, (b) relative prevalence of chronic disease, (c) prevalence of hypertension, and (d) rate of cervical cancer per 100,000. Original figure from Adler et al. (1994).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Psychobiological influences on the socioeconomic status–health gradient.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

LITERATURE CITED

    1. Adler NE, Boyce T, Chesney MA, Cohen S, Folkman S, et al. Socioeconomic status and health. The challenge of the gradient. Am. Psychol. 1994;49:15–24. - PubMed
    1. Adler NE, Epel ES, Castellazzo G, Ickovics JR. Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: preliminary data in healthy white women. Health Psychol. 2000;19(6):586–592. - PubMed
    1. Aiello AE, Kaplan GA. Socioeconomic position and inflammatory and immune biomarkers of cardiovascular disease: applications to the panel study of income dynamics. Biodemogr. Soc. Biol. 2009;55:178–205. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Almeida DM, Neupert SD, Banks SR, Serido J. Do daily stress processes account for socioeconomic health disparities? J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2005;60(Spec. No. 2):34–39. - PubMed
    1. Avendano M, Kawachi I, Van LF, Boshuizen HC, Mackenbach JP, et al. Socioeconomic status and stroke incidence in the US elderly: the role of risk factors in the EPESE study. Stroke. 2006;37(6):1368–1373. - PubMed

RELATED RESOURCES

    1. Adler NE, Rehkopf DH. U.S. disparities in health: descriptions, causes, and mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Public Health. 2008;29:235–252. - PubMed
    1. Report of the APA Task Force on Socioeconomic Status. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.; 2007. Am. Psychol. Assoc. Task Force Socioecon. Status.
    1. Lynch J, Smith GD. A life course approach to chronic disease epidemiology. Annu. Rev. Public Health. 2005;26:1–35. - PubMed
    1. Marmot M. The Status Syndrome: How Social Standing Affects Our Health and Longevity. New York: Henry Holt; 2004.
    1. Sampson RJ, Morenoff JD, Gannon-Rowley T. Assessing “neighborhood effects”: social processes and new directions in research. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2002;28:443–478.

Publication types