Cumulative inequality theory

Last updated

Cumulative inequality theory or cumulative disadvantage theory is the systematic explanation of how inequalities develop. The theory was initially developed by Merton in 1988, [1] who studied the sciences and prestige. He believed that recognition from peers, and from published research in the scientific field created cumulative advantage or also Matthew effect that led to the receipt of resources that facilitated research projects. The theory expanded in four decades to include the idea that some people have more disadvantages than advantages which influence the quality of life of societies, cohorts, and individuals. The theory is principally a social scientific explanation of phenomena but with links to biological and health factors, personal adjustment, and well-being. A central premise is that "social systems generate inequality, which is manifested over the life course via demographic and developmental processes." [2] Cumulative inequality and cumulative advantage/disadvantage (CAD) are two different but interrelated theories. Cumulative inequality has drawn from various theoretical traditions, including CAD.

Contents

Development and application

The ideas of this theory were developed by Kenneth Ferraro and colleagues as an integrative or middle-range theory. Originally specified in five axioms and nineteen propositions, cumulative inequality theory incorporates elements from the following theories and perspectives, several of which are related to the study of society:

In recent years, Ferraro and several other researchers have been testing and elaborating elements of the theory on a variety of topics to provide evidence for the theoretical framework. In the following information you will find some of the uses of this theory in sociological studies.

McDonough, Worts, Booker, et al. (2015) for example studied cumulative disadvantage in the generations of health inequality among mothers in Britain and the United States. The study examined "if adverse circumstances early in the life course cumulate as health harming biographical patterns across working and family caregiving years." [3] Also, it was examined if institutional context moderated cumulative effects of micro level processes. The results showed that existing health disparities of women in midlife, during work and family rearing time, were intensified by cumulative disadvantages caused by adversities in early life. Thus, the accumulation of disadvantage had negative connotations for the well-being of women's occupational experiences and family life.

McLean (2010), on the other hand, studied U.S. combat and non combat veterans through cumulative disadvantage. He discovered that cumulated negative disadvantages caused by disability and unemployment were more likely to influence the lives of combat veterans versus non combat veterans. Combat veterans suffered physical and emotional trauma that had a disabling effect which impeded their ability to successfully obtain employment. . The research is crucial for social policy implementation that assist United States Veterans to find and retain employment that is suitable to their personal conditions.[ citation needed ]

In continuation, Woolredge, Frank, Coulette, et al. ( 2016) studied the prison sentencing of racial groups. specifically of African American males with prior felony convictions. They examined how pre-trial processes affect trial outcomes. It was determined that cumulative disadvantage was existent for African American males and young men; the results were measured by: set bail amounts, pre-trial detention, prison sentencing, and no reduction in sentencing length. The research are striving to create changes in the justice system that reduce incarceration rates of African American Males by reducing bail amounts, and pre trial imprisonment. Further studies are important to decrease the incarceration of minority groups in society, and to create a non biased justice system.[ citation needed ]

Additionally, Ferraro & Moore (2003) have applied the theory to the study of long-term consequences of early obesity for midlife health and socioeconomic attainment. The study shows that obesity experienced in early life leads to lower-body disability, but higher risk factors to health. [4] Moreover. The research mentions a risk that has been brought to attention in the past years; it ties being over weight to negative stigma (DeJong 1980),and has influenced fair labor market positioning [5] and wages. [6]

Lastly, Crystal, Shea, & Reyes (2016) studied the effects of cumulative advantage in increasing within age cohort economic inequalities in diverse periods of time. The study utilized economic patterns such as annual wealth value and household size. The inequalities of age were analyzed by using the gini coefficient. The study took place between 1980 and 2010. The results showed that at age 65 plus individuals had higher rates of inequality and it increased significantly for baby boomers or during economic recession and times of war. The research is written to estimate the possible impacts of social security changes on older adults in American Society.

In conclusion, Cumulative Inequality or Cumulative Disadvantage Theory, is broadly examining various topics that impact public policy, and the view of our role within society. Further benefits of the theory are still to be seen in the next coming years.

Core ideas

According to Ferraro and Shippee, there are five main ideas in cumulative inequality or Cumulative Disadvantage Theory, which include: [2]

Axiom 1

Ferraro, K.F., & Shippee, T.P. (2009) stated that social structures shape human behavior and interpersonal relations. Furthermore, cumulation in childhood experiences shape life outcomes sometimes in negative ways. Inequality is, therefore, not a randomly determined misfortune, but rather a predestined state that one is born into. Although it is possible for inequality to come from an individual's own actions consequences, that is not always true. One's childhood experiences and conditions should also be taken into consideration since these experiences help mold a young individual into an adult.

Axiom 2

Ferraro, K.F., & Shippee, T.P. (2009) want us to consider that cumulative advantage and disadvantage are not different they are merely opposite ends of the spectrum. Cumulative Disadvantage is perceived as a risk whereas Cumulative Advantage is an opportunity. A well-known concept in sociological sources is that individuals with advantages, whether they are achieved or born into, have a higher rate of opportunity in life. On the contrary, those with many disadvantages are more susceptible to risks throughout their life. For example, one who is born into the majority race with well-educated parents in a developed area will have more exposure to opportunity, whether it be getting a job through one of their parents' college friends or going to a highly rated high school and then being able to get into a highly accredited college. But, on the contrary, one who is born into a minority race with parents who may not have finished high school and live in the ghettos of the roughest town in the city may, not only have less exposure to opportunities, but more exposure to risks such as violence and crime.

Axiom 3

Ferraro, K.F., & Shippee, T.P. (2009) state that even though previous life events are important, the overall quality of life is determined by frequently changing trajectories, or the long-term changes in life stability, which are created by an individual's resources, risks, and human agencies. Human agencies simply refer to an individual's own ability to act and think on their own based on their own morals and beliefs. Elder & Shanahan (2006) however, believe that people's responses to stimuli determines changes to the trajectory of life. Moreover, the involvement of the institution in the decision-making process also alters individual decisions and behaviors.

Axiom 4

Carstensen (2006) makes the inference that ones view on everyday situations and success outcomes is more influential than their actual life status when it comes to their subsequent actions. Drawing from social comparison and symbolic interaction theories, a person's view of their resources may be different from what actually exists, and therefore shapes life trajectories in unique ways. People's view of their lives play a huge role into how they continue their trajectory through the decisions they make, and the activities they choose to partake in. Therefore, the theory makes the claim that those who possess a more positive and optimistic outlook on life typically are more satisfied with their life course.

Axiom 5

Ferraro, K.F., & Shippee, T.P. (2009) stated that before starting to explain Axiom 5, researchers should avoid cohort inversion. It will limit cohort centered studies, specifically, as it refers to the use of non random sample selection that excludes individuals with greater health issues from the samples. Studying individuals of certain age in this case, older adults, may lead to skewed data if selection of only healthier older adults takes place. The mean concentration of results will be designed to a specific population which will limit the data from being externally valid. The axiom may seem hard to understand at first but the overall meaning is that the accumulation of disadvantages can lead to premature mortality, or in simpler terms, younger death. Also, nonrandom selection may make it seem like mortality rates are decreasing when they are not. Take for example the number of young people deaths in areas with high crime and violence. These individuals are not exposed to many advancing opportunities so they fall victim of the cumulative inequality theory. The nonrandom selection component of the axiom signifies how older populations age in a manner that is not totally random, but rather as a result of the advantages and disadvantages that they have gathered throughout their life. An example is exceptional health care throughout life which prolonged lifespan, or, on the contrary, prolonged exposure to toxic chemicals as a result of working in dangerous environments.

Sources

  1. Merton, Robert K. (1 December 1988). "The Matthew Effect in Science, II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property". Isis. 79 (4): 606–623. doi:10.1086/354848. S2CID   17167736.
  2. 1 2 3 Ferraro, K. F.; Shippee, T. P. (17 April 2009). "Aging and Cumulative Inequality: How Does Inequality Get Under the Skin?". The Gerontologist. 49 (3): 333–343. doi:10.1093/geront/gnp034. PMC   2721665 . PMID   19377044.
  3. McDonough, Peggy; Worts, Diana; Booker, Cara; McMunn, Anne; Sacker, Amanda (September 2015). "Cumulative disadvantage, employment–marriage, and health inequalities among American and British mothers". Advances in Life Course Research. 25: 49–66. doi: 10.1016/j.alcr.2015.05.004 .
  4. Ferraro, Kenneth F.; Kelley-Moore, Jessica A. (October 2003). "Cumulative Disadvantage and Health: Long-Term Consequences of Obesity?". American Sociological Review. 68 (5): 707–729. doi:10.2307/1519759. JSTOR   1519759. PMC   3348542 . PMID   22581979.
  5. Averett, S.; Korenman, S. (February 1999). "Black-white differences in social and economic consequences of obesity". International Journal of Obesity. 23 (2): 166–173. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0800805 . PMID   10078852.
  6. Register, Charles A; Williams, Donald R (March 1, 1990). "Wage Effects of Obesity among Young Workers". Social Science Quarterly. 71 (1): 130–141.

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gerontology</span> Study of the social, psychological and biological aspects of aging

Gerontology is the study of the social, cultural, psychological, cognitive, and biological aspects of aging. The word was coined by Ilya Ilyich Mechnikov in 1903, from the Greek γέρων (gérōn), meaning "old man", and -λογία (-logía), meaning "study of". The field is distinguished from geriatrics, which is the branch of medicine that specializes in the treatment of existing disease in older adults. Gerontologists include researchers and practitioners in the fields of biology, nursing, medicine, criminology, dentistry, social work, physical and occupational therapy, psychology, psychiatry, sociology, economics, political science, architecture, geography, pharmacy, public health, housing, and anthropology.

Health equity arises from access to the social determinants of health, specifically from wealth, power and prestige. Individuals who have consistently been deprived of these three determinants are significantly disadvantaged from health inequities, and face worse health outcomes than those who are able to access certain resources. It is not equity to simply provide every individual with the same resources; that would be equality. In order to achieve health equity, resources must be allocated based on an individual need-based principle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social determinants of health</span> Economic and social conditions that influence differences in health status

The social determinants of health (SDOH) are the economic and social conditions that influence individual and group differences in health status. They are the health promoting factors found in one's living and working conditions, rather than individual risk factors that influence the risk or vulnerability for a disease or injury. The distribution of social determinants is often shaped by public policies that reflect prevailing political ideologies of the area.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Allostatic load</span> Wear and tear on the body due to stress

Allostatic load is "the wear and tear on the body" which accumulates as an individual is exposed to repeated or chronic stress. The term was coined by Bruce McEwen and Eliot Stellar in 1993. It represents the physiological consequences of chronic exposure to fluctuating or heightened neural or neuroendocrine response which results from repeated or prolonged chronic stress.

The life course approach, also known as the life course perspective or life course theory, refers to an approach developed in the 1960s for analyzing people's lives within structural, social, and cultural contexts. It views one's life as a socially sequenced timeline and recognizes the importance of factors such as generational succession and age in shaping behavior and career. Development does not end at childhood, but instead extends through multiple life stages to influence life trajectory.

The Hispanic paradox is an epidemiological finding that Hispanic Americans tend to have health outcomes that "paradoxically" are comparable to, or in some cases better than, those of their U.S. non-Hispanic White counterparts, even though Hispanics have lower average income and education, higher rates of disability, as well as a higher incidence of various cardiovascular risk factors and metabolic diseases.

Eileen M. Crimmins is the AARP Chair in Gerontology at the USC Davis School of Gerontology of the University of Southern California. Her work focuses on the connections between socioeconomic factors and life expectancy and other health outcomes.

Race and health refers to how being identified with a specific race influences health. Race is a complex concept that has changed across chronological eras and depends on both self-identification and social recognition. In the study of race and health, scientists organize people in racial categories depending on different factors such as: phenotype, ancestry, social identity, genetic makeup and lived experience. Race and ethnicity often remain undifferentiated in health research.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Socioeconomic status</span> Economic and social measure of a persons affluence and/or influence

Socioeconomic status (SES) is an economic and sociological combined total measure of a person's work experience and of an individual's or family's access to economic resources and social position in relation to others. When analyzing a family's SES, the household income and the education and occupations of its members are examined, whereas for an individual's SES only their own attributes are assessed. Recently, research has revealed a lesser-recognized attribute of SES as perceived financial stress, as it defines the "balance between income and necessary expenses". Perceived financial stress can be tested by deciphering whether a person at the end of each month has more than enough, just enough, or not enough money or resources. However, SES is more commonly used to depict an economic difference in society as a whole.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social inequality</span> Uneven distribution of resources in a society

Social inequality occurs when resources within a society are distributed unevenly, often as a result of inequitable allocation practices that create distinct unequal patterns based on socially defined categories of people. Differences in accessing social goods within society are influenced by factors like power, religion, kinship, prestige, race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, intelligence and class. Social inequality usually implies the lack of equality of outcome, but may alternatively be conceptualized as a lack of equality in access to opportunity.

While epidemiology is "the study of the distribution and determinants of states of health in populations", social epidemiology is "that branch of epidemiology concerned with the way that social structures, institutions, and relationships influence health." This research includes "both specific features of, and pathways by which, societal conditions affect health".

Social epidemiology focuses on the patterns in morbidity and mortality rates that emerge as a result of social characteristics. While an individual's lifestyle choices or family history may place him or her at an increased risk for developing certain illnesses, there are social inequalities in health that cannot be explained by individual factors. Variations in health outcomes in the United States are attributed to several social characteristics, such as gender, race, socioeconomic status, the environment, and educational attainment. Inequalities in any or all of these social categories can contribute to health disparities, with some groups placed at an increased risk for acquiring chronic diseases than others. These health disparities are root issues to the health equity crisis present not just in the United States, but even around the world.

Robert J. Sampson is the Woodford L. and Ann A. Flowers University Professor at Harvard University and Director of the Social Sciences Program at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study. From 2005 through 2010, Sampson served as the Chair of the Department of Sociology at Harvard. In 2011–2012, he was elected as the President of the American Society of Criminology.

Cognitive epidemiology is a field of research that examines the associations between intelligence test scores and health, more specifically morbidity and mortality. Typically, test scores are obtained at an early age, and compared to later morbidity and mortality. In addition to exploring and establishing these associations, cognitive epidemiology seeks to understand causal relationships between intelligence and health outcomes. Researchers in the field argue that intelligence measured at an early age is an important predictor of later health and mortality differences.

Social stigma of obesity is bias or discriminatory behaviors targeted at overweight and obese individuals because of their weight and high body fat percentage. Such social stigmas can span one's entire life as long as excess weight is present, starting from a young age and lasting into adulthood. Studies also indicate overweight and obese individuals experience higher levels of stigma compared to other people. Stigmatization of obesity is usually associated with increased health risks (morbidity) of being overweight or obese and the possibility of a shorter lifespan (mortality).

In 1995, Jo C. Phelan and Bruce G. Link developed the theory of fundamental causes. This theory seeks to outline why the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and health disparities has persisted over time, particularly when diseases and conditions previously thought to cause morbidity and mortality among low SES individuals have resolved. The theory states that an ongoing association exists between SES and health status because SES "embodies an array of resources, such as money, knowledge, prestige, power, and beneficial social connections that protect health no matter what mechanisms are relevant at any given time." In other words, despite advances in screening techniques, vaccinations, or any other piece of health technology or knowledge, the underlying fact is that those from low SES communities lack resources to protect and/or improve their health.

The social determinants of health in poverty describe the factors that affect impoverished populations' health and health inequality. Inequalities in health stem from the conditions of people's lives, including living conditions, work environment, age, and other social factors, and how these affect people's ability to respond to illness. These conditions are also shaped by political, social, and economic structures. The majority of people around the globe do not meet their potential best health because of a "toxic combination of bad policies, economics, and politics". Daily living conditions work together with these structural drivers to result in the social determinants of health.

Ecosocial theory, first proposed by name in 1994 by Nancy Krieger of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, is a broad and complex theory with the purpose of describing and explaining causal relationships in disease distribution. While it incorporates biological and psychosocial influences on disease occurrence, the theory is also suited to analyze the relationships between social factors and disease development in public health research. The core constructs of Ecosocial Theory are: Embodiment; Pathways to Embodiment; the cumulative interplay between exposure, resistance, and susceptibility; and agency and accountability. Further, the theory specifies that all constructs must be considered in concert, as they work together in a synergistic explanation of disease distribution. The theory assumes that distributions of disease are determined at multiple levels and that analyses must incorporate historical, political economic, temporal, and spatial analyses

Arline Geronimus wrote about the weathering hypothesis the early 1990s to account for health disparities of newborn babies and birth mothers due to decades and generations of racism and social, economic, and political oppression. It is well documented that people of color and other marginalized communities have worse health outcomes than white people. This is due to multiple stressors including prejudice, social alienation, institutional bias, political oppression, economic exclusion, and racial discrimination. The weathering hypothesis proposes that the cumulative burden of these stressors as individuals age is "weathering", and the increased weathering experienced by minority groups compared to others can account for differences in health outcomes. In recent years, social scientists investigated the biological plausibility of the weathering hypothesis in studies evaluating the physiological effects of social, environmental and political stressors among marginalized communities. The weathering hypothesis is more widely accepted as a framework for explaining health disparities on the basis of differential exposure to racially based stressors. Researchers have also identified patterns connecting weathering to biological phenomena associated with stress and aging, such as allostatic load, epigenetics, telomere shortening, and accelerated brain aging.

Biological inequity, also known as biological inequality, refers to the “systematic, unfair, and avoidable stress-related biological differences which increase risk of disease, observed between social groups of a population”. The term developed by Centric Lab aims to unify societal factors with the biological underpinnings of health inequities – the unfair and avoidable differences in health status and risks between social groups of a population — such that these inequalities can be investigated in a holistic manner.