CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 960Social and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status DynamicsPersonality Traits and Psychology

Social class, sense of control, and social explanation.

Kraus, Michael W., Piff, Paul K., Keltner, Dacher·2009·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0016357
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Lower social class is associated with diminished resources and perceived subordinate rank. On the basis of this analysis, the authors predicted that social class would be closely associated with a reduced sense of personal control and that this association would explain why lower class individuals favor contextual over dispositional explanations of social events. Across 4 studies, lower social class individuals, as measured by subjective socioeconomic status (SES), endorsed contextual explanations of economic trends, broad social outcomes, and emotion. Across studies, the sense of control mediated the relation between subjective SES and contextual explanations, and this association was independent of objective SES, ethnicity, political ideology, and self-serving biases. Finally, experimentally inducing a higher sense of control attenuated the tendency for lower subjective SES individuals to make more contextual explanations (Study 4). Implications for future research on social class as well as theoretical distinctions between objective SES and subjective SES are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0016357

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Upper-class individuals were more disengaged non-verbally, whereas lower-class individuals exhibited more socially engaged eye contact, head nods, and laughter.

    “whereas upper‐class individuals were more disengaged non‐verbally, lower‐class individuals exhibited more socially engaged eye contact, head nods, and laughter”

    From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Kraus and Keltner (2009)

  • In a series of four studies, Kraus, Piff, and Keltner found that lower subjective social class individuals reported lower perceived control.

    “In a series of four studies, Kraus, Piff, and Keltner (2009) found that, by comparison with their higher subjective social class counterparts, lower subjective social class individuals (1) reported lower perceived control”

    From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Kraus, Piff, and Keltner (2009)

  • Naive observers shown 60-second excerpts of interactions used disengaged versus engaged non-verbal behavioural styles to judge the educational and income backgrounds of the people they had seen with above-chance accuracy.

    “when naïve observers were shown 60‐s excerpts of these interactions, they used these disengaged versus engaged non‐verbal behavioural styles to make judgements of the educational and income backgrounds of the people they had seen with above‐chance accuracy”

    From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Kraus and Keltner (2009)

  • There was a significant indirect effect of subjective social class on the tendency to see phenomena as caused by external factors, via perceived control.

    “there was a significant indirect effect of subjective social class on the tendency to see phenomena as caused by external factors, via perceived control”

    From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Kraus, Piff, and Keltner (2009)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 82 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2009-12
Volume
97
Issue
6
Pages
992-1004
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/a0016357
OpenAlex
W2106125319
Cited by
956
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 56 · 2025: 109 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 92 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 75 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 63 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 25
FWCI
60.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
social class, subjective socioeconomic status, sense of personal control, contextual explanations, social explanation, economic trends, emotions, self-serving bias, political ideology
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Emotions, Ethnicity, Facial Expression, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Judgment, Male, Personal Satisfaction, Social Class, Social Environment, Social Perception, Students

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review