Advertisement

Journal of Urban Health

, Volume 90, Issue 1, pp 175–184 | Cite as

Reconsidering the Effects of Poverty and Social Support on Health: A 5-Year Longitudinal Test of the Stress-Buffering Hypothesis

  • David MoskowitzEmail author
  • Eric Vittinghoff
  • Laura Schmidt
Article

Abstract

Prior research in the general population has found that social support can buffer the adverse effects of stressors on health. However, both stressors and social support may be qualitatively different for those living in urban poverty. We examined the effects of social support and poverty-specific stressors on self-rated health. We used data from the Welfare Client Longitudinal Survey (WCLS), a 5-year longitudinal study of 718 public aid recipients. We measured received social support and “net social support,” defined as the difference between support received and that given to others. We used restricted cubic splines to model the stress-buffering effects of social support on self-rated health as a function of stressful life events and neighborhood disorder. Increased exposure to stressors was associated with poorer self-rated health. Evidence of stress buffering was confined to those with the heaviest exposure to stressors, and its effects decreased across increasing levels of social support. Analyses using net social support had generally more modest effects than those using received social support. Social support does not buffer the effects of stressors on health uniformly for individuals living in conditions of urban poverty. Researchers and policymakers should be cautious in overestimating the beneficial effects that social support may have on health for marginalized populations.

Keywords

Social support Stressors Self-rated health Social environment Urban poverty 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by grants from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) P50 AA05595, R01 AA13136, R01 AA0149918, and R21AA015397. Dr. Moskowitz was supported by the Primary Care Research Fellowship at UCSF, funded by the Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration D55HP05165. Dr. Schmidt’s effort was supported by the Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies Fellowship Program and NIAAA grant R01AA017197.

References

  1. 1.
    Berkman LF, Syme SL. Social networks, host resistance, and mortality: a nine-year follow-up study of Alemeda County residents. Am J Epidemiol. 1979; 109(2): 186–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    House J, Landis K, Umberson D. Social relationships and health. Science. 1988; 241(4865): 540–545.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Uchino BN, Cacioppo JT, Kiecolt-Glaser JK. The relationship between social support and physiological processes: a review with emphasis on underlying mechanisms and implications for health. Psychol Bull. 1996; 119(3): 488–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohen S, Wills TA. Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull. 1985; 98(2): 310–357.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosengren A, Orth-Gomer K, Wedel H, Wilhelmsen L. Stressful life events, social support, and mortality in men born in 1933. BMJ. 1993; 307(6912): 1102–1105.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Falk A, Hanson BS, Isacsson SO, Ostergren PO. Job strain and mortality in elderly men: social network, support, and influence as buffers. Am J Public Health. 1992; 82(8): 1136–1139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Feldman PJ, Steptoe A. How neighborhoods and physical functioning are related: the roles of neighborhood socioeconomic status, perceived neighborhood strain, and individual health risk factors. Ann Behav Med. 2004; 27(2): 91–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ross CE, Mirowsky J. Neighborhood disadvantage, disorder, and health. J Health Soc Behav. 2001; 42(3): 258–276.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wacquant L. Urban outcasts: a comparative sociology of advanced marginality. Cambridge: Polity; 2007.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Currie E. Reckoning: drugs, the cities, and the American future. New York: Hill and Wang; 1993.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Venkatesh SA. American project: the rise and fall of a Modern Ghetto. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Conley D. Being black, living in the red: race, wealth, and social policy in America. London: University of California Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dohan D. The price of poverty: money, work and culture in the Mexican-American Barrio. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sundquist K, Theobald H, Yang M, et al. Neighborhood violent crime and unemployment increase the risk of coronary heart disease: a multilevel study in an urban setting. Soc Sci Med. 2006; 62(8): 2061–2071.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chaix B, Lindstrom M, Rosvall M, Merlo J. Neighbourhood social interactions and risk of acute myocardial infarction. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2008; 62(1): 62–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Berkman L, Kawachi I. Social epidemiology. London: Oxford University Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tigges LM, Browne I, Green GP. Social isolation of the urban poor: race, class, and neighborhood effects on social resources. Sociol Q. 1998; 39(1): 53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cattell V. Poor people, poor places, and poor health: the mediating role of social networks and social capital. Soc Sci Med. 2001; 52(10): 1501–1516.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Edin K, Lein L. Making ends meet: how single mothers survive welfare and low-wage work. New York: Russell Sage; 1997.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stack C. All our kin: strategies for survival in a black community. New York: Harper and Row; 1974.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Domínguez S, Watkins C. Creating networks for survival and mobility: social capital among African-American and Latin-American low-income mothers. Soc Probl. 2003; 50(1): 111–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Newman K. Chutes and ladders: navigating the low-wage labor market. New York: Russell Sage; 2006.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Belle D. Poverty and women’s mental health. Am Psychol. 1990; 45(3): 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Knowlton AR, Yang C, Bohnert A, Wissow L, Chander G, Arnsten JA. Informal Care and Reciprocity of Support are Associated with HAART Adherence Among Men in Baltimore, MD, USA. AIDS Behav. 2011; 15(7): 1429–1436.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Antonucci TC, Fuhrer R, Jackson JS. Social support and reciprocity—a cross-ethnic and cross national perspective. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 1990; 7: 519–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ziersch AM, Baum FE, Macdougall C, Putland C. Neighbourhood life and social capital: the implications for health. Soc Sci Med. 2005; 60(1): 71–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Abbott S, Freeth D. Social capital and health: starting to make sense of the role of generalized trust and reciprocity. J Health Psychol. 2008; 13(7): 874–883.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Diggle PJ, Heagerty P, Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Analysis of longitudinal data. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mulia N, Schmidt L, Bond J, Jacobs L, Korcha R. Stress, social support and problem drinking among women in poverty. Addiction. 2008; 103(8): 1283–1293.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lown EA, Schmidt L, Wiley J. Unraveling lives: interpersonal violence among women seeking welfare. Paper presented at: Research Society on Alcohol. Santa Barbara, CA; June 2005.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schmidt LA, Weisner CM, Wiley JA. Substance abuse and the course of welfare dependency. Am J Public Health. 1998; 88(11): 1616–1622.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schmidt LA, Wiley JA, Dohan D, et al. Changing patterns of addiction and public aid receipt: tracking the unintended consequences of welfare reform policy. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2006; 31(5): 945–980.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schmidt L, Dohan D, Wiley J, Zabkiewicz D. Addiction and welfare dependency: interpreting the connection. Soc Probl. 2002; 49: 221–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schmidt L, Zabkiewicz D, Henderson S, Wiley J, Jacobs L. On the declining health status of welfare caseloads: emerging dilemmas in serving the poor. Soc Work Publ Health. 2011; 26(2): 181–211.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schmidt L, Zabkiewicz D, Jacobs L, Wiley J. Substance abuse and employment among welfare mothers: from welfare to work and back again? Subst Use Misuse. 2007; 42(7): 1069–1087.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zabiewicz D, Schmidt LA. The mental health benefits of work: do they apply to welfare mothers with a drinking problem? J Behav Health Serv Res. 2009; 36(1): 96–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    McGee DL, Liao Y, Cao G, Cooper RS. Self-reported health status and mortality in a multiethnic US cohort. Am J Epidemiol. 1999; 149(1): 41–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Idler EL, Benyamini Y. Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies. J Health Soc Behav. 1997; 38(1): 21–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stewart AL, Napoles-Springer A. Health-related quality-of-life assessments in diverse population groups in the United States. Med Care. 2000; 38(9 Suppl): 102–124.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Burstrom B, Fredlund P. Self rated health: is it as good a predictor of subsequent mortality among adults in lower as well as in higher social classes? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001; 55(11): 836–840.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    University of Michigan Ford School of Public Policy. The women’s health study: wave 1 survey instrument. http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/research/poverty/wes/instrument/wave_1.php. Accessed 1 February 2010.
  42. 42.
    Ewart CK, Suchday S. Discovering how urban poverty and violence affect health: development and validation of a Neighborhood Stress Index. Health Psychol. 2002; 21(3): 254–262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Perkins DD, Taylor RB. Ecological assessments of community disorder: their relationship to fear of crime and theoretical implications. Am J Community Psychol. 1996; 24(1): 63–107.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mulia N, Schmidt L. Conflicts and trade-offs due to alcohol and drugs: clients’ accounts of leaving welfare. Soc Serv Rev. 2003; 77(4): 499–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kawachi I, Subramanian SV, Kim D. Social capital and health. New York: Springer; 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Steptoe A, Feldman PJ. Neighborhood problems as sources of chronic stress: development of a measure of neighborhood problems, and associations with socioeconomic status and health. Ann Behav Med. 2001; 23(3): 177–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Knowlton AR, Curry A, Hua W, Wissow L. Depression and social context: primary supporter relationship factors associated with depressive symptoms among a disadvantaged population with HIV/AIDS. J Community Psychol. 2009; 37(4): 526–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Venkatesh SA. Off the books: the underground economy of the urban poor. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Odierna DH, Schmidt LA. The effects of failing to include hard-to-reach respondents in longitudinal surveys. Am J Public Health. 2009; 99(8): 1515–1521.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Durrleman S, Simon R. Flexible regression models with cubic splines. Stat Med. 1989; 8(5): 551–561.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Oehlert G. A note on the delta method. Am Stat. 1992; 46(1): 27–29.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Academy of Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Moskowitz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eric Vittinghoff
    • 2
  • Laura Schmidt
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Ambulatory and Preventive MedicineAlameda County Medical CenterOaklandUSA
  2. 2.Department of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  3. 3.Department of Anthropology, History and Social MedicineUniversity of California at San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  4. 4.Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy StudiesUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations