Social Indicators Research

, Volume 104, Issue 2, pp 225–251 | Cite as

Issues in the Conceptualisation and Measurement of Socioeconomic Background: Do Different Measures Generate Different Conclusions?

Article

Abstract

Parental occupation and education are used extensively in the analysis of socioeconomic inequalities in education and subsequent social and economic outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to examine if different ways of measuring socioeconomic background substantially alter substantive conclusions on cross-national differences in socioeconomic inequalities in student achievement. The effects of father’s occupational group are largely consistent across countries, with students from teaching backgrounds scoring very highly in many countries. Student performance by mother’s educational group is quite similar across countries although the relative performance of students whose mothers completed vocational education differs between countries. Notwithstanding these differences, continuous measures of father’s and mother’s occupation and education, and composite measures comprising combinations of these four indicators and additional indicators produce similar, but not identical, orderings of countries in terms of socioeconomic inequalities in student performance. However common single indicator measures, mother’s education and father’s occupation do not show a particularly high correspondence, cross-nationally. On theoretical and empirical grounds, the preferred measure is a composite of both parents’ occupation and education.

Keywords

Occupational status Class background Student achievement Sociology of education Cross-national comparisons 

References

  1. Acock, A. C. (2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(4), 1012–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alford, R. R. (1963). Party and society: The Anglo-American democracies. New York: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  3. Allison, P. D. (2001). Missing data. In Quantitative applications in the social sciences (Vol. 136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Beaton, A. E., Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzalez, E. J., Kelley, D. L., & Smith, T. A. (1996). Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: IEA’s third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Boston: Centre for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston College.Google Scholar
  5. Beller, E. (2009). Why mothers matter in mobility research. American Sociological Review, 74(4), 507–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blau, P., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Bond, R., & Saunders, P. (1999). Routes to success: Influences on occupational attainment of young British males. British Journal of Sociology, 50, 217–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bornstein, M. C., & Bradley, R. H. (Eds.). (2003). Socioeconomic status, parenting and child development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Borus, M. E., & Nestel, G. (1973). Response bias in reports of father’s education and socioeconomic status. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 68(December), 816–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brauns, H., & Steinmann, S. (1997). Educational reform in France, West-Germany, the United Kingdom and Hungary: Updating the CASMIN educational classification (No. 1–21). Mannheim: Mannheim Centre for European Social Research (MZES).Google Scholar
  11. Breen, R. (2004). Social mobility in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burawoy, M. (1977). Social structure, homogenization, and the process of status attainment in the United States and Great Britain. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 1031–1042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Comber, L. C., & Keeves, J. P. (1973). Science education in nineteen countries: International studies in evaluation I. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Conley, D. (2001). Capital for college: Parental assets and postsecondary schooling. Sociology of Education, 74(1), 59–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Corak, M. (Ed.). (2005). Generational income mobility in North America and Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Coser, L. A. (1975). Presidential address: Two methods in search of a substance. American Sociological Review, 40, 691–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Currie, C. E., Elton, R. A., Todd, J., & Platt, S. (1997). Indicators of socioeconomic status for adolescents: The WHO health behaviour in school-aged children survey. Health Education Research, 12(3), 385–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Duncan, O. D. (1961). A socioeconomic index for all occupations. In A. J. J. Reiss (Ed.), Occupations and social structure (pp. 109–138). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  19. Duncan, O. D., Featherman, D. L., & Duncan, B. (1972). Socioeconomic background and achievement. New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
  20. Ehrenreich, B., & Ehrenreich, J. (1979). The professional managerial class. In P. Walker (Ed.), Between labour and capital (pp. 5–45). Hassocks, Sussex: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
  21. Entwisle, D. R., & Astone, N. M. (1994). Some practical guidelines for measuring youth’s race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Child Development, 65(6), 1521–1540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Erikson, R., & Goldthorpe, J. (1992). The constant flux. A study in class mobility in industrial nations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  23. Erikson, R., Goldthorpe, J. H., & Portocarero, L. (1979). Intergenerational class mobility in three western societies: England, France and Sweden. British Journal of Sociology, 30(4), 415–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fejgin, N. (1995). Factors contributing to the academic excellence of American Jewish and Asian students. Sociology of Education, 68(1), 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ganzeboom, H. B. G., & Treiman, D. J. (1996). Internationally comparable measures of occupational status for the 1988 international standard classification of occupations. Social Science Research, 25, 201–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Giddens, A. (1980). The class structure of advanced societies (Second ed.). London: Hutchinson and Co.Google Scholar
  27. Grusky, D. B., & Sørensen, J. B. (1998). Can class analysis be salvaged? American Journal of Sociology, 103(5), 1187–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Güveli, A., Need, A., & de Graaf, N. D. (2007). The rise of ‘New’ social classes within the service class in The Netherlands: Political orientation of social and cultural specialists and technocrats between 1970 and 2003. Acta Sociological, 50(2), 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hauser, R. M., & Warren, J. R. (1997). Socioeconomic indexes for occupations: A review, update, and critique. Sociological Methodology, 27(1), 177–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hodge, R. W. (1981). The measurement of occupational status. Social Science Research, 10(4), 396–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hodge, R. W., Treiman, D. J., & Rossi, P. H. (1966). A comparison study of occupational prestige. In R. Bendix & R. Lipset (Eds.), Class, status, power (2nd ed.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  33. Inkeles, A., & Rossi, P. H. (1956). National comparisons of occupational prestige. American Journal of Sociology, 61(4), 329–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ishida, H., Muller, W., & Ridge, J. M. (1995). Class origin, class destination, and education: a cross- national study of ten industrial nations. American Journal of Sociology, 101(July), 145–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jencks, C., Bartlett, S., Corcan, M., Crouse, J., Eaglesfield, D., Jackson, G., et al. (1979). Who gets ahead? The determinants of economic success in America. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  36. Jencks, C., Smith, M., Acland, H., Bane, M. J., Ginitis, D., Heyns, B., et al. (1972). Inequality. A reassessment of family and schooling in America. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  37. Jones, F. L., & McMillan, J. (2001). Scoring occupational categories for social research: A review of current practice with Australian examples. Work, Employment and Society, 15(3), 539–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Juster, F. T., Smith, J. P., & Stafford, F. (1999). The measurement and structure of household wealth. Labour Economics, 6(1999), 253–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kalmijn, M. (1994). Mother’s occupational status and children’s schooling. American Sociological Review, 59(2), 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kingston, P. W. (2000). The classless society. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Korupp, S. E. (2000). Mothers and the process of social stratification. The Netherlands: Interuniversity Center for Social Science Theory and Methodology.Google Scholar
  42. Kraus, V., Schild, E. O., & Hodge, R. W. (1978). Occupational prestige in the collective conscience. Social Forces, 56, 900–918.Google Scholar
  43. Lien, N., Friestad, C., & Klepp, K. I. (2001). Adolescents’ proxy reports of parents’ socioeconomic status: How valid are they? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 55(10), 731–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lipset, S. M., & Zetterberg, H. (1959). Social Mobility in Industrial Societies. In S. M. Lipset & R. Bendix (Eds.), Social mobility in industrial society (pp. 11–75). London: Heinman.Google Scholar
  45. Looker, E. D. (1989). Accuracy of proxy reports of parental status characteristics. Sociology of Education, 62(4), 257–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Marks, G. N., Headey, B., & Wooden, M. (2005). Household wealth in Australia: Its components, distribution and correlates. Journal of Sociology, 41(1), 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Marks, G. N., & McMillan, J. (2003). Declining inequality? The changing impact of socioeconomic background and ability on education in Australia. British Journal of Sociology, 54(4), 453–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McIntosh, S., & Vignoles, A. (2001). Measuring and assessing the impact of basic skills on labour market outcomes. Oxford Economic Papers, 3, 453–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McMillan, J., Beavis, A., & Jones, F. L. (2009). The AUSEI06: A new socioeconomic index for Australia. Journal of Sociology, 45(2), 123–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Morgan, S. L., & Kim, Y.-M. (2005). Inequality of conditions and intergenerational mobility: Changing patterns of educational attainment in the United States. In S. L. Morgan, D. B. Grusky, & G. S. Fields (Eds.), Mobility and inequality: Frontiers of research from sociology and economics. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Müller, W., Lüttinger, P., König, W., & Karle, W. (1989). Class and education in industrial nations. International Journal of Sociology, 19, 3–39.Google Scholar
  52. Murnane, R. J., Willett, J. B., & Levy, F. (1995). The growing importance of cognitive skills in wage determination. Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(2), 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. OECD. (1999). Classifying educational programmes. Manual for ISCED-97 implementation in OECD countries. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  54. OECD. (2001). Knowledge and skills for life. First results from the 2000 OECD programme for international student assessment. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  55. OECD. (2002). PISA 2000 technical report. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  56. OECD. (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  57. OECD. (2005). PISA 2003 data analysis manual: SAS users. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  58. OECD. (2007). Science competencies for tomorrow’s world (Vol. 1). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  59. Olneck, M. R., & Crouse, J. (1979). The IQ-meritocracy debate reconsidered. American Journal of Education, 88(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Park, H. (2008). Home literacy environments and children’s reading performance: A comparative study of 25 countries. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14(6), 489–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Purves, A. C. (1973). Literature education in ten countries. An empirical study. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  62. Sewell, W. H., Haller, A. O., & Portes, A. (1969). The educational and early occupational attainment process. American Sociological Review, 34, 82–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Shavit, Y., Arum, R., & Gamoran, A. (2007). Stratification in higher education: A comparative study. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Shavit, Y., & Blossfeld, H.-P. (1993). Persistent inequality. Changing educational attainment in thirteen countries. Boulder, Colorado: Westview.Google Scholar
  65. Sirin, S. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytical review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sørensen, A. B. (1991). On the usefulness of class analysis in research on social mobility and socioeconomic inequality. Acta Sociological, 34(2), 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tahlin, M. (2007). Class clues. European Sociological Review, 23(5), 557–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Teachman, J. D. (1987). Family background, educational resources, and educational attainment. American Sociological Review, 52, 548–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Thomson, S., Cresswell, J., & De Bortoli, L. (2004). Facing the future: A focus on mathematical literacy among Australian 15-year-old students in PISA 2003. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  70. Treiman, D. J. (1977). Occupational prestige in comparative perspective. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  71. Treiman, D. J., & Yip, K.-B. (1989). Education and Occupational Attainment in 21 Countries. In M. L. Kohn (Ed.), Cross national research in sociology (Vol. Chapter 16, pp. 373–394). Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  72. West, P., Sweeting, H., & Speed, E. (2001). We really do know what you do: A comparison of reports from 11-year olds and their parents in respect of parental economic activity and occupation. Sociology, 35(2), 539–560.Google Scholar
  73. White, K. R. (1982). The relationship between socio-economic status and academic achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 91(3), 461–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. White, S. B., Reynolds, P. D., Thomas, M. M., & Gitzlaff, N. J. (1993). Socioeconomic-status and achievement revisited. Urban Education, 28(3), 328–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Whitt, H. P. (1986). The sheaf coefficient: A simplified and expanded approach. Social Science Research, 15, 174–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wright, E. O. (1985). Classes. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  77. Wright, E. O. (1997). Class counts: Comparative studies in class analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Australian Council for Educational ResearchCamberwellAustralia
  2. 2.Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social ResearchUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations