ArticleDemographic research
A test of the predictive validity of relative versus absolute income for self-reported health and well-being in the United States.
Article in Demographic research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social status and the relationship between income rank and well-being in 109 nations.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Unequal benefits: housing provident fund and happiness among China's migrant and non-migrant populations.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Salary Differences by Gender, Race, and Ethnicity Among Assistant Professors at US Medical Schools.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Association Between Internet Gaming Disorder and Suicidal Ideation Mediated by Psychosocial Resources and Psychosocial Problems Among Adolescent Internet Gamers in China: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR serious games · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA classic debate concerns whether absolute or relative income is more salient.
objectiveThis study investigates specifically whether absolute income or relative income matters more for health and well-being.
methodsWe exploit within-person, within-age, and within-time variation with higher-quality income measures and multiple health and well-being outcomes in the United States. Using the Panel Study of Income Dynamics and the Cross-National Equivalent File, we estimate three-way fixed effects models of self-rated health, poor health, psychological distress, and life satisfaction.
resultsFor all four outcomes, relative income has much larger standardized coefficients than absolute income. Robustly, the confidence intervals for relative income do not overlap with zero. By contrast, absolute income mostly has confidence intervals that overlap with zero, and its coefficient is occasionally signed in the wrong direction. A variety of robustness checks support these results.
conclusionsRelative income has far greater predictive validity than absolute income for self-reported health and well-being. CONTRIBUTION: Compared to earlier studies, this study provides a more rigorous comparison and test of the predictive validity of absolute and relative income that is uniquely conducted with data on the United States. This informs debates on income measurement, the sources of health and well-being, and inequalities generally. Plausibly, these results can guide any analysis that includes income in models.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.