<p>Exposure to economic inequality is widely thought to erode subjective well-being and mental health<sup><CitationRef AdditionalCitationIDS="CR2 CR3 CR4" CitationID="CR1">1</CitationRef>–<CitationRef CitationID="CR5">5</CitationRef></sup>, which carries important societal implications<sup><CitationRef AdditionalCitationIDS="CR7 CR8 CR9" CitationID="CR6">6</CitationRef>–<CitationRef CitationID="CR10">10</CitationRef></sup>. However, existing studies face reproducibility issues<sup><CitationRef AdditionalCitationIDS="CR12" CitationID="CR11">11</CitationRef>–<CitationRef CitationID="CR13">13</CitationRef></sup>, and theory suggests that inequality only affects individuals in disadvantaged contexts<sup><CitationRef AdditionalCitationIDS="CR15" CitationID="CR14">14</CitationRef>–<CitationRef CitationID="CR16">16</CitationRef></sup>. Here we present a meta-analysis of 168 studies using multilevel data (11,389,871 participants from 38,335 geographical units) identified across 10 bibliographical databases (2000–2022). Contrary to popular narratives, random-effects models showed that individuals in more unequal areas do not report lower subjective well-being (standardized odds ratio (OR<sub>+0.05</sub>) = 0.979, 95% confidence interval&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.951–1.008). Moreover, although inequality initially seemed to undermine mental health, the publication-bias-corrected association was null (OR<sub>+0.05</sub> = 1.019; 0.990–1.049)<sup><CitationRef CitationID="CR17">17</CitationRef></sup>. Meta-analytical effects were smaller than the smallest effect of interest, and specification curve analyses confirmed these results across ≈95% of 768 alternative models<sup><CitationRef CitationID="CR18">18</CitationRef></sup>. When assessing study quality and certainty of evidence&#xa0;using ROBINS-E and GRADE criteria, ROBINS-E rated 80% of studies at high risk of bias, and GRADE assigned greater certainty to the null effects than to the negative effects. Meta-regressions revealed that the adverse association between inequality and mental health was confined to low-income samples. Moreover, machine-learning analyses<sup><CitationRef CitationID="CR19">19</CitationRef></sup> indicated that the association with well-being was negative in high-inflation contexts but positive in low-inflation contexts. These moderation effects were replicated using Gallup World Poll data (up to 2 million participants). These findings challenge the view that economic inequality universally harms psychological health and can inform public health policy.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

No meta-analytical effect of economic inequality on well-being or mental health

  • Nicolas Sommet,
  • Adrien A. Fillon,
  • Ocyna Rudmann,
  • Alfredo Rossi Saldanha Cunha,
  • Annahita Ehsan

摘要

Exposure to economic inequality is widely thought to erode subjective well-being and mental health15, which carries important societal implications610. However, existing studies face reproducibility issues1113, and theory suggests that inequality only affects individuals in disadvantaged contexts1416. Here we present a meta-analysis of 168 studies using multilevel data (11,389,871 participants from 38,335 geographical units) identified across 10 bibliographical databases (2000–2022). Contrary to popular narratives, random-effects models showed that individuals in more unequal areas do not report lower subjective well-being (standardized odds ratio (OR+0.05) = 0.979, 95% confidence interval = 0.951–1.008). Moreover, although inequality initially seemed to undermine mental health, the publication-bias-corrected association was null (OR+0.05 = 1.019; 0.990–1.049)17. Meta-analytical effects were smaller than the smallest effect of interest, and specification curve analyses confirmed these results across ≈95% of 768 alternative models18. When assessing study quality and certainty of evidence using ROBINS-E and GRADE criteria, ROBINS-E rated 80% of studies at high risk of bias, and GRADE assigned greater certainty to the null effects than to the negative effects. Meta-regressions revealed that the adverse association between inequality and mental health was confined to low-income samples. Moreover, machine-learning analyses19 indicated that the association with well-being was negative in high-inflation contexts but positive in low-inflation contexts. These moderation effects were replicated using Gallup World Poll data (up to 2 million participants). These findings challenge the view that economic inequality universally harms psychological health and can inform public health policy.