The impact of socioeconomic polarisation and inequalities of wealth and income on cognitive development
Lead Research Organisation:
University of York
Department Name: Health Science
Abstract
Introduction
It is well established that socioeconomic status (SES) and health are related (Macintyre, 1994; Pickett and Pearl, 2001) through influencing access to health services; attitudes towards health; stress; and a lack of social support (Macintyre, Maciver, & Sooman, 1993). More recently, children born into low SES families have been found to have poorer cognitive development in terms of language and executive function, including working memory (Hackman and Farah, 2009). Importantly, working memory is a more powerful predictor of subsequent academic success than IQ (Alloway and Alloway, 2010). Clearly, the consequences of being from a low SES family leave children at risk of being at cognitive disadvantage.
The majority of this research has exclusively focused on the consequences of inequality for low SES families. Beyond this, there is a correlation between societies with inequality and social problems; proposed to be a consequence of increased status competition and exacerbated social anxiety among individuals in a society. Hence, inequalities in society are detrimental not only for the low SES families, but for everyone living in that society (Wilkinson and Pickett, 2009). Still, there is little empirical data available that explores the relationship between inequality and cognitive development.
This study will investigate the relationship between inequality of wealth/income and cognitive development. By revealing the risk that inequality impedes on cognitive development for all levels of SES, relevant interventions can be designed for these children. Furthermore, this investigation may further the argument to minimize inequalities, and improve the societies that these at risk children live in by impacting on policy and practice.
The hypothesis is that children from high inequality societies will display poorer performance in measures of cognitive development, in comparison to children from equal societies.
Method
Participants. This study would have access to The Born in Bradford (BiB) cohort. BiB is a longitudinal medical research study examining health and development during childhood, and subsequently adult life in a deprived multi-ethnic population. Importantly, 60% of the babies born in the city are born into the poorest 20% of the population of England and Wales (Wright et al, 2013). The participants would be children from the BiB cohort who live in high inequality neighbourhoods. Another group of children would also be recruited from low inequality neighbourhoods.
Design. This research would use an observational matched pairs design, where the participants tested from the BiB cohort will be compared to another group matched in terms of age and gender. The independent variable (IV) is the level of socioeconomic inequality (high or low), and the dependent variable (DV) is the performance on measures of cognitive development.
Measures. The IV will be determined by assessing the disparities of wealth/income in the neighbourhood that the participants live in. Additionally, the SES of individual participants could be collected. The DV measures will involve a battery of standardised cognitive measures including a working memory test battery (Pickering and Gathercole, 2001).
Analysis.
A regression analysis will be conducted to produce a model that reflects the relationship between socioeconomic inequality and cognitive development.
It is well established that socioeconomic status (SES) and health are related (Macintyre, 1994; Pickett and Pearl, 2001) through influencing access to health services; attitudes towards health; stress; and a lack of social support (Macintyre, Maciver, & Sooman, 1993). More recently, children born into low SES families have been found to have poorer cognitive development in terms of language and executive function, including working memory (Hackman and Farah, 2009). Importantly, working memory is a more powerful predictor of subsequent academic success than IQ (Alloway and Alloway, 2010). Clearly, the consequences of being from a low SES family leave children at risk of being at cognitive disadvantage.
The majority of this research has exclusively focused on the consequences of inequality for low SES families. Beyond this, there is a correlation between societies with inequality and social problems; proposed to be a consequence of increased status competition and exacerbated social anxiety among individuals in a society. Hence, inequalities in society are detrimental not only for the low SES families, but for everyone living in that society (Wilkinson and Pickett, 2009). Still, there is little empirical data available that explores the relationship between inequality and cognitive development.
This study will investigate the relationship between inequality of wealth/income and cognitive development. By revealing the risk that inequality impedes on cognitive development for all levels of SES, relevant interventions can be designed for these children. Furthermore, this investigation may further the argument to minimize inequalities, and improve the societies that these at risk children live in by impacting on policy and practice.
The hypothesis is that children from high inequality societies will display poorer performance in measures of cognitive development, in comparison to children from equal societies.
Method
Participants. This study would have access to The Born in Bradford (BiB) cohort. BiB is a longitudinal medical research study examining health and development during childhood, and subsequently adult life in a deprived multi-ethnic population. Importantly, 60% of the babies born in the city are born into the poorest 20% of the population of England and Wales (Wright et al, 2013). The participants would be children from the BiB cohort who live in high inequality neighbourhoods. Another group of children would also be recruited from low inequality neighbourhoods.
Design. This research would use an observational matched pairs design, where the participants tested from the BiB cohort will be compared to another group matched in terms of age and gender. The independent variable (IV) is the level of socioeconomic inequality (high or low), and the dependent variable (DV) is the performance on measures of cognitive development.
Measures. The IV will be determined by assessing the disparities of wealth/income in the neighbourhood that the participants live in. Additionally, the SES of individual participants could be collected. The DV measures will involve a battery of standardised cognitive measures including a working memory test battery (Pickering and Gathercole, 2001).
Analysis.
A regression analysis will be conducted to produce a model that reflects the relationship between socioeconomic inequality and cognitive development.
Organisations
People |
ORCID iD |
| Kate Pickett (Primary Supervisor) | |
| Kate Mooney (Student) |
Publications
Studentship Projects
| Project Reference | Relationship | Related To | Start | End | Student Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ES/P000746/1 | 01/10/2017 | 30/09/2027 | |||
| 1944092 | Studentship | ES/P000746/1 | 01/10/2017 | 30/09/2021 | Kate Mooney |
| Description | I have completed a systematic review on the association between socioeconomic disadvantage, ethnic minority status, and children's working memory (WM) ability. From this review I have found that there is a significant and medium effect size between socioeconomic position and working memory - where children from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds score lower. This effect was consistent across both verbal and visuospatial WM, and across both simple and complex WM. I also found that ethnic minority children appear to do worse on WM, however, there was not enough research with appropriate modelling techniques to confirm this. The review highlighted several important research questions, several of which have been addressed through data analysis of Born in Bradford data: • the magnitude of the association between SEP and WM • what factors might mediate any relationship between SEP and WM • whether a relationship between ethnic minority status and WM ability exists in England • whether a relationship between ethnicity and WM exists, after adjusting for SEP as a mediator Through analysis of BiB data, I have found that the difference in WM between the least and most deprived socioeconomic groups in Bradford is equivalent to at least a 16 month age difference, and varied slightly by WM task. We also found substantial differences in children's working memory between nine ethnic groups, which varied by working memory task. The 'White Other' and 'Gypsy or Irish Traveller' children had the lowest overall WM scores. The other ethnic minority groups (Mixed, Black, South Asian) had higher WM scores than the ethnic majority group (White British). In the two largest ethnic groups in the sample (White British and Pakistani), we explored a mediating factor between SEP and WM - the home learning environment. The home learning environment did not mediate the association between SEP and WM; and this may be due to insensitive measurement of it, or due to home activities not being influential for children's WM. In a multi-group analysis, socioeconomic disadvantage was found to be more detrimental for WM among ethnic majority children (White British) than for ethnic minority children (Pakistani). In a final analysis, I explored whether the negative effects of disadvantage may be buffered by other factors for ethnic minorities, such as own ethnic density and mosque attendance. However, it was found that neither of these factors were associated with children's working memory scores. |
| Exploitation Route | The systematic review has now been published. A paper is currently under review describing the socioeconomic and ethnic group differences in the Born in Bradford cohort. A final paper is currently being prepared for the multi-group analysis including the home learning environment. The studies will also be submitted for presentation at relevant conferences. In terms of non-academic routes, this information is relevant for parents, teachers, and other practitioners who work with children. This information may be useful for teachers working with socioeconomically disadvantaged children, as they can be aware that the children's WM abilities may limit their abilities in the classroom. Teachers may be able to provide aids to children to alleviate their WM load. |
| Sectors | Education |
| Description | Finalist in 3 minute thesis competition |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Postgraduate students |
| Results and Impact | I took part in the University of York's three minute thesis competition and came in 3rd place. I have had several members of the public email me since then to express interest in my research. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| URL | https://www.york.ac.uk/research/events/three-minute-thesis/2021/ |
| Description | Presentation at Born in Bradford co-applicant meeting |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | I presented some descriptive results to the co-applicants of the MRC/ESRC Born in Bradford study. The co-applicants included academics from several different institutions. They gave me feedback on my interpretation of the results, and we discussed potential reasons behind the findings. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020 |
| Description | Presentation at postgraduate research session. |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Postgraduate students |
| Results and Impact | I presented at a postgraduate research session, and took questions from the audience after on my research. Audience members included postgraduate students from many different disciplines. Audience members commented that new knowledge was gained. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Public Health and Society seminar |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | 30 academics attended the talk I gave to the Public Health and Society research group. There were follow up questions and discussions took place after the seminar. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |