Journal of psychosomatic research · 2026
Objective and subjective socioeconomic status affect subjective well-being through psychosomatic symptoms: A structural equation modeling analysis.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yuan Yucheng, Li Lei, Zhang Yubo, Sun Guangwei, Sun Taipeng, Zhang Yuqun, Zhou Hongliang, Jiang Wenhao, Yuan Yonggui, Jiang Chenguang, Chen Gang
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Socioeconomic status (SES) is generally considered to exert a positive influence on subjective well-being (SWB). However, under the current economic downturn context, this relationship has become increasingly complex. Psychosomatic symptoms, as important factors affecting SWB, may play a crucial role. This study aimed to systematically examine their interrelationships.
METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional online survey was conducted, collecting data on objective SES (oSES), subjective SES (SSS), psychosomatic symptoms, and SWB. A total of 27,876 valid participants (female, 65.9%) were included. Structural equation modeling, subgroup stratification, and mediation analyses were employed to evaluate the associations among these variables.
RESULTS: In the overall sample, oSES was significantly and positively associated with SSS, but negatively associated with SWB. Psychosomatic symptoms showed strong negative associations with SWB and significantly mediated the relationship between oSES and SWB, accounting for 40.9% of the total effect. Fatigue, irritability or suicidal ideation, and pain emerged as the most influential mediators. Subgroup analyses indicated notable heterogeneity across age and SES groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In today's socioeconomic context, the association between SES and SWB has shifted, with psychosomatic symptoms serving as a key mediating mechanism. Efforts to enhance SWB should focus not only on socioeconomic resource distribution but also on the early detection and management of psychosomatic symptoms.
METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional online survey was conducted, collecting data on objective SES (oSES), subjective SES (SSS), psychosomatic symptoms, and SWB. A total of 27,876 valid participants (female, 65.9%) were included. Structural equation modeling, subgroup stratification, and mediation analyses were employed to evaluate the associations among these variables.
RESULTS: In the overall sample, oSES was significantly and positively associated with SSS, but negatively associated with SWB. Psychosomatic symptoms showed strong negative associations with SWB and significantly mediated the relationship between oSES and SWB, accounting for 40.9% of the total effect. Fatigue, irritability or suicidal ideation, and pain emerged as the most influential mediators. Subgroup analyses indicated notable heterogeneity across age and SES groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In today's socioeconomic context, the association between SES and SWB has shifted, with psychosomatic symptoms serving as a key mediating mechanism. Efforts to enhance SWB should focus not only on socioeconomic resource distribution but also on the early detection and management of psychosomatic symptoms.