Article summary with The culture of affluence: Psychological costs of material wealth by Luthar - 2003

What is the American paradox?

The American paradox refers to the observation that while material affluence and human rights in the United States have surged since the 1960s, psychological wellbeing has lowered. Among other things there is a higher divorce rate, more teen suicide, and higher depression rates. It seems, paradoxically, that the more people strive for extrinsic goals such as money, the more numerous their problems and the less robust their wellbeing.

What are possible theoretical explanations on the individual level for the association between wealth and unhappiness?

There are many theories about how wealth is associated with unhappiness. Some theories look at processes on the level of the individual:

• High productivity associated with affluence involves little leisure time, leading people to become increasingly prone to distress.

• The more invested someone becomes in material goals, the more the sensitivity for other rewards, such as friendship, art, and nature, atrophies.

• Attributes for success, such as self-protectiveness and opportunism, inhibit the development of intimacy.

• People with high wealth are often overly dedicated to their work and don’t have much time for personal relationships.

What possible theoretical explanations on the community level explains the association between wealth and unhappiness?

There are community-level forces at play that may explain the association between wealth and unhappiness:

• Competitive structures of market economies can promote distress by inhibiting the formation of supportive relationship networks.

• High use of market-based services goes together with limited engagement of individuals outside the marketplace, low levels of cooperation for shared goals, and growing use of child care services. These trends erode social capital.

• Material wealth reduces the need to depend solely on friends. Those with high material wealth rarely obtain proof of others’ authentic concern. This makes them less likely to experience deep social connectedness.

• Physical characteristics of wealthy neighborhoods contribute to feelings of isolation, with houses set far apart, long driveways, high hedges, and big lawns. Neighbors don’t bump into each other as often, and children play less on the street together.

What theoretical cultural explanations can be given for the association between wealth and unhappiness?

The nature of affluence in itself can explain why it may lead to unhappiness:

• In complex individualistic settings, people can belong to many groups without being strongly committed to them and can easily go from one group to another as they choose. This transient nature of social groups can exacerbate people’s unhappiness.

• High wealth means many options. Because people have so much choice, they feel like they should be able to choose exactly what they want and it should all be perfect. Then when that perfection is not achieved, they feel like it is their own fault. This causal inference fosters depression.

• Cultures of materialism assume that affluence brings happiness and that wealthy people who are unhappy must be ungrateful or self-indulgent. They often feel guilty and confused about their unhappiness. This combined with the trivialization of their depression exacerbates feelings of isolation and unhappiness.

How can gender affect the association between wealth and unhappiness?

There are challenges specific to gender that influence the association between wealth and unhappiness:

• Many affluent mothers don’t work once they have had children, even though they are well educated and had good careers. This deprives them of work-related gratifications like self-efficacy and positive identity.

• Affluent mothers who do work once they have children often experience dual pressures. They often have high demands at work and set high standards for themselves as mothers.

• Upper class has a strong emphasis on privacy. This leads to a social isolation that often leads many women to self-medicate through alcohol or prescription drugs.

• Men who are confronted with socially dominant men often think negatively about themselves in terms of their desirability as marriage partners. In high-paying professions there are many dominant and influential men and thus a high potential for self-doubt and insecurity among the other men in such settings.

• Failure is especially painful for those who are most accustomed to power and success.

• When fathers are frequently absent for work, the family experiences stress when he comes back. Spouses and children find it difficult to readjust their role boundaries and routines to accommodate the men’s reentry after prolonged absences.

Why is it not true that the rich, because they have so many options, are responsible for their own unhappiness?

There is often little empathy for the rich, because people believe that they have so much money and so many options, they could just change whatever needs changing. A few things need to be considered:

• People evaluate themselves not so much by objective standards as by comparison with those around them.

• Many upper-class parents are reluctant to give up their high-paying careers because it could imply reductions in opportunities for their children.

• People’s resolute commitment to fast-paced careers often stem from deep-seated personal unhappiness, not from egotistical, narcissistic self-absorption.

What is ¨schadenfreude¨?

Schadenfreude refers to the phenomenon that the misfortunes of the wealthy can evoke a malicious pleasure in others. People in general feel some satisfaction in the downfall of those far more successful than they themselves are. The wealthy tend to evoke more widespread dislike than the poor given their status as the keepers of the power rather than those excluded from it.