IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/15128_16.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Relative deprivation and satisfaction: empirical findings

In: Handbook of Research on Economic and Social Well-Being

Author

Listed:
  • Paolo Verme

Abstract

The chapter provides a review of the empirical literature in economics that has attempted to test the relative income hypothesis as put forward by Duesemberry (1949) and the relative deprivation hypothesis as formalized by Runciman (1966). It is argued that these two hypotheses and the empirical models used to test these two hypotheses are essentially similar and make use of the same relative income concept. The review covers the main intellectual contributions that led to the formulation and tests of these hypotheses, the main formulations of the utility and econometric equations used in empirical studies, the main econometric issues that complicate the testing of the hypotheses, and the empirical results found in the literature. The majority of studies use absolute and relative income together as explanatory factors in utility models and find absolute income to have a positive and significant effect on utility (happiness). The majority of studies also find relative income to be a significant factor in explaining utility, but the sign of this relation varies across studies. The source of this variation is complex to detect because very few results are directly comparable across studies due to differences in model specifications.

Suggested Citation

  • Paolo Verme, 2018. "Relative deprivation and satisfaction: empirical findings," Chapters, in: Conchita D’Ambrosio (ed.), Handbook of Research on Economic and Social Well-Being, chapter 16, pages 356-376, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:15128_16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781781953709.00021.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:15128_16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.