Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

Socio-economic status, including variables such as the income of parents, the

education of children, and the occupational prestige of parents, continues to affect the

socialization of learners (Goodman, 2018). Social structures create distinctive

arrangements that enable social procedures to be performed competently (Nash,

2003). The mechanism includes the socializing impact on attitudes, beliefs, and

behaviors of an individual's socio-economic system through the life course (Marmot,

2004). Interactions have become commonly accepted indicators of favorable

socialization experiences and in this region of study socio-economic status continues

to be ignored or simply regulated (Walpole, 2007).

Socio-economic status as a cultural identity which represents a person's

objective socio-economic status or objective resource through two procedures,

inferences and perceptions of one's subjective socio-economic status in comparison

with others (Kraus et al. 2011). Similarly, only a handful of research has expanded the

socialization process to cognitive results among different student organizations.

Goodman et al. (2001) also state that earnings, education, and jobs are the traditional

variables used to assess socio-economic status.

Parental earnings as a socio-economic status indicator reflect the student's

capacity for social and economic assets. The second traditional socio-economic status

component, parental education, is regarded to be one of socio-economic status's most

 2

stable elements because it is typically formed at an early era and tends to stay the

same time. In addition, parental schooling is an indicator of the revenue of the parent

because earnings and education are extremely correlated (Hauser & Warren, 2002).

Socialization is the technique by which people are taught to be qualified

community members. It describes how people come to understand societal norms and

expectations, adopt societal opinions, and become aware of societal values. Socio-

economic processes that generate awareness of socio-economic norms and values

by new members of society and help them achieve a distinct sense of self. It is the

technique that transforms a helpless child into a knowledgeable, self-conscious

person who is skilled in a society's culture (Thompson, 2017).

The impacts of socio-economic status on how individuals approach their social

interactions can have important impacts on organizational life. Understanding how

members of the organization relate to others helping others, donating resources to

those in need, and demonstrating empathy when they are agreeable has become an

important goal of organizational science (Dutton et al., 2006; Grant & Parker, 2009;

Margolis & Walsh, 2003).

Furthermore, social-psychological identity analyzes have not paid much

attention to social class or socio-economic status as an identity component. Rather,

the focus was on race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, and age categories.

Easterbrook et al. (2018) analyzed information from two big, representative British

adult specimens and demonstrated that participants attached great subjective

significance to their socio-economic status-indicative identities. Those with greater

 3

socio-economic status attached more significance to identities that are reflective of

their socio-economic status, but less significance to identities rooted in or linked to

fundamental demographics.

Stephens et al. (2014) analyzed how social class forms the concept of self

through the home, school, and work's' gateway contexts. They contend that social

class provides rise to culture-specific selves and habits of thinking, feeling, and acting

with a focus on the United States but with wider consequences. They label one sort

of self as difficult interdependence. They claim that this is characteristic of those who

grow up in low-income working-class settings. With greater rates of material limitations

and fewer possibilities for impact, decision, and control, working-class environments

tend to provide a knowledge of self and conduct as interdependent with others and

the social context, as the writers put it.

Effects of socio-economic and race on cognitive development, eventually filling

the study gap on socio-economic status impact and race with socializing factors.

Factors of socialization have been discovered to moderate the impacts of parental

education used as an indicator of socio-economic status in our model.. Asserting that

the process of socialization has an inhibitive impact on the need for cognition for first-

generation learners. Students socialization can provide an additive boost to learners

in need of cognition. Rather than assuming that encouraging learners to participate

with socializing agents is a suitable answer for all learners, schools and universities

also need to be attentive to the socio-economic and racial socialization impacts

(Goodman, 2018).
 4

Related Literature

Whether individuals grow up in a working-class environment or an academic

household, they take on behaviors that are typical for their class. A big part of the

studies on socio-economic class impact derives from the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu's

thoughts. He explains how our growing environment is profoundly inscribed in our

identity. Social-psychological writers claim that lower-class individuals have access to

fewer resources and can only have a restricted impact on their surroundings (Aydin et

al., 2018).

Therefore, they depend more on mutual help, making solidarity a valuable

value. Individuals identify with this value and consequently act cooperatively. On the

other side, people from the upper socio-economic classes have access to more funds,

can choose from several options, and are less dependent on mutual support. This

leads to individualistic self-conceptions where it is essential to shape the world

according to one's preferences. Therefore, these distinct behavioral methods are

adaptations to appropriate social environments (Aydin et al., 2018).

Family is one among the foremost vital social establishment and agent of

socialization charged with the responsibility for among alternative things, crucial one's

perspective towards faith, intellectual training, character training, love for others and

vocational training (Jekayinfa & Oke, 2003).

Social psychological analysis or identity have historically not paid abundant

attention to social class or socio-economic status as an element of identity. Instead,

the focus has been on classes like race, gender, sexual orientation, status, and age.
 5

Indeed, they connected at least the maximum amount of importance to their socio-

economic status identities as they did to spot like quality or gender (Easterbrook et al.

2018). According to Evans (2004), he discovered that low socio-economic status

children are less cognitively stirred up than high socio-economic status children, as a

result of reaching less knowledge and less advanced communication with parents.

Fiske & Markus (2012) defines socio-economic status as the one who shapes

behavior through cultural learning, like socialization method occurring among family

whose members share the same socio-economic background. It additionally defined

as one's position within the economic hierarchy in society that arises from a

combination of annual financial gain, academic attainment and occupational status

(Andler et al., Oakes & Rossi, 2003). Social class may also verify the groups and

individuals interacts with and belongs to (Lareau & Conley, 2008).

According to Aries & Seider (2007), they stated that wealthy students were

aware of the academic advantages that had increased from their economically

privileged status and of the opportunities that they had to travel and pursue their

interests. Lower financial students were a lot probably to downplay class in the

conception of their own identities than were the affluent students. Additionally, they

have analyzed how social class shapes self-thought through the "gateway concepts"

at home and school. With broader implications, they argued that social class provides

rise to specific selves and patterns of thinking, feeling and acting (Stephens et al.

2014).
 6

Socio-economic Status. Kraus et al. (2011) defined socio-economic status as

'a cultural identity that constitutes the objective socio-economic status or objective

resource of a person through two processes, inferences and perceptions of one's

subjective socio-economic status compared to others '. Some of the current definitions

highlight objective socio-economic status elements, while others highlight subjective

elements. The traditional factors used to objectively describe socio-economic status

across the fields are earnings, education, and prestige at work (Adler & Snibbe, 2003;

Goodman et al., 2001; Twenge & Campbell, 2002). Goodman et al. (2001) also say

that the traditional factors used to evaluate socio-economic status are income,

education, and employment.

According to Gallo & Matthews (2003), socio-economic status is an aggregate

notion defined concerning one's resource level or prestige. Resource-based policies

evaluate access to material and socio-economic resources, including revenue, wealth,

and achievement in education. Prestige-based measures refer to the rank or status of

an individual in a socio-economic hierarchy, typically assessed by access to and

consumption of products, services, and expertise related to the prestige of work and

education. Individuals have greater socio-economic statuses to the extent that they

have more cash, sophisticated education, and prestigious jobs than others, according

to the objective approach to identifying socio-economic status. By comparison,

subjective definition emphasizes the perceived rank of people compared to others in

society (Kraus et al., 2009).

 7

According to Crossman (2019), there are three primary variables that social

researchers used to calculate socioeconomic status. Income, this is how much an

individual earns, including wages and wages, as well as other types of income such

as assets and savings. Sometimes the definition of revenue is extended to include

hereditary wealth as well as intangible assets. Education, the level of education of a

person has a direct effect on their earning capacity, with greater earning power leading

to more instructional possibilities, which in turn increases the potential for future

earnings. Occupation, due to its subjective nature, this factor is harder to evaluate.

White-collar professions, such as physicians or lawyers, that require a high degree of

skilled training, tend to require more education and therefore return more income than

many blue-collar jobs.

Individuals probably compare themselves in a reference group with a sample

of other individuals and evaluate whether each sampled individual has more material

resources than they do. (Boyce et al., 2010). According to the subjective approach,

Individuals are of greater socio-economic status, according to the subjective strategy,

to the extent that they think they rank higher than others because they perceive that

they have more cash, more sophisticated education, and/or more prestigious jobs than

others. Given suggestions that socio-economic status objective and subjective

elements are interrelated parts of a broader idea rather than conflicting views (Kraus

et al., 2011).
 8

Socialization. Societies are shared communities with complex codes and

organizational structures. Socialization is the process by which individuals adapt to

and internalize the norms, values, customs, and behaviors of a shared social group

(Lutfey & Mortimer, 2006). By society, communication can help the students to

develop themselves, by accepting them and encourage.

According to William (2014), socialization is the method of teaching individuals

to be skilled members of a community. It explains how individuals come to

comprehend societal norms and expectations, embrace the views of society, and

become conscious of societal values. The socio-economic processes by which fresh

members of society create consciousness of socio-economic standards and values

and assist them to attain a separate feeling of self. It is the method that converts a

helpless infant into a knowledgeable, self-conscious individual who is competent in

the culture of a society (Thompson, 2017).

The term socialization refers to a process whereby naive individuals are the

thought the skills, behavior patterns, values and motivation needed for competent

functioning in the culture in which the child is growing up. Paramount among these

are social skills, social understanding, and emotional maturity needed for interaction

with other individuals to fit in with the functioning of social dyads and larger groups.

Socialization process includes all those whereby culture is transmitted from each

generation to the next, including training for specific roles in specific occupations

(Grusec & Hastlings, 2014).

 9

Thompson (2017) also defined socialization stating that it is the social

processes by which fresh members of society create consciousness of socio-

economic standards and values and assist them to attain a separate feeling of self. It

is the method that converts a helpless infant into a knowledgeable, self-conscious

individual who is competent in the culture of a society. Socialization is critical for

people as well as for the communities they reside in. It shows how human beings and

their social worlds are intertwined. First, a society perpetuates itself by teaching

culture to fresh members. If a society's fresh generations do not know their way of life,

it will cease to exist. For a society to survive, anything that distinguishes a culture must

be passed on to those who join it (William, 2014).

For us as people, socialization is just as vital. Social interaction offers the

means through which we can gradually see ourselves through other people's eyes,

learn who we are and how we fit into the globe around us. Furthermore, to work

effectively in society, we need to know the basics of both material soil non-material

culture, everything from dressing up to what is suitable for a particular occasion; from

sleeping to sleeping; and from eating for lunch to using the stove to prepare it. Most

importantly, to interact and think, we must learn language whether it is the dominant

language or a prevalent language in a subculture, whether it is verbal or through signs

(William, 2014).

Socio-economic Status and Socialization. Socio-economic status effects on

how people approach their social interactions may have significant consequences for

organizational life. Understanding how members of the organization relate to others–

 10

providing help to others, donating resources to those in need, and showing empathy

when they are agreeable has become a significant objective of organizational science

(Dutton et al., 2006; Grant & Parker, 2009; Margolis & Walsh, 2003).

Most study has shown that social identities influence people on how they think

and feel about their social environment and affect their social behavior somehow.

Moreover, most people plan to have a reduced feeling of private control because they

relate themselves to socio-economic classes that are likely to describe them as lower-

class individuals and are much more interdependent in their notions of themselves.

According to Manstead (2018), those in the lower class commonly retained their

opinions that most of them are incapacitated in prevailing prestigious universities and

positions in the workplace compared to those in the middle class and could trigger

certain minorities in terms of financial risk. In other words, because of social

cohesions, socio-economic class distinctions define their socialization.

Individuals of lower and greater socio-economic status experience distinct

circumstances of material and environment (Kraus et al., 2009, 2011; Piff et al., 2010;

Snibbe & Markus, 2005; Stephens et al., 2011). The impact on more social

engagement of the lower socio-economic status can extend to generosity. Individuals

of the lower status may be more generous because their increased socio-economic

commitment enables them to find more possibilities to assist. Because feelings such

as sorrow and anxiety should be detected more appropriately, signaling that others

need assistance, lower-status people should be better advised about possibilities to

assist others. Individuals of the lower status may also be more prepared to assist when
 11

possibilities emerge, as they are closer to others (Piff et al., 2010). This rationale

indicates that people of lower status should usually be more generous than their

counterparts of greater status.

Several correlation studies have found that first-generation college learners

report feeling more alienated from university settings than their ongoing generation

counterparts do. A finding that indicates that signals of socio-economic class on

college campuses, which are predominantly inhabited by individuals from extremely

educated households, decrease emotions of belonging among individuals of

comparatively low class (Bufton, 2003).

In previous researches, kids in the lower status performed and spoke in closer

physical proximity in a schoolyard and were more likely to smile and less likely to

demonstrate signs of boredom in a status room setting, relative to kids in the greater

status room. In another research, vehicle advertisements aimed at lower-status

customers (i.e., vehicle advertisements typically bought by individuals with restricted

resources) were more likely to emphasize the link with others, for instance by

displaying friends in passenger seats, than advertisements aimed at higher-status

customers (Stephens et al., 2007).

Socio-economic class theoretical accounts indicate that it shapes the lives of

people in a constant and lasting way by restricting or extending access through

concentrations of financial resources or by influencing conduct through cultural and

psychological means (Fiske & Markus, 2012). Studies usually support this claim: class

determines the products that individuals consume (Monisaivis & Drewnowski, 2009),
 12

the music and art that they appreciate (Van Eijck, 2001), the leisure activities that

individuals participate in, the language habits they use (Labov, 2006), and the clothes

they wear (Gillath et al., 2012). This assessment indicates that some of their behaviors

and cultural activities are infused with socio-economic class when individuals

participate in social interactions and thus correctly communicate the status of socio-

economic class to observers.

Cote (2011) indicates that organizations consisting of some members of the

higher and some of the lower status may struggle to coordinate their operations, as

members of the greater status may overlook and trigger frustration in members of the

lower status, who should be particularly sensitive to the reality that their thoughts are

excluded from the debate. Moreover, if two groups are identical in skills and character

but one is composed of members of the greater status and the other members of the

reduced status the likelihood may be greater than the group with members of the

greater status will display coordination issues created by restricted social involvement

(Cote, 2011).

In another inquiry, lower-status individual decisions were more in line with other

people's decisions, while higher-status people were making more decisions that

helped them stand out. (Stephens et al., 2007). Thus, all other equal organizations

made up of lower-status members should display more conformity, and organizations

made up of higher-status participants should emit more divergent views during the

decision-making phase and take longer to reach a possibly better solution.

 13

Organization members may also behave differently when interacting with

partners of distinct socio-economic groups. Socio-economic status relates to specific

patterns of communication with the social world as a dimension of the self (Greenwald

et al., 2002; Markus & Kitayama, 2010). If socio-economic status is linked with

predictable behavior patterns, people may depend on these patterns to infer the socio-

economic status of others. In turn, these inferences can direct how people behave

toward others. Members of the organization may behave differently in perceiving that

their interaction partner has significant rather than restricted material resources.

Blascovich et al. (2001) tested the hypothesis that interactions with other

reduced socio-economic statuses would cause physiological indications of danger as

low socio-economic status is a cause of stigma and therefore these interactions are

interpreted as demanding. As anticipated, there were greater physiological threat

responses when interacting with a lower-status partner than with a higher-status

partner.

Stephens et al. (2014) are consistent with the 'subjective social rank' argument

advanced by Kraus et al. (2011) to conceptualize culture-specific selves that differ as

a function of socio-economic class. The latter writers claim that the variations in

material resources accessible to working-class and middle-class individuals generate

cultural identities based on subjective socio-economic rank perceptions with others.

These perceptions are based on unique patterns of observable behavior resulting from

riches, education, and employment differences. ‘To the extent that these behavioral

patterns are both observable and reliably linked to personal riches, occupational
 14

prestige, and education, they become future signals to others of the socio-economic

class of a person' (Kraus et al., 2011).

Non-verbal behavior is one of the indicators of socio-economic class. Kraus &

Keltner (2009) researched non-verbal behavior in pairs of people from distinct

backgrounds in society and discovered that while upper-class individuals were more

non-verbally disengaged, lower-class individuals showed more socially committed eye

contact, head nods, and laughter. Also, when naïve observers were shown 60s

extracts of these interactions, they used these disengaged versus committed non-

verbal behavioral styles to judge the backgrounds of the individuals they had seen

with above-chance precision. In other words, variations in socio-economic class are

expressed in social signals, and people can use these signals to evaluate their

subjective social rank. By comparing their wealth, education, work, aesthetic tastes

and behavior with others, people can determine where they are in the socio-economic

hierarchy, and then this subjective socio-economic rank forms other socio-economic

behavioral elements. These results have been verified by the latest studies.

Becker et al. (2017) also discovered that the socio-economic class of

individuals could be assessed with above-chance precision from uploaded Facebook

photos, while Kraus, Park, and Tan (2017) discovered that when Americans were

asked to assess the socio-economic class of a speaker from only seven phrases

spoken, the precision of their decisions was again above chance. The fact that there

are behavioral signals of the socio-economic class also opens up the ability for others

to hold prejudiced attitudes and participate in discriminatory behavior towards those

 15

of the lower socio-economic class, although Kraus et al. (2011) focuses on how the

method of social comparison impacts the self-perception of the socio-economic rank

and how this, in turn, impacts other elements of socio-economic behavior.

These writers claim that subjective social rank exerts a wide influence on

thought, emotion, and social behavior regardless of the substance of objective socio-

economic class. An interesting problem is a relationship between goal and subjective

socio-economic class. Objective socio-economic class is usually operationalized in

terms of riches and revenue, education, and employment. These are Stephens et al.

(2014) three gateway contexts. These environments, as argued by them, have a

strong impact on individual cognition and behavior that operates within them, but they

do not fully determine how people are thinking, feeling and acting in these

environments. Similarly, there will be situations where, because of the context in which

they reside, people who are objective, say, middle-class see themselves as having a

low subjective socio-economic rank.

From the start, social class appears to create a difference. When children from

working-class households join college, middle-class families may lag behind their

colleagues (Tudge et al., 2003). Different socializations may be one of the factors. For

instance, parents of the middle and working-class can socialize their kids differently

(Bronfenbrenner, 2004). Parents of various social classes also have distinct parental

views and values and how their values impact their views (Hoff et al., 2002). Kohn

(2003) discovered that parents of the working class in their young kids emphasized

conformity.
 16

Erceg (2014) in his studies, which discovered a statistically insignificant

distinction between parents with greater socio-economic status expectations of kids

and parents with reduced socio-economic status expectations of kids. According to

the study outcomes, gifted children whose parents have a greater socioeconomic

status show reduced rates of healthy perfectionism or neurotic perfectionism,

therefore, suitable pedagogical psychological measures are needed to avoid the

appearance of neurotic perfectionism. The findings acquired in this study are in close

correlation with the renowned author's statement (Ferbezer, 2002) that the person and

his or her pressures, combined with setting unrealistic objectives and rigid rules and

regulations, lead to a life full of concern, frustration, and pressure from family, society,

and the media.

According to Kaplan et al. (2015), there is a disparity between income and

perceived socioeconomic status as they pertain to ethnic identity. It is feasible that a

powerful sense of ethnic identity enables some learners to succeed despite what they

think to be modest origins (i.e., lesser avowed SES), thereby reinforcing the feeling

that their ethnicity is a source of strength and may be seen by others as going hand

in hand with industry, as stated by greater general ethnic identity results.

The stressful situation can be reacted in very distinct ways by different

individuals with different personalities, with different family relationships and/or with

different levels of peer support. In the connection between SES and child welfare,

Leventhal and Brooks-Gunn (2000) suggested three prospective mediators: their first

variable mediator category is institutional resources such as schools, childcare

 17

centers, hospitals, and job possibilities. The second category of mediator variable as

proposed by Leventhal and Brooks Gunn (2000) is relationships, that is, parent traits

and parent support networks. They are norms in their third form of the mediator.

Blackmon & Durm (2001) found no significant correlation between the

education of children and the report of their self-esteem and socialization by their

children in their research of fifty-one high school students. Parental education had little

impact on the self-esteem and socialization of the child in another research of 200

families and their ten to twelve-year-old kids (Bouissou & Tap, 2002). It has been

discovered that parental unemployment has an aversive effect on the self-esteem and

socialization of children. During adolescence, the quality of the connection between

parent and child is more crucial to the growth of self-esteem and socialization skills

than the peer relationship. During adolescence, self-esteem still relies on parent-child

interaction quality and factors of parenting such as warmth, acceptance/rejection, and

autonomy/control (Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 2000).

Brody et al. (2000) also found that it did not matter to regulate social

competence among economically distressed families because economic status

doesn't make the kids see themselves less. On the other hand, Bornstein et al., (2003)

asserted that the various elements of SES (revenue, education, and occupation) may

affect children's results differently. Gottfried et al. (2003) found no important

correlations between the social status and accomplishment of women in terms of the

impact of maternal occupation on accomplishment. Parenting styles may influence

adolescents' attribution styles, which, in turn, might influence academic achievement.

 18

Related Studies. A study conducted by Deckers et al. (2015) entitled "How

Does Socio-Economic Status Shape a Child's Personality?" shows that socio-

economic status is a strong predictor of a child's personality in many facets. Exploring

facets of personality that include time preferences, risk preferences, and altruism, as

well as crystallized and fluid IQ. Measuring the socio-economic status of a family by

the average educational and household income years of the parents. Also, address

possible mechanisms through which socio-economic status may influence the

development of a child's character by documenting that many dimensions of a child's

setting are systematically different by socio-economic status: parenting style, amount

and quality of time spent by parents with their kids, mother's IQ and financial

preferences, early childhood circumstances and family structure.

The study of Atlintas (2012) and Lareau (2003) offered rich ethnographical

proof showing that parents' socio-economic class, affects children's socialization in

leisure routines that promote their skills and life possibilities. Children from affluent

backgrounds typically obtain the 'elite culture' connected with educational and labor

market, opportunities, which is explained significantly by the development of

'embodied' cultural capital by children through family life (Bodovski & Farkas et. al.).

According to Yaish & Katz-Gerno, (2012), socio-economic resources for

parents can also affect children's leisure time. Privileged parents have enormous

financial resources to enable them to be active in cultural expenditure. Due to their

elevated revenue to outsource domestic work, parents from the wealthy social role

can benefit from family-oriented participation. Kraus & Keltner (2009) stated that
 19

wealthier people are more likely to break away from social interaction and have less

compassion for individuals in trouble than their fewer wealthy counterparts (Stellar et.

al., 2012).

On the other hand, a study conducted by Yunus & Dahlan (2013) "Child-rearing

Practices and Socio-economic Status: Possible Implications for Children's

Educational Outcomes". The study investigates how socio-economic status plays a

significant role in affecting parenting practices and growth of kids, whereby high-SES

parents can provide a wider variety of experiences, material resources, parental

behavior, and social interactions that many kids with low socio-economic status may

not have access to. The fundamental concept is that parents have a strong effect on

the features of the character that kids develop and influence their life direction. The

research tried to explore the relationship between the socio-economic status of

children and their views about parenting practices in two significant developmental

areas, i.e. stimulation of cognitive and socio-emotional functions such as socialization.

Examining several aspects of the parental beliefs and practices of respondents,

namely socio-economic status of parents and cognitive stimulus activities; socio-

economic status of parents and social-emotional attachment; and parental beliefs in

raising children concerning their socio-economic status. Results analyzes showed

important distinctions between the three groups in child-rearing methods and parental

beliefs i.e. high, middle and low socio-economic background parents.

The study of Manstead (2018) also draws on latest studies on social class

psychology, asserts that the material circumstances in which individuals develop and
 20

live have a permanent effect on their personal and social identity, influencing both

their way of thinking and feeling about their social environment and important

elements of their social behavior. Relative to middle-class counterparts, people in the

lower working class are less likely to describe themselves in terms of their socio-

economic status and are more likely to have interdependent self-concepts; they are

also more likely to understand social occurrences in situational terms because of

having a lower feeling of private control.

Manstead (2018) claims that working-class individuals score greater on

empathy measures and are more likely to assist others in distress. It is commonly

believed that working people are more prejudicial to immigrants and ethnic minorities

as a function of financial risk, highly educated individuals also express prejudice to

these organizations when they are defined as extremely trained and thus pose a

financial danger. The fact that middle-class standards of independence prevail in

universities and prestigious workplaces make it less likely for working-class individuals

to apply for jobs in such organizations, less likely to be chosen and less likely to remain

if chosen. In other words, variations in social class in identity, cognition, emotions, and

behavior make it less likely that people in the working class will profit from instructional

and employment possibilities to enhance their material conditions. This implies

redistributive policies are required to break the deprivation cycle that restricts

possibilities and threatens social cohesion.

 21

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored based on the following theories:

Family Stress Model (Conger & Conger, 2002). Postulates that adverse

financial factors lead to less qualitative parent interaction and child interaction with

more adverse parenting methods such as the absence of participation, inconsistency,

and severe parenting methods (Conger & Conger, 2002; Conger et al., 2002). The

fundamental theory of the structure is that child growth, including but not restricted to

competence (cognition, social and academic skills), internalization (e.g. depression

and anxiety) and outsourcing (e.g. aggression and antisocial behavior), is determined

by the family's financial assets (Conger et al., 2010).

A number of current research have discovered support for the Family Stress

Model and its predictive capabilities (Conger et al., 2002; Mistry et al., 2002; Yeung

et al., 2002; Solantaus et al. 2004; Parke et al., 2004), and surveys using distinct

ethnic and racial groups have replicated the theory's assumptions (Conger et al.,

2002; Solantaus et al., 2004; Parke et al., 2004). Studies have discovered support for

the theory premise that (a) financial hardship findings in financial stress on children,

(b) financial stress results in parent emotional distress, (c) parent emotional distress

resulting in parent dispute, (d) parent conflict resulting in maladaptive parenting

behavior (d) parental conflict contributes to maladaptive parental behaviors and (e)

parental disturbance leads to infant maladjustment (Conger, Conger, and Martin,

2010).
 22

The family stress model demonstrates how the quality of interparental

relationships is affected by poverty and financial pressure, which in turn affects child

results. Longitudinal proof indicates that poverty or financial stress affects the mental

health of children, which can trigger conflict between parents and parenting problems.

These then have a negative effect on the results of children and their future life

opportunities, including issues externalizing and internalizing, academic and physical

health issues, and issues of social and interpersonal relationships. Increasingly

interparental conflict is seen as the main mechanism of bad parenting and adverse

child results or a precursor to them (Conger et al., 2010). This implies that it is unlikely

that parenting interventions will be efficient in households with elevated rates of

interparental conflict.

Social Causation Perspective (Lerner 2003; Mayer 1997; Rowe & Rodgers,

1997). The characteristics of the person will determine socioeconomic

accomplishment and the family relationships that they will construct, according to the

Social Causation Perspective (Lerner 2003; Mayer 1997; Rowe & Rodgers, 1997).

Individuals with favorable features are more likely to persist in difficult circumstances,

resulting in the collection of financial and social capital that will be transferred from

parents to kids. As such, socio-economic status is regarded to be an accumulation of

concepts determined by characteristics of individuals such as intelligence and

personality (Conger et al., 2010).

According to Mayer (1997), parent features such as abilities, sincerity,

awareness, and reliability will improve children's life chances. On the other side,
 23

parents ' interpersonal skills influence parenting methods and family structure in such

a manner that kids with parents that have weak interpersonal skills are subjected to

lower parenting performance and have adverse developmental results. (McLanahan

& Percheski, 2008). Research has related characteristics and arrangements of people

to status accomplishments in accordance with what the social causation view

assumes (Conger et al., 2010). Individual cognition and personality variations are

reported to predict socio-economic status indicators such as revenue, type of work

and financial stress (Donnellan et al. 2009; Feinstein & Bynner, 2004; McLeod &

Kaiser, 2004).

Socio-economic status of families particularly the parents can greatly affect

child’s development. It is said that socio-economic status determines an individual’s

characteristics which if we put in the setting of a family, parents characteristics is

dependent on their socio-economic status that means what the parents skills can

greatly affect their child’s skills and development which can be in terms of socialization

of their children (Feinstein & Bynner, 2004).

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework shows a visual representation of the independent

variable (socio-economic status). It also shows the dependent variable (respondent’s

socialization).

The independent variable is the socio-economic status. As stated by Baker

(2014) socio-economic status is outlined as a life of one's combined economic and

social station and tends to be completely related to higher health. This entry focuses
 24

on the 3 common measures of socioeconomic status; education, income, and

occupation. It embodies the definitions, theoretical background, and empirical support

for every of those socio-economic status indicators and their relationship with health.

socio-economic status is usually thought to influence health through 3 avenues: (1)

socio-economic status influences health through the power to get health promoting

resources and treatments; (2) socialization of early health habits and continued

socialization of health habits differs by socio-economic status; and (3) it's been posited

that, instead of socio-economic status influencing health, health influences socio-

economic status, less healthy people complete fewer years of college, miss a lot of

work, and earn lower incomes. Within the study, socio-economic status facilitate,

extend the data, and alter to grasp a completely different social economic category

that affects bound factors of socialization that promotes data which will contribute to

the parents and present social problems.

The dependent variable is the respondents' socialization. The term

socialization refers to processes that trained the skills, behavior patterns, values, and

motivations required for competent functioning within the culture that the child grows

up. Predominant among these areas are the social skills, social understandings, and

emotional maturity required for interaction with alternative people to suit in with the

functioning of social dyads and bigger teams. Socialization processes embody all

those whereby culture is transmitted from every generation to ensuing, including

coaching for specific roles in specific occupations.

 25

The socio-economic status was defined in terms of family income. It was used

to determine if it affects the socialization of the students according to age, sex, and

strand. Meanwhile, the socialization was used to evaluate the socialization of the

students in age, sex, and strand in terms of the socio-economic status.

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Displaying the Independent and Dependent

Variable

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Socio-economic

Students Demographic Profile

a. Age;

b. Sex; and

c. Strand

Socialization
 26

Statement of the Problem

This section presents the descriptive and inferential questions of the study. The

purpose of this study is to investigate if there is a relationship between socio-economic

status of students and their socialization skills as senior high school students living in

Davao City. We specifically seek answers to the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of senior high school students?

1.1. age;

1.2. sex; and

1.3. strand

2. What is the level of socio-economic status of senior high school students?

3. What is the level of socialization skills of senior high school students?

4. Is there a significant difference in socio-economic status when grouped according

to:

4.1. age;

4.2. sex; and

4.3. strand

5. Is there a significant difference in socialization when grouped according to:

5.1. age;

5.2. sex; and

5.3. strand

6. Is there a significant relationship between socio-economic status and socialization?

 27

Null Hypothesis

The null hypothesis for this study was formulated and tested at α=<.05 level of

significance:

Ho1 No significant relationship is established between students socio-economic

status and socialization skills.

Ho2 No significant difference is established in socio-economic status when

grouped according to age, sex and strand

Ho3 No significant difference is established in socialization when grouped according

to age, sex and strand

Importance of the Study

This section presents those who will benefit from this study. The researchers

believe that the following individuals can appreciate the contributions that can be

derived from the results of this investigation in many ways: besides, this study was

conducted to determine the respondents' level and the relationship of socio-economic

status and socialization.

First, the school itself considering that they are more accountable for each

learner's learning. Knowing how socio-economic impacts a student's socialization will

offer them an opportunity to carry out more tasks that concentrate mainly on

developing each student.

Second, teachers as they are the one who validates the socialization of their

learners; understanding the reasons and factors how the level of socio-economic
 28

status affects the socialization skills of their learners is likely to assist them to know

the learners and offer them the opportunity to encourage them more.

Another, the parents who are concerned about the socialization skills of their

kids; understanding the cause of why their child has no friends will create them more

hands-on and lead them back to the correct route. It can give them insights on how to

properly manage their finances.

Next, the learners or students themselves whose socio-economic status level

is either high or low. It will be easier for them to know the significance and how their

socialization is affected by the level of socio-economic status.

Lastly, future researchers who have the interest to pursue this study as it will

serve as their guide for their future research and preparing for the next generations to

maintain society alive and existing, morally or materialistically. Also, the consideration

of this investigation's recommendation for future research-related efforts.

Scope and Limitation

The study only covers the level of socio-economic status and socialization that

focuses on Davao City National High School senior high school students as this is

conducted only in this premise.

The tool for measuring the independent variable which is socio-economic

status is the monthly income of the respondent's parents. That is to answer the study's

feasibility. The researchers did not comply with Parent's consent forms to the

respondents before conducting the study despite the respondents' minor age (18

below). Since the data collected focused solely on the school-based.

 29

The respondents to this study are Davao City National High School senior high

school students only. The researchers surveyed an innovative sample size of fifty (50)

respondents out of the original sample size (327), as it was instructed and there was

limited time for conducting this research study.

This study aims to investigate how socio-economic status affects socialization.

Senior High School Students are chosen respondents because they had more school

expenses to pay compared to junior high school. It is important to remove barriers that

may interfere with their learning, teaching, and tendency to perform such activity.