Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T12:19:41.229Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Todos Somos de Clase Media: Sobre el estatus social subjetivo en Chile

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2022

Juan Carlos Castillo ,
Daniel Miranda  and
Ignacio Madero Cabib
Juan Carlos Castillo
Affiliation:
Centro de Medición MIDE UC, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Daniel Miranda
Affiliation:
Centro de Medición MIDE UC, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Ignacio Madero Cabib
Affiliation:
Centro de Medición MIDE UC, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Resumen

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Chile es uno de los países con mayor concentración del ingreso a nivel mundial. Dada la relación entre alta desigualdad económica y patrones de estratificación social, en tal contexto se esperaría una alta dispersión de las percepciones respecto del propio estatus o estatus social subjetivo. Sin embargo, la evidencia internacional señala una marcada tendencia hacia la media del estatus subjetivo, es decir, existirían distorsiones del estatus subjetivo respecto del estatus objetivo. La presente investigación intenta profundizar en este aspecto para el caso de Chile, particularmente en la relación entre estatus socioeconómico, clase social y estatus subjetivo. Los datos a analizar corresponden al módulo de desigualdad económica de la encuesta International Social Survey Programme (ISSP), en su versión del año 2009 para Chile. Los resultados indican una marcada tendencia en la población hacia la media del estatus subjetivo, principalmente de parte de aquellos con mayor estatus objetivo.

Abstract

Abstract

Chile has one of the highest levels of income inequality among countries worldwide. Given the association between economic inequality and patterns of social stratification, in such a context one would expect to find a large dispersion of subjective social status indicators in the population. Nevertheless, analyses of international surveys reveal a strong tendency to the mean of subjective status, that is, distortions of subjective status in respect to objective status. The present research attempts to tackle this phenomenon for the Chilean case, with a focus on the influence of status and class variables on subjective status. We analyze Chilean data from the social inequality module of the 2009 International Social Survey Programme. The results indicate a strong tendency to the mean of subjective status in the population, particularly among those with higher objective status.

Type
Research Reports and Notes
Information
Latin American Research Review , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , 2013 , pp. 155 - 173
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 by the Latin American Studies Association

Footnotes

Esta investigación ha sido financiada por el proyecto Inicio 11/2011 de la Vicerrectoría de Investigación de la Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.

References

Referencias

Alesina, Alberto, y Giuliano, Paola 2010 “Preferences for Redistribution”. En Handbook of Social Economics, editado por Benhabib, Jess, Jackson, Matthew O. y Bisin, Alberto, 93–131. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Araujo, Kathya, y Martuccelli, Danilo 2011 “La inconsistencia posicionai: Un nuevo concepto sobre la estratificación social”. Revista de la CEPAL (103): 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barozet, Emmanuel, y Espinoza, Vicente 2008 “¿Quiénes pertenecen a la clase media en Chile? Una aproximación metodológica”. Ecuador Debate (74): 103–121.Google Scholar
Bauer, Ullrich 2011 Sozialisation und Ungleichheit eine Hinführung. Wiesbaden, Alemania: VS-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauman, Zygmunt 1999 Modernidad líquida. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich, y Beck-Gernsheim, Elisabeth 2002 Individualization: Institutionalized Individualism and Its Social and Political Consequences. Londres: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biglaiser, Glen, y DeRouen, Karl 2006 “Economic Reforms and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment in Latin America”. Latin American Research Review 41 (1): 51–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, Peter M., y Duncan, Otis Dudley 1967 The American Occupational Structure. Nueva York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Braun, Michael, y Uher, Rolf 2003 “The ISSP and Its Approach to Background Variables”. En Advances in Cross-National Comparison: A European Working Book for Demographic and Socio-economic Variables, editado por Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, J. y Wolf, C., 33–47. Nueva York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantril, Hadley 1966 Pattern of Human Concerns. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Castillo, Juan C. 2011 “Legitimacy of Inequality in a Highly Unequal Context: Evidence from the Chilean Case”. Social Justice Research 24 (4): 314–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castillo, Juan C., Miranda, Daniel y Carrasco, Diego 2012 “Percepción de desigualdad económica en Chile: Medición, diferencias y determinantes”. Psykhé 21 (1): 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Centro de Estudio Públicos 2009 Manual del usuario encuesta CEP No. 59: Estudio Nacional de Opinión Pública, tercera serie. Santiago: Centro de Estudio Públicos.Google Scholar
Crompton, Rosemary 1998 Class and Stratification: An Introduction to Current Debates. Cambridge, RU: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Davis, James 1956 “Status Symbols and the Measurement of Status Perception”. Sociometry 19 (3): 154–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dion, Michelle 2007 “Poverty, Inequality, Policy and Politics in Latin America”. Latin American Research Review 42 (1): 186–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drake, Paul 1986 “Review: The Buoyant Bourgeoisie of Chile”. Latin American Research Review 21 (2): 166–177.Google Scholar
Durkheim, Émile 1985 La división del trabajo social. Barcelona: Planeta Agostini.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert, y Goldthorpe, John 1992 The Constant Flux: A Study of Class Mobility in Industrial Societies. Oxford, RU: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert, Goldthorpe, John y Portocarrero, Lucienne 1979 “Intergenerational Class Mobility in Three Western European Societies: England, France and Sweden”. British Journal of Sociology 30 (4): 415–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Mariah, y Kelley, Jonathan 2004 “Subjective Social Location: Data from 21 Nations”. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 16 (1): 3–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Mariah, Kelley, Jonathan y Kolosi, Tamas 1992 “Images of Class: Public Perceptions in Hungary and Australia”. American Sociological Review 57 (4): 461–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganzeboom, Harry, y Treiman, Donald 1996 “Internationally Comparable Measures of Occupational Status for the 1988 International Standard Classification of Occupations”. Social Science Research 25 (3): 201–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganzeboom, Harry, y Treiman, Donald 2003 “Three Internationally Standardized Measures for Comparative Research on Occupational Status”. En Advances in Cross-national Comparison: A European Working Book for Demographic and Socio-economic Variables, editado por Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik, J. y Wolf, C., 150–193. Nueva York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
Ganzeboom, Harry, Treiman, Donald y Ultee, W. 1991 “Comparative Intergenerational Stratification Research: Three Generations and Beyond”. Annual Review of Sociology 17:277–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gough, Harrison 1948 “A New Dimension of Status: I. Development of a Personality Scale”. American Sociological Review 13 (4): 401–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grusky, David 2001 Social Stratification: Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Jackman, Mary, y Jackman, Robert 1973 “An Interpretation of the Relation between Objective and Subjective Social Status”. American Sociological Review 38 (5): 569–582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerbo, Harold R. 1991 Social Stratification and Inequality: Class Conflict in Historical and Comparative Perspective. Nueva York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Kerckhoff, Alan 1995 “Social Stratification and Mobility Processes”. En Sociological Perspectives on Social Psychology, editado por Cook, Karen S., Fine, Gary Alan y House, James S., 476–496. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
Kluegel, James 1989 “Perceptions of Justice in the US: Split Consciousness among the American Public”. Manuscrito presentado en la Conferencia sobre Percepción de Justicia Social en Este y Oeste, 17 de agosto, Dubrovnik, Croacia.Google Scholar
Kluegel, James R., Mason, David S. y Wegener, Bernd, eds. 1995 Social Justice and Political Change: Public Opinion in Capitalist and Post-Communist States. Nueva York: Aldine de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluegel, James, Singleton, Royce y Starnes, Charles 1977 “Subjective Class Identification: A Multiple Indicator Approach”. American Sociological Review 42 (4): 599–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluegel, James R., y Smith, Elliot R. 1981 “Beliefs about Stratification”. Annual Review of Sociology 7:29–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluegel, James R., y Smith, Elliot R. 1986 Beliefs about Inequality: Americans' Views of What Is and What Ought to Be. Nueva York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lenski, Gerhard E. 1966 Power and Privilege: A Theory of Social Stratification. Nueva York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Lora, Eduardo, y Fajardo, Johanna 2011 “Latin American Middle Classes: The Distance between Perception and Reality”. Working Paper No. IDB-WP-275, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lukács, Georg (1920) 1972 History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Madero, Cristóbal, e Madero, Ignacio 2012 “Elección escolar y selección estudiantil en el sistema educativo chileno, ¿quién elige a quién? El caso de la educación católica.” Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa 17 (55): 259–287.Google Scholar
Madero, Ignacio 2011 “Inclusión y exclusión de género y clase en la escuela chilena en 4 comunas del sur de Chile”. Revista Estudios Pedagógicos 37 (2): 135–145.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl, y Engels, Friedrich 1848 Das Kommunistische Manifest. Londres: Wien, Sternverlag.Google Scholar
Marx, Karl, y Engels, Friedrich 1962 Die Deutsche Ideologie. Berlín: MEW, Dietz Verlag.Google Scholar
McNamee, Stephen J., y Miller, Robert K. Jr. 2004 The Meritocracy Myth. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Ministerio de Planificación y de Chile, Cooperación 2006 Distribución del ingreso e impacto distributivo del gasto social CASEN 2006: Serie análisis CASEN. Santiago de Chile: Ministerio de Planificación y Cooperación.Google Scholar
Ministerio de Planificación y de Chile, Cooperación 2010 Distribución del ingreso 2009: Serie análisis CASEN. Santiago de Chile: Ministerio de Planificación y Cooperación.Google Scholar
Nelson, Joan 2011 “Social Policy Reforms in Latin America: Urgent but Frustrating”. Latin American Research Review 46 (1): 226–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, Talcott, y Smelser, Neil J. 1956 Economy and Society. Londres: Routledge.Google Scholar
Singh-Manoux, Archana, Adler, Nancy y Marmot, Michael G. 2003 “Subjective Social Status: Its Determinants and Its Association with Measures of III-Health in the Whitehall II Study”. Social Science and Medicine 56 (6): 1321–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor-Sutphin, Suzanne, y Simpson, Brent 2009 “The Role of Self-Evaluations in Legitimizing Social Inequality”. Social Science Research 38 (3): 609–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, Amos, y Kahneman, Daniel 1973 “Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability”. Cognitive Psychology 5 (2): 207–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UN Development Program 2006 Human Development Report 2006. Nueva York: UN Development Program.Google Scholar
UN Development Program 2007 Human Development Report 2007/2008. Nueva York: UN Development Program. 2009 Human Development Report 2009. Nueva York: UN Development Program.Google Scholar
Weber, Max 1947 The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. Nueva York: Free Press.Google Scholar