Measuring Class Hierarchies in Postindustrial Societies: A Criterion and Construct Validation of EGP and ESEC Across 31 Countries

Abstract

In social stratification research, the most frequently used social class schema are based on employment relations (EGP and ESEC). These schemes have been propelled to paradigms for research on social mobility and educational inequalities and applied in cross-national research for both genders. Using the European Working Conditions Survey, we examine their criterion and construct validity across 31 countries and for both genders. We investigate whether classes are welldelineated by the theoretically assumed dimensions of employment relations and we assess how several measures of occupational advantage differ across classes. We find broad similarity in the criterion validity of EGP and ESEC across genders and countries as well as satisfactory levels of construct validity. However, the salariat classes are too heterogeneous and their boundaries with the intermediate classes are blurred. To improve the measurement of social class, we propose to differentiate managerial and professional occupations within the lower and higher salariat respectively. We show that implementing these distinctions in ESEC and EGP improves their criterion validity and allows to better identify privileged positions.

Are upper-secondary track decisions risky? Evidence from Sweden on the assumptions of risk-aversion models

“…However, this scheme has been criticized for overstating the manual vs. non-manual divide (Oesch 2003), which is of less importance for female jobs (Heath and Britten 1984). Thus, gender differences in risks related to occupational class might reflect the extent to which EGP VII captures the lowest ranks among female and male-dominated occupations (Smallenbroek, Hertel and Barone 2022). Second, the issue of selection might still be present.…”

Integrating intercohort changes in the composition of social origin into OED triangle research: A literature review and an outlook for future research

“…On the other hand, recent empirical studies suggest that there exist large differences in the income trajectories between classes, making class still a good multidimensional measure for permanent income and income trajectories in Israel, the US, and Western European countries (Kim et al., 2018; Westhoff et al., 2022; Yaish & Kraus, 2020). Moreover, recent construct validity analyses show that differences in employment relations or job tasks are relatively well captured by the EGP class scheme (Gil‐Hernández et al., 2023; Smallenbroek et al., 2022).…”

Mobility and Inequality in the Professoriate: How and Why First-Generation and Working-Class Backgrounds Matter

“…Regarding occupational class status, we follow research surrounding the strength and efficacy of occupation-based nominal class schemas (Erikson, Goldthorpe, and Portocarero 1979; see also Smallenbroek et al 2022) (i.e., schemas that draw on the specific occupations of parents to effectively differentiate working-class background vs. more advantaged class origins). Our indicator is derived from open-ended survey responses to the question “In what occupation did your primary parent/caregiver [#1/#2] work, if any, during your childhood?…”

“…or occupational prestige (Blau and Duncan 1967), whereas analyses over the past two decades have tended to rely more consistently on measures of occupational class position (e.g., Goldthorpe 1992, 2002;Smallenbroek, Hertel, and Barone 2022) and/or first-generation status (e.g., Benson and Lee 2020;Manzoni and Streib 2019;Wilbur and Roscigno 2016).…”

“…Contemporary stratification research, including specific literatures on poverty (e.g., Fox, Torche, and Waldfogel 2016), income and wealth inequality (e.g., Keister and Moller 2000; Oliver and Shapiro 2009), health (e.g., Brady et al 2020; Willson and Shuey 2019) and education (e.g., Lareau 2003; Mare and Maralani 2006) point to such effects despite sometimes measuring socioeconomic background in distinct ways. Traditional stratification research, for instance, used indices such as socioeconomic status (SES) or occupational prestige (Blau and Duncan 1967), whereas analyses over the past two decades have tended to rely more consistently on measures of occupational class position (e.g., Erikson and Goldthorpe 1992, 2002; Smallenbroek, Hertel, and Barone 2022) and/or first-generation status (e.g., Benson and Lee 2020; Manzoni and Streib 2019; Wilbur and Roscigno 2016).…”