Socioeconomic Scales -Internationally and National Scales. Social Stratification

1. SOCIOECONOMIC
SCALES
Dr.Payal Dash
Post Graduate Trainee
Dept.Of Public Health Dentistry

2. CONTENTS • BACKGROUND
• TERMINOLOGIES
• INTRODUCTION
• CLASSIFICATION OF SES
• INTERNATIONAL SES
• INDIAN SES
• PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE
• SUMMARY
• CONCLUSION
• REFERENCES
2

3. 1.BACKGROUND
A.History:-
• Social Stratification in Age of Capitalism
• Social exploitation
• Social stratification in pre and post Independent India
B.Social Stratification
• Principles
• Theories
• Systems : -Slavery,Class,Caste,Estate
C. Social Mobility

7. Pre-Independence India

8. • Mānava-Dharmaśāstra or Laws of Manu, -
first ancient legal text and constitution among
the many Dharmaśāstras of Hinduism
• 50 manuscripts of the Manusmriti are now
known
• Most translated and presumed authentic
version -"Kolkata (formerly Calcutta)
manuscript with Kulluka Bhatta
commentary"

9. Vedic varnas
• varnas originated in Vedic
society (c. 1500–500 BCE).
• Brahmins, Kshatriyas and
Vaishya, have parallels
with other Indo-European
societies, while the addition
of the Shudras is probably a
Brahmanical invention
from northern India.
Jatis
• Jeaneane Fowler,- it is
impossible to determine how
and why the jatis came into
existence.
• Susan Bayly - jati system
emerged because it offered a
source of advantage in an era
of pre-Independence poverty,
lack of institutional human
rights, volatile political
environment, and economic
insecurity.

10. After India achieved
independence, the policy of caste-
based reservation of jobs was
formalised with lists of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes

11. SOCIAL STRATIFICATION
A kind of social differentiation wherby a society is divided into
groups people into socioeconomic strata

12. SOCIAL STRATIFICATION
•Social stratification is a kind of social differentiation whereby
members of society are grouped into socioeconomic strata, based
upon their occupation and income, wealth and social status, or
derived power.
•Rankings of people based on wealth and other resources as society
values.
- Andy Schmitz. Social stratification. Sociology: Comprehensive
edition
-Park’s textbook of preventive and social medicine. K
Park. 23rd edition.Medicine and Social Sciences.
12

13. •It refers to the division of the society into layers(strata) whose
occupants have unequal access to social opportunities and
rewards.
- Syed Amin Tabish. Social class and health status. JK
Practitioner 2006;13(4):242-247
•The structure and process of allocation and distribution of
resources and the rationale of decision making about the
allocation of high and low positions in the society.
- K L Sharma, Social
stratification and change in contemporary India
13

14. Principles of social stratification
• Social stratification is a trait of the society and not simply
a reflection of individual differences.
• Social stratification carries over from generation to
generation.
• Social stratification is universal but variable.
• Social stratification involves not just inequality but beliefs.
Textbook of preventive and social medicine. Piyush Ghai. Social and behavioural sciences in health: 623-629
14

15. THEORIES
1.Karl-marx Theory
BOURGEOISE
PROLETARIAT
Modern
Society
15

16. WEBERIAN THEORY
• Max Weber(1864-1920)
• Neglected the materialistic concept of history
•Propertied upper class,Propertyless white-collar
workers,Petty bourgeoisie,Manual working class
• Human motivation and ideas were the real forces of
change.
• Weber believed that sociology should focus on social
action and not preoccupy itself with structures.
DAVIS and MOORE THEORY
• Proposed in the year 1945
• Amended in 1948.
• Perspective that considers society as an organism
• This theory argued that this organism has needs
that must be met if it is to remain healthy.
• Important positions or jobs in the society.
16

17. Systems of social stratification
•Systems vary on their degree of vertical mobility, or the
chances of rising up or falling down the stratification ladder.
•In some so-called closed societies, an individual has virtually no
chance of moving up or down.
• Open societies have more vertical mobility, as some people,
and perhaps many people, can move up or even down.
•SLAVERY ,CASTE ,CLASS,ESTATES 17

18. Slavery in Greece
18

19. www.globalslaveryindex.org

20. 20

21. Caste system in the Indian scenario
21

22. •Many societies, including all industrial ones, have class systems.
•A system of stratification containing unequal groups but with a
relatively high degree of social mobility.
•In this system of stratification, a person is born into a social
ranking but can move up or down from it much more easily than in
caste systems or slave societies.
CLASS SYSTEMS
22

23. •Estate systems are characterized by control of land and were common
in Europe and Asia during the Middle Ages and into the 1800s.
•Landed gentry and the peasantry
•Estate systems thrived in Europe until the French Revolution in 1789
violently overturned the existing order.
Estate systems
23

24. Status is achieved
through effort
/merit
Also known as
meritocracy
OPEN
Status is ascribed
Based on various
factors-family
background,
ethnicity
CLOSED
SOCIAL MOBILTY
• Movement of individuals,social groups or categories of
people between the layers /strata in stratification system.
• Open and closed stratification
24

25. 1. SOCIETY: Society is a group of individuals who have
organized themselves and follow a given way of life.
2. RURAL SOCIETIES: This comprises of the population living
in the villages. The villages are self sufficient units for most of
the routine requirements of its people.
3. URBAN SOCIETIES: Towns and cities comprise the urban
societies. They are relatively large, dense and permanent
settlements of people.
2. TERMINOLOGIES
25

26. 4. FAMILY: The family is a primary unit in all societies. It is a
group of biologically related individuals living together and
eating from a common kitchen.
5. COMMUNITY: A community is a social group determined by
geographical boundaries and/or common values and interests.
2. TERMINOLOGIES

27. 6.SOCIAL STRUCTURE: Social structure refers to the pattern
of inter relations between persons. Every society has a social
structure- a complex of major institutions, groups, power
structure and status heirarchy.
7.SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS: It has been defined as the
position that an individual or family occupies with reference to
the prevailing average standards of cultural and material
possessions, income and participation in group activity of the
community.
2. TERMINOLOGIES

28. • "The relative position of a family or individual on a hierarchical
social structure, based on their access to or control over wealth,
prestige and power.” -MUELLER and PARCEL
• "A broad concept that refers to the placement of persons,
families, households and census tracts or other aggregates with
respect to the capacity to create or consume goods that are
valued in our society."

29. 3.INTRODUCTION
• Socio-Economic Scales and Health
• Need for Socio-Economic Scales

30. INTRODUCTION

31. • Influences the Accessibility, Affordability, Acceptability
and Actual utilization of available health facilities.
• In primary care settings, examinations of socioeconomic
scales often reveal inequities in access to health care.

32. • Reveals a pattern to the health problems existing in a specific
population
• The two key areas that the SES helps to address are:
• Low SES- Common with communicable diseases and nutritional
deficiency
• High SES- shows more of obesity and noncommunicable
diseases;
• Access to health care with high SES shows a better access.

34. NEED FOR SOCIOECONOMIC SCALES
• prestige rating,
• intelligence quotient
• annual income
• education
• occupations.

35. • Proper understanding the affordability of health services,
amenities and their purchasing capacity.
• To understand the health seeking behavior.
• To describe and monitor the social distribution of diseases and
health status
• To influence health policy

36. • To monitor changes over time or across different regions, social
groups
• To evaluate whether policy targets to diminish health inequalities.
• To explaining the causal mechanisms through which SES
generates health differences
• To statistically adjust for socioeconomic circumstances when
some other exposure is the main focus of interest.
• To obtain the ‘independent’ effect of the exposure of interest.

37. 4.CLASSIFICATION OF SOCIO ECONOMIC
SCALES
• International Scales
• National Scales
• Rural Scales
• Urban Scales
• Miscellaneous Scales

38. SES
International National
Rural
Urban
Both
Miscellaneous
CLASSIFICATION OF SOCIOECONOMIC
SCALES
International
United States
Hollingshead four-
factor index.1975
Nakao & Treas
,1992
Canada
Blishen et al.,1987
United Kingdom
Edward’s Social-
Economic Grouping
of Occupations,

39. RURAL URBAN RURAL & URBAN
RAHUDKAR SCALE (1960) KUPPUSWAMY SCALE MODIFIED B.G.PRSAD
SCALE
UDAI PAREEKH SCALE
(1964)
SRIVASTAVA SCALE AGARWAL SCALE
SHIRPURKAR SCALE JALOTA SCALE S.C TIWARI & AMRISH
KUMAR
KULSHRESHTA SCALE GAUR CLASSIFICATION
SATAYA PRIYA SCALE
INDIAN SCALES
MISCELLANEOUS SCALES
• Bharadwaj Scale-For student population
• Wealth index - Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS)
• Standard of Living Index -National Family Health Survey

40. INTERNATIONAL SCALES:-
A.
Hollinghead four point scale
B.Nakao & Treas Scale
C.Blishen et. al scale

41. • Designed to measure social status of an individual based on
four domains:
• Marital status,
• Retired/employed status
• Educational attainment
• Occupational prestige.
• Obtained separately for adults (18-85) and children (6-17)
The child participant’s parent’s education code is rated on a 7-point
scale
7=graduate/professional training,
6= standard college or university graduation,
5=partial college, at least one year of specialized training,
4= high school graduate,
3=partial high school, 10th or 11th grade,
2= junior high school, including 9th grade,
1= less than 7th grade,
0=not applicable or unknown.
HOLLINGSHEAD FOUR FACTOR INDEX

42. • OCCUPATION
• 9=higher executive, proprietor of large businesses, major professional,
• 8=administrators, lesser professionals, proprietor of medium-sized business,
• 7=smaller business owners, farm owners, managers, minor professionals,
• 6=technicians, semi-professionals, small business owners (business valued at
$50,000-70,000),
• 5=clerical and sales workers, small farm and business owners (business valued at
$25,000-50,000),
• 4=smaller business owners (<$25,000), skilled manual laborers,
craftsmen, tenant farmers,
• 3=machine operators and semi-skilled workers,
• 2=unskilled workers,
• 1=farm laborers, menial service workers, students, housewives,
(dependent on welfare, no regular occupation),
• 0=not applicable or unknown

43. • SES scores were derived for the 503 job codes listed in the 1980
U.S. census
• Based on the education and income of individuals
• Where data were available for only one adult (e.g., only one
parent/guardian was working), the code for the employed
individual was used.
• In families in which data were available for more than one
parent/guardian, their SES scores were averaged.
Nakao & Treas S

44. HOLLINGSHEAD FOUR INDEX SCALE NAKAO & TREAS SCALE
8–48 (referent, lowest
SES)
0–51.86 (referent,
lowest SES)
49–56 51.87–72.23
57–63 72.24–83.65
Greater than 63 (highest
SES)
Greater than 83.65
(highest SES)

45. Blishen et al. Scale (1987)
• Provides an occupational socioeconomic index
• Considers the median income for men and women and the net
proportion of well-educated individuals for a given
occupation.
• An SES score was derived for each of the 514 occupational
codes from the 1981 Canadian census.

46. • B.G.PRASAD SCALE
• UDAI & PAREEKH SCALE
• KUPPUSWAMY SCALE
• AGARWAL SCALE
• GAURS CLASSIFICATION OF SES
• TIWARI SCALE
INDIAN SCALES

47. B.G. Prasad’s socio-economic status scale
• Developed in 1961
• Modified in 1968 and 1970 by Prasad BG.
• Can be used in both urban and rural areas.
• Based on per capita monthly income.
• It uses only one variable i.e., income.
• It has to be revised regularly.
• Advantage of this scale is easy to use, universal in all populations and areas.
• Monthly Per capita income = Total monthly income of the family/total number of
members in family
SOCIO ECONOMIC
CLASSIFICATION
PER CAPITA
MONTHLY
INCOME (1961)
PER CAPITA MONTHLY INCOME
MODIFIED (2021)
LOWER LIMIT UPPER LIMIT
I 100 & ABOVE 7863 INFINITY
II 50-99 3931 7862
III 30-49 2359 3930
IV 15-29 1179 2358
V <15 0 1179

48. Udai Pareek and G. Trivedi (1964) –Rural
Caste Occupation Education
SCORE CASTE
1 SCHEDULED
CASTE
2 LOWER
CASTE
3 ARTISAN
CASTE
4 AGRICULTURE
CASTE
5 PRESTIGE
CASTE
6 DOMINANT
CASTE
SCORE OCCUPATION
0 NONE
1 LABOURER
2 CASTE
OCCUPATION
3 BUSINESS
4 INDEPENDEN
T
PROFESSION
5 CULTIVATION
6 SERVICE
SCORE EDUCATION
0 ILLITERATE
1 CAN READ ONLY
2 CAN READ AND
WRITE
3 PRIMARY
4 MIDDLE
5 HIGH SCHOOL
6 GRADUATE
7 AND ABOVE

49. Udai Pareek and G. Trivedi (1964) –Rural
Land
Social
Participation
House
SCORE LAND
0 NO LAND
1 LESS THAN 1
ACRE
2 1 -5 ACRE
3 5-10 ACRE
4 10-15 ACRE
5 15-20 ACRE
6 20 AND ABOVE
SCORE SOCIAL
PARTICIPATION
0 NONE
1 MEMBER OF
ONE
ORGANISATION
2 MEMBER OF
MORE THAN
ONE
ORGANISATION
3 OFFICE HOLDER
4 WIDE PUBLIC
LEADER
SCORE HOUSE
0 NO HOUSE
1 HUT
2 KUTCHA HOUSE
3 MIXED HOUSE
4 PUCCA HOUSE
5 MANSION

50. Udai Pareek and G. Trivedi (1964) –Rural
Farm
Power
Material
Possession
Family
Type
SCORE FARM POWER
0 NO DRAUGHT
ANIMALS
1 1-2
2 3-4
3 5-6
SCORE MATERIAL
POSSESSION
0 BULLOCK CART
1 CYCLE
2 RADIO
3 CHAIRS
4 MOBILE PHONE
5 TELEVISION
6 REFRIGERATOR
SCORE FAMILY TYPE
1 SINGLE
2 JOINT
3 EXTENDED
2 SIZE UPTO 5
2 ANY OTHER
DISINCTIVE
FEATURES

51. GRADE CATEGORY SCORE ON SCALE
A UPPER CLASS ABOVE 43
B UPPER MIDDLE CLASS 33-42
C MIDDLE CLASS 24-32
D LOWER MIDDLE CLASS 13-23
E LOWER CLASS BELOW 13
Based on scoring on above classification, the individual is
categorised with SES as given

52. LIMITATIONS
• Quite comprehensive
• Income has not been mentioned
• Some of the categories are ambiguous.
• Another limitation is that it is applicable on individual level
only.

53. KUPPUSWAMMY SCALE-1976

54. EDUCATION-
HEAD OF FAMILY
SCORE OCCUPATION-HEAD OF
FAMILY
SCORE
Professional or
honours degree
7 Professional 10
Graduate or post
graduate 6
6 Semi-profession 6
Intermediate or
post high school
diploma
5 Clerical, shop-owner,
farmer
5
High school
certificate
4 Skilled worker 4
Middle school
certificate
3 Semi-skilled worker 3
Primary school
certificate
2 Unskilled worker 2
Illiterate 1 Unemployed 1

55. MODIFICATION 2021

56. 1.Education of Head: The scoring is only for the education of the Head of family, irrespective of
whether he/she was the subject or not.
2. Credit for completed milestone only: maximum level already attained, not the one currently
undergoing and not yet completed.
3.Renaming of categories: The education scenario haschanged since the time of the original
scale.

57. 3. ‘High grade’ professional degree:
5. Expanded definition of illiterate: less than 7 years of age as ‘illiterate’.
As per the Census of India - irrespective of their actual capacity to read and write
ELECTRON FAMILY
The eldest sibling
would be the de-
facto ‘head’ and
education thus need
to be scored.

59. CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
An index measuring the change in the cost of typical wage-
earner purchases of goods and services expressed as a
percentage of the cost of these same goods and services in
some base period
— called also cost-of-living index
HOW TO
CALCULATE
CPI?
Select a base year for CPI-always set at
100
Gather prices for common products or
services in the past
Collect prices for current products or
services
Add them and Divide the current
product price total by the past price total
Multiply by 100 and convert into %

60. Year Pasta Price Noodles price Total
2019 50/- 80/- 130/-
2021 55/- 95/- 150/-
Say you're calculating costs of certain grocery food items made from
one brand from the year 2019 to the year 2021. After gathering the
receipts to determine the prices for certain products, your list would
look like this:
CPI=150/130*100 =115.38%
Subtract this total from 100 to receive your final percentage of
change, which is 15.38%.

61. CALCULATION OF CPI FOR 2020 ,2021
Inflation rate of February 2019 = 2.57
Inflation rate of February 2020 =6.58
Inflation rate of January 2021 = 4.06
Inflation rate=(b-a ) * 100
a
‘b’ is the CPI of current year and ‘a’ is the CPI of last year
CPI = 4.06 * (income scale values of 2012)
For example
1520 *6.58= 10001.6 30375*4.06=123322 1520*4.06=6174

62. SCORE SOCIO ECONOMIC CLASS
26-29 Upper (I)
16-25 Upper Middle (II)
11-15 Lower Middle (III)
5-10 Upper Lower (IV)
<5 Lower (V)
Kuppuswamy socio-economic status scale 2021
LIMITATIONS:-consideration of educational status and type of
occupation of the head of the family is completely unsuitable, scale
needs the regular update and is based on changing CPI values,
which makes the scale vulnerable to fluctuations in income levels

63. • Focus was shifted from the head of the household to the highest
achiever in the family and accounted for income from all sources.
• The scale is comprehensive
• Includes 22 items.
• Inclusion of a large number of parameters gave the tool accuracy
and complexity.
AGARWAL SCALE

64. • Caste, material possessions
(vehicle, TV, fridge, AC, washing
machine, mobile phone, house, tap
water, domestic servant, land,
milch cattle etc), visits abroad,
monthly per capita income, income
tax paid, highest education in the
family and occupation.

65. EDUCATION

68. LIMITATION
• time consuming
• labor intensive exercise.
• Several items are not relevant to urban areas;
• calculation of pooled income of the family is difficult
• occupation scoring is also difficult as many categories are not
mentioned

69. For example, lower rank government servants; it is unclear how to
assess land possession (agricultural, nonagricultural) and
inheritance of property. This can lead to miss-classification by
data collectors.
Hence, there is a need for developing an abridged version of the
scale with selected key indicators from Aggarwal et al.'s
questionnaire

70. GAURS CLASSIFICATION
First introduced in 1996,revised in 2004 and 2012
Education Occupation
Income per
capita
Expenditure
Housing
Condition
Living
Status
Debts to
Asset Ratio

71. EDUCATION

72. OCCUPATION

73. INCOME PER CAPITA PER MONTH
(2012)

74. EXPENDITURE

75. HOUSING CONDITION

77. HOUSING ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS

78. LIVING STATUS

79. LIVING STATUS

80. DEBT TO ASSET RATIO

81. SOCIOECONOMIC
STATUS
TOTAL SCORES
Upper Class (I) >40
Upper Middle Class 30-39
Lower Middle Class 20-29
Upper lower class 10-19
Lower Class <10
GAUR CLASSIFICATION

82. Advantages
• This scale considers majority of criteria of Kuppuswamy
scales
• More relevant in modern ages.
Disadvantages
• It requires much more information in comparison to B
.G.Prasad scale.

83. TIWARI SCALE OF SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS-2005
• Authors-S C Tiwari ,Amrish Kumar
• Applicable in both rural and urban areas
• Seven domains:-
• House
• Material possession-Househol gadgets,Conveyance Facilty
• Education -Qualification, Computer Profiency
• Occupation
• Monthly income
• Land
• Social participation Understanding.

84. 1.HOUSE PROFILE
LAND AREA HOUSE TYPE

85. 2.MATERIAL POSSESSION

86. 3. EDUCATION PROFILE FOR
BOTH URBAN & RURAL

87. COMPUTER
PROFICIENCY

88. OCCUPATION (RURAL &URBAN) 2005 & 2010 SCORE
No gainful employment. 0
Unskilled Labour (labour,agricultural labour, rickshaw puller) 2
Class IV employee, skilled worker (tailor, black smith, carpenter, washer-man, potter,
barber, driver etc.), hawker, vendor, (goods less than 50,000.00) petty farmer (cultivated
land<1 acre), caste occupation.
4
Class-III employee, primary school teacher, high school
teacher, small businessman (having his/her own or rented shop and goods upto Rs.
1,00,000.00), farmer (culivated land 1-10 acres) & private contractor, insurance agents etc.
6
Class-II employee/junior professionals (experience up-to 5 years), intermediate teacher,
principals upto intermediate colleges, farmer (cultivated land upto 10-20 acres), business
man (goods upto Rs. 1,00,000.00 -5,00,000.00), local public leader like corporater, Govt.
contractor etc.
8
Class-I employee/executives/senior professionals (experience more than 5 years),
university/degree colleges teachers, principals of degree colleges, professors, farmers (land
more than 20 acre), businessman (goods>Rs. 5,00,000.00), leaders (MLA’s, MP’s etc).
10

89. INCOME

90. Possessed land /house cost profile

91. Understanding and participating in Social
Issues (Rural & Urban ) 2005,2010
Scores
None 0
Religious-Cultural 2
Developmental 2
Educational 2
Health promotional 2
Political 2
SOCIAL PROFILE

93. This extensive scale given attention to many issues like
occupation, education and city in which the individual resides,
however makes this very lengthy difficult to use in community.
Same scoring in some categories like land cost, computer
proficiency, education may not give same status in rural as in
urban areas. The scale takes time for data collection.
APPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS

94. MISCELLANEOUS SCALES
1. Standard Of Living Index Scale
2. Wealth Index Scale

95. STANDARD OF LIVING INDEX SCALE
• The GoI in National family
health survey used it
• 11 items viz.
• house type
• source of lighting
• toilet facility
• main fuel for cooking
• source of drinking water
• separate room for cooking
• house ownership
• agricultural land owenership
• irrigated land ownership
• livestock ownership
• durable goods ownership
Scores Standard Of Living
less than equal to 9 Low
9-19 Medium
more than equal to 19 High score

98. • Developed by The DHS Program
• composite measure of a household's cumulative living
standard.
• calculated using easy-to-collect data on a household’s
ownership of selected assets, such as televisions and bicycles;
materials used for housing construction; and types of water
access and sanitation facilities.
WEALTH INDEX

99. • Identification of problems particular to the poor, such as
unequal access to health care, as well as those particular to the
wealthy, such as, in Africa, increased risk for infection with
HIV.
• To evaluate whether public health services, vaccination
campaigns, education, and other essential interventions are
reaching the poorest.

101. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE

106. SUMMARY
1. Indian till 1960 occupation-based classification advocated
by the British Registrar General was used.
2. Socio economic status (SES) is a measure of the social
standing of an individual or a family in the society and it has
important implications on all aspects of life.
3. Influences the Accessibility, Affordability, Acceptability
and Actual utilization of available health facilities.

107. SI.
NO
.
SCALE TYPE YEAR AUTHOR COMPONENTS
1. B.G.Prasad Scale Indian 1960 B.G.Prasad Per capita income
of family
2. Udai Pareekh’s
Scale
Indian
Rural
1964 Udai and
G.Pareekh
Caste,Occupation,
Education,Social
Participation,Land,
House,FarmPowers
,Material
Possession,Family
3. Kuppuswamy Scale Indian
Urban
1962 B.Kuppuswa-
mmy
Education
Ocupation
Income

108. SI.
NO.
SCALE TYPE YEAR AUTHOR COMPONENTS
4. Agarwal
Scale
Rural
Urban
2005 O.P.Agarw
al et al
22 items-Monthly
income,Education,Occupation,Fami
ly Posession,Type of
House,Possession of Vehicle,No.Of
earning members,No.of children
head of the family etc
5. Gaurs
Classification
Rural
Urban
1996 K L Gaur 7 items-
Education,Occupation,In
come,Expenditire,Housi
ng Condition,Living
Style,Debts to Asset
Ratio

109. SI.
NO.
SCALE TYPE YEAR AUTHO
R
COMPONENTS
6. Tiwari Rural
Urban
2005
Update
d -2012
S
CTiwari
and
AmriSh
Kmar
house,
material possession,
education,
occupation, monthly
income, land and
social participation
and
understanding.

110. CONCLUSION
• SES is a characteristic to define the consumption and
expenditure pattern of individuals and families.
• It is a crucial measure to identify the position of the individual
in a society.
• The above-mentioned scales are beneficial to determine the
SES, but all have some limitations. To regularly revise the
income range is essential, which helps to apply the scales to
measure the current state of social status.

111. Hollingshead, A. A. (1975). Four-factor index of social status. Unpublished manuscript, Yale
University, New Haven, CT.
Wani RT. Socioeconomic status scales-modified Kuppuswamy and Udai Pareekh's scale updated for
2019. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8(6):1846-1849. doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_288_19
Rahudkar WB. A scale for measuring socioeconomic status of Indian farm families. Nay Agril
Coll Mag 1960; 34.
Parikh U, Trivedi G. Manual of socio-economic status scale (Rural), Manasayan, Delhi, 1964.
Jalota S, Pandey RN, Kapoor SD, Singh RN. Socioeconomic status scale questionnaire (Urban),
Psycho-Centre, New Delhi, 1970.
REFERENCES

112. Kulshrestha SP, Day P. Socio-economic status scale (Urban) form-A, National PsychologicalCorporation, Agra,
1972.
Kuppuswamy B. Manual of Socioeconomic Status (urban), Manasayan, Delhi, 1981.
Srivastava GP. Socio-economic status scale (Urban), National Psychological Corporation,Agra, 1978.
Bhardwaj RL. Manual for socio-economic status scale. National Psychological Corporation, Agra,2001.
Mishra D, Singh HP. Kuppuswamy’s socioeconomic status scale- A revision. Indian J
Pediatr 2003; 70: 273-274.