How to tell if someone is high or low class? Poll gets interesting replies from Singaporeans
By NG JUN SEN
Illustration: Kenneth ChoyA study commissioned by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy found that around 66 per cent of those who took part in a poll believed that what determines class identity is income.
Published19 JULY, 2019
UPDATED 19 JULY, 201
SINGAPORE — What sets the “high class” and “low class” populations apart in Singapore are their jobs and income, housing and education levels, as well as whether they consume brands that are associated with either classes.
This was the finding from an opinion poll commissioned by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP).
What was "most interesting", researchers said, was that the problem of social inequality, while fretted about by the Government as a cause for concern, was “simply not central to citizens’ views of life in society”, when compared with other countries.
One of the study’s researchers, Dr Jennifer Dodgson, said: “While Singaporeans may like or dislike their own place on the social ladder, they do not necessarily see this as a problem inherent in the system itself.”
Titled Cars, Condos and Cai Png: Singaporeans’ Perceptions of Class, Wealth and Status, the study had looked at the open-ended responses of around 538 people who had taken part in an online poll in February.
It was conducted by Vox Dei, a research start-up based in the National University of Singapore and founded by Dr Dodgson and fellow LKYSPP researcher Pei Junjie.
In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to describe a person of high and low social class, as well as to define their own social class that they feel they belong.
The results, which were published on Thursday (July 18), showed that around 66 per cent of those polled believed that what determines class identity is income — either from jobs, capital gains, welfare, or the absence of it.
Other factors — in the order of how frequently they were mentioned — are: Housing, education, family, car, holidays, language, networks and domestic helpers.
For example, one’s family links may be seen as having an effect of adding to one’s wealth or poverty, the study said.
Around 9 per cent of respondents identified language as a signpost of class status.
Those who speak mainly English are seen as belonging to a higher class, particularly when they have a foreign accent.
Researchers also noted that respondents had indicated fluency in a language as a more important characteristic than the language being used, with two respondents saying that the ability to code-switch between English and Singlish is a sign of having a high-class status.
BEHAVIOUR LINKED TO CLASS
The majority of the respondents — 61 per cent — saw class only in material terms, while 3 per cent saw it only in behavioural terms.
The remaining 36 per cent considered both material and behaviour as factors in defining class status, with some drawing a link between personal qualities and material prosperity.
One 59-year-old male respondent described someone high class as a “well-to-do business owner, lives in a landed property, appreciates fine arts, is socially respected and responsible for others’ livelihoods”, as well as contributes to societal development.
Not everyone had positive sentiments about people who are high class. A 24-year-old male respondent said that such a person is “out of touch and locked within one’s ivory tower”, while a 21-year-old female respondent wrote, “18 year old but has a car. Eats at expensive restaurant. Flex every day on Instagram about their stuff. Generally useless, too.”
The researchers noted that even among those who had demonstrated resentment towards the wealthy, “no one took an explicitly ideological view” and few saw the survey as a chance to express “overtly political views” despite its open-ended nature.
Instead, there was a tendency among the Singapore respondents to associate the high class with positive traits, and the low class with negative traits, the researchers said.
Around 21 per cent of respondents described the high class as having positive behaviours, while about 4 per cent commented on negative behaviours.
Conversely, positive traits were used to describe the low class around 8 per cent of the time, while negative traits were used in around 28 per cent of the answers.
“It implies a relatively low degree of resentment toward the wealthy, and thus, that the majority of people are broadly content with the ways in which resources are distributed within society,” the Vox Dei researchers said, adding that such a view has important political implications.
It was also noteworthy that only two of the 538 respondents referred to foreign workers when asked to define low class, they added.
The researchers said: “Their apparent invisibility, despite recent attempts to raise the profile of issues surrounding (foreign workers’) rights and treatment, indicates that they are simply not factored in when most people think about Singapore society.”
BRANDS AFFECT PERCEPTION
The survey also found that respondents named a number of brands as a marker of class, though certain brands were associated with both high and low class.
For example, ride-sharing firm Grab, Japanese fashion brand Uniqlo, as well as luxury fashion houses Louis Vuitton and Gucci were seen as symbols of those who are both high and low class.
“The mentions of Louis Vuitton and Gucci would seem to indicate that the prevalence of forgeries on the market has — as the companies themselves feared — contributed to lowering the cachet of the originals,” the study said.
As one 30-year-old female respondent put it, the low class are people who have “grown up in small HDB (Housing and Development Board) flats, speak more Chinese or mother tongue language, own tasteless luxury or wannabe brands but fail to look good and put together”.
Dr Dodgson said that artificial intelligence was used to skim through the qualitative responses to generate quantitative statistics. The research technology, which is still being patented, would allow large-scale qualitative research to be feasible.
The study, which was commissioned by LKYSPP, came about as the researchers were intrigued by the controversy surrounding an social studies guidebook last year, Dr Dodgson said.
The unauthorised guidebook had described certain activities as those typically done by people from either low or high socioeconomic status, for instance, a person with a lower economic status would "speak Singlish, play football or basketball, and eat at hawker centres", while those of a higher economic status "speak formal English, play golf or tennis, and only eat at fine restaurants".
While Dr Dodgson acknowledged that the sample size was relatively low, with a 4.25 per cent margin of error, she told TODAY that the open-ended nature of the survey “gave greater nuance and accuracy” than multiple-choice questionnaires.
By NG JUN SEN
Published19 JULY, 2019
UPDATED 19 JULY, 201
SINGAPORE — What sets the “high class” and “low class” populations apart in Singapore are their jobs and income, housing and education levels, as well as whether they consume brands that are associated with either classes.
This was the finding from an opinion poll commissioned by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP).
What was "most interesting", researchers said, was that the problem of social inequality, while fretted about by the Government as a cause for concern, was “simply not central to citizens’ views of life in society”, when compared with other countries.
One of the study’s researchers, Dr Jennifer Dodgson, said: “While Singaporeans may like or dislike their own place on the social ladder, they do not necessarily see this as a problem inherent in the system itself.”
Titled Cars, Condos and Cai Png: Singaporeans’ Perceptions of Class, Wealth and Status, the study had looked at the open-ended responses of around 538 people who had taken part in an online poll in February.
It was conducted by Vox Dei, a research start-up based in the National University of Singapore and founded by Dr Dodgson and fellow LKYSPP researcher Pei Junjie.
In the questionnaire, respondents were asked to describe a person of high and low social class, as well as to define their own social class that they feel they belong.
The results, which were published on Thursday (July 18), showed that around 66 per cent of those polled believed that what determines class identity is income — either from jobs, capital gains, welfare, or the absence of it.
Other factors — in the order of how frequently they were mentioned — are: Housing, education, family, car, holidays, language, networks and domestic helpers.
For example, one’s family links may be seen as having an effect of adding to one’s wealth or poverty, the study said.
Around 9 per cent of respondents identified language as a signpost of class status.
Those who speak mainly English are seen as belonging to a higher class, particularly when they have a foreign accent.
Researchers also noted that respondents had indicated fluency in a language as a more important characteristic than the language being used, with two respondents saying that the ability to code-switch between English and Singlish is a sign of having a high-class status.
BEHAVIOUR LINKED TO CLASS
The majority of the respondents — 61 per cent — saw class only in material terms, while 3 per cent saw it only in behavioural terms.
The remaining 36 per cent considered both material and behaviour as factors in defining class status, with some drawing a link between personal qualities and material prosperity.
One 59-year-old male respondent described someone high class as a “well-to-do business owner, lives in a landed property, appreciates fine arts, is socially respected and responsible for others’ livelihoods”, as well as contributes to societal development.
Not everyone had positive sentiments about people who are high class. A 24-year-old male respondent said that such a person is “out of touch and locked within one’s ivory tower”, while a 21-year-old female respondent wrote, “18 year old but has a car. Eats at expensive restaurant. Flex every day on Instagram about their stuff. Generally useless, too.”
The researchers noted that even among those who had demonstrated resentment towards the wealthy, “no one took an explicitly ideological view” and few saw the survey as a chance to express “overtly political views” despite its open-ended nature.
Instead, there was a tendency among the Singapore respondents to associate the high class with positive traits, and the low class with negative traits, the researchers said.
Around 21 per cent of respondents described the high class as having positive behaviours, while about 4 per cent commented on negative behaviours.
Conversely, positive traits were used to describe the low class around 8 per cent of the time, while negative traits were used in around 28 per cent of the answers.
“It implies a relatively low degree of resentment toward the wealthy, and thus, that the majority of people are broadly content with the ways in which resources are distributed within society,” the Vox Dei researchers said, adding that such a view has important political implications.
It was also noteworthy that only two of the 538 respondents referred to foreign workers when asked to define low class, they added.
The researchers said: “Their apparent invisibility, despite recent attempts to raise the profile of issues surrounding (foreign workers’) rights and treatment, indicates that they are simply not factored in when most people think about Singapore society.”
BRANDS AFFECT PERCEPTION
The survey also found that respondents named a number of brands as a marker of class, though certain brands were associated with both high and low class.
For example, ride-sharing firm Grab, Japanese fashion brand Uniqlo, as well as luxury fashion houses Louis Vuitton and Gucci were seen as symbols of those who are both high and low class.
“The mentions of Louis Vuitton and Gucci would seem to indicate that the prevalence of forgeries on the market has — as the companies themselves feared — contributed to lowering the cachet of the originals,” the study said.
As one 30-year-old female respondent put it, the low class are people who have “grown up in small HDB (Housing and Development Board) flats, speak more Chinese or mother tongue language, own tasteless luxury or wannabe brands but fail to look good and put together”.
Dr Dodgson said that artificial intelligence was used to skim through the qualitative responses to generate quantitative statistics. The research technology, which is still being patented, would allow large-scale qualitative research to be feasible.
The study, which was commissioned by LKYSPP, came about as the researchers were intrigued by the controversy surrounding an social studies guidebook last year, Dr Dodgson said.
The unauthorised guidebook had described certain activities as those typically done by people from either low or high socioeconomic status, for instance, a person with a lower economic status would "speak Singlish, play football or basketball, and eat at hawker centres", while those of a higher economic status "speak formal English, play golf or tennis, and only eat at fine restaurants".
While Dr Dodgson acknowledged that the sample size was relatively low, with a 4.25 per cent margin of error, she told TODAY that the open-ended nature of the survey “gave greater nuance and accuracy” than multiple-choice questionnaires.
