strength of the status maintenance motive

Abstract

This instrument is designed to measure the parental motivation for intergenerational social status maintenance, a key concept in sociological theories of educational inequality. The scale consists of four items focusing on two distinct components of the status maintenance motive: a) the subjective importance placed on maintaining family status across generations, and b) the perceived efficacy of various German school-leaving qualifications (Hauptschulabschluss, Realschulabschluss, and Abitur) in achieving this goal. Item 1, measuring the strength of the status maintenance motive, is adapted from a previous study by Richard Fauser (1985). The remaining three items, measuring perceived efficacy, were newly constructed for this instrument. The instrument was validated using data from 992 parents of primary school children in Germany, demonstrating criterion validity by linking perceived educational efficacy to parental socioeconomic status and realistic educational aspirations.

Keywords

Socio-economic status, aptitude, education, status maintenance motive, educational pathways, social inequality, parental aspirations, Germany.

Authors

Volker Stocké, Richard Fauser

Purpose

The primary purpose of this scale is the empirical analysis of educational decisions made by parents, particularly during the critical transition phase from primary school to secondary education within the German school system. The instrument was developed as part of the research project “Educational Aspirations, Reference Groups, and Educational Decisions” (Sonderforschungsbereich 504) at the University of Mannheim.

Specifically, the scale seeks to operationalize and explain the significant influence of the family’s social background on these educational choices. By separating the status maintenance motive into two measurable components—the subjective strength of the motive and the perceived suitability of specific school certificates—the instrument aims to provide a robust tool for testing theoretical models, such as those proposed by Boudon (1974) and Breen & Goldthorpe (1997), regarding the secondary effects of social status on educational outcomes.

Construct

The psychological construct measured is the Status Maintenance Motive (Statuserhaltsmotiv). This motive posits that parents, regardless of their current social standing, are primarily driven by the goal of ensuring their children achieve at least the same social status as themselves, thereby preventing intergenerational status degradation. This framework highlights an asymmetry in decision-making, where the avoidance of status loss is a stronger motivator than the pursuit of status gain, aligning conceptually with Prospect Theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979).

The scale operationalizes the Status Maintenance Motive through two key sub-components: 1) the strength of the motive, defined by the subjective importance parents assign to avoiding a status loss for their child; and 2) the perceived suitability (efficacy) of educational certificates, defined by the subjective probability that a child obtaining a specific German school-leaving qualification (Hauptschulabschluss, Realschulabschluss, or Abitur) will result in maintaining or exceeding the parental occupational status.

Validity

Criterion validity evidence supports the utility of the instrument. Analyses demonstrated that the perceived suitability of school certificates for maintaining family status varied significantly based on parental social status, measured via three indicators: Treiman Occupational Prestige (SIOPS), parental educational attainment, and Goldthorpe class membership (EGP).

• Differential Assessment by Status: Lower educational qualifications (e.g., Hauptschulabschluss) were rated as less suitable for status maintenance by parents of higher socioeconomic status (SES) compared to those of lower SES. Conversely, the highest qualification (Abitur) was perceived as highly likely to secure status across all status groups.
• Incentive Differentials: Higher-status families perceived significantly greater differences in the status-securing potential between adjacent educational levels (e.g., Abitur vs. Realschulabschluss) than lower-status families. This outcome confirms the theoretical expectation that higher-status parents experience stronger perceived incentives for investing in higher educational paths for their children.
• Predictive Validity (Realistic Aspirations): The scale components significantly predicted parents’ realistic educational aspirations for their children, even when controlling for objective factors (e.g., family income, children’s objective and subjective academic performance). Specifically, a stronger Status Maintenance Motive and a higher perceived relative suitability of superior qualifications positively correlated with the parents anticipating a higher school-leaving certificate (Realschulabschluss over Hauptschulabschluss, and Abitur over Realschulabschluss).

Reliability

No traditional reliability coefficients (e.g., Cronbach’s Alpha) were explicitly reported for the overall scale or its subcomponents in the available documentation. However, item analysis conducted via Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on the three items measuring the perceived suitability of educational certificates suggests unidimensionality for this subscale.

• PCA Results: The first component explained 52.4% of the observed variance across the three suitability items.
• Factor Loadings: The perceived suitability of the Hauptschulabschluss (.80) and Realschulabschluss (.89) were highly associated with this component, while the loading for the Abitur (.37) was comparatively weak, suggesting that while the construct is largely unidimensional, the Abitur item functions somewhat differently, likely due to its near-universal acceptance as a status-securing qualification across all SES groups.

Factor Analysis

Factor analysis was performed on the three items assessing the perceived suitability of school certificates for status maintenance using Principal Component Analysis (PCA).

• Method: Principal Component Analysis (PCA).

• Result: The analysis indicated a single dominant component for the three suitability items, explaining 52.4% of the variance (Eigenvalue: 1.57).

• Component Loadings (F1) and Communalities (KO):

  Item	F1	KO
  1. Eignung Hauptschulabschluss	.80	.65
  2. Eignung Realschulabschluss	.89	.79
  3. Eignung Abitur	.37	.13

• Interpretation: The high loadings for the Hauptschulabschluss and Realschulabschluss suggest they are strong indicators of the perceived suitability component. The low loading for the Abitur item (.37) suggests it contributes less to the common variance, likely because its high status-securing probability is uniformly perceived across socioeconomic groups, reducing its differentiating power within this dimension.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire (Attitudinal Scale)

Format: 4 items total. Item 1 uses a 7-point rating scale measuring the strength of the motive. Items 2-4 use a separate 7-point rating scale measuring perceived probability/suitability.

Language Available: German (deutsch)

Population Group: Parents (specifically parents of primary school children).

Age Group: Adults (Parents, average age 39.0).

Population Details: The validation sample included N = 992 parents of second-grade primary school students in the Ludwigshafen, Frankenthal, Speyer, and Rhein-Pfalz districts of Germany, surveyed in 2003. The sample excluded first-generation migrant parents. The majority of respondents were female (93.0%) and classified as employees/civil servants (75.9%).

Test Methodology: Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI). The scale items were administered during the first third of the interview, which lasted approximately 70 minutes.

Keywords

Social status, intergenerational mobility, educational aspirations, Goldthorpe class, Abitur, German school system, perceived probability, motivation, vocational prestige, survey methodology.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected] (Dr. Volker Stocké)

Correspondence Address: Dr. Volker Stocké, University of Bamberg (based on email domain).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The instrument was developed as part of the Special Research Center 504 (Sonderforschungsbereich 504) at the University of Mannheim. The data used for validation were collected in 2003. The instrument is documented in the data archives accessible via the following digital object identifiers (DOIs): http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.12660 and http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.12925.

Reference’s

• Astone, N. M., & McLanahan, S. S. (1994). Family structure, parental practices and high school completion. American Sociological Review, 59(3), 309-320.
• Becker, R. (2000). Die Bedeutung von Bildungserträgen und Statuserhaltungsmotiven für die Primäreffekte der sozialen Herkunft. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 29(3), 163-181.
• Becker, R. (2003). Educational expansion and persistence of the effects of social origin in Germany. European Sociological Review, 19(1), 1-21.
• Biblarz, T. J., & Raftery, A. E. (1999). Family structure, educational attainment, and socioeconomic success: Rethinking the “pathology of matriarchy.” American Journal of Sociology, 105(2), 321-365.
• Boudon, R. (1974). Education, opportunity, and social inequality: Changing prospects in Western society. New York: Wiley.
• Breen, R. (2001). A multi-layered explanation for persistent inequality in education. In R. Breen (Ed.), Social mobility in Europe (pp. 21-46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Breen, R., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (1997). Explaining educational differentials: Towards a formal rational action theory. Rationality and Society, 9(3), 275-305.
• Breen, R., & Yaish, M. (forthcoming). Social class and education in Israel. European Sociological Review.
• De Graaf, P. M. (1986). The impact of the family on the educational attainment of children in the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Sociology, 22(1), 1-17.
• Downey, D. B. (1995). When children in the same family are in different schools: Parental satisfaction and involvement. Sociology of Education, 68(4), 284-303.
• Duncan, G. J. (1994). Families and neighbors as sources of inequality in educational attainment. American Journal of Sociology, 100(2), 365-373.
• Duncan, G. J., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Klebanov, P. K. (1994). Economic deprivation and early childhood development. Child Development, 65(2), 296-318.
• Erikson, R., & Goldthorpe, J. H. (1992). The constant flux: A study of class mobility in industrial societies. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Erikson, R., & Jonsson, J. O. (1996). Explaining class inequality in education: The Swedish test case. In R. Erikson & J. O. Jonsson (Eds.), Can education compensate? Balancing equality and efficiency in Swedish schools (pp. 25-61). London: Falmer Press.
• Esser, H. (1999). Soziologie: Spezielle Grundlagen, Band 6: Sinn und Kausalität. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
• Evans, M. D. R., & Schwab, J. J. (1995). School experiences, academic ability, and educational attainment. Sociology of Education, 68(3), 173-191.
• Fauser, R. (1985). Bildungsverläufe in Arbeiterfamilien. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz.
• Fejgin, N. (1995). Factors contributing to the academic excellence of American Jewish and Asian students. Sociology of Education, 68(1), 18-31.
• Ganzach, Y. (2000). Parents’ education, children’s academic achievement, and children’s occupational expectations. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(1), 168-181.
• Goldthorpe, J. H. (1996). Class analysis and the reorientation of comparative sociology. Comparative Social Research, 15, 151-174.
• Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The economics of school quality. Economics of Education Review, 11(3), 195-207.
• Haveman, R., & Wolfe, B. (1995). The determinants of children’s attainments: A review of methods and findings. Journal of Economic Literature, 33(4), 1829-1878.
• Helmke, A., Schneider, W., & Weinert, F. E. (Eds.). (2002). Entwicklung und Förderung der Lernkompetenz in der Grundschule. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
• Ingenkamp, K. (1996). Bildungsberatungstest für 3. und 4. Klassen. Weinheim: Beltz.
• International Labour Office. (1990). International Standard Classification of Occupations: ISCO-88. Geneva: ILO.
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
• Kalmijn, M. (1994). Intergenerational reproduction of social inequality: New evidence from the Netherlands. Social Forces, 72(4), 1017-1036.
• Kristen, C. (1999). Bildungsentscheidungen und soziale Ungleichheit: Eine empirische Untersuchung am Beispiel des Übergangs von der Grundschule in die Sekundarstufe I. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.
• Light, A., & Strayer, W. E. (2000). The effect of education on job search outcomes. Journal of Labor Economics, 18(2), 346-369.
• Myers, D. E., Milne, A. M., Baker, D. P., & Ginsberg, A. (1987). The test score decline: Has it stopped? Educational Researcher, 16(5), 18-24.
• Need, A., & De Jong, E. (2000). Educational aspirations, parental involvement and school achievement of primary school children in the Netherlands. Educational Research and Evaluation, 6(1), 31-59.
• Parcel, T. L., & Dufur, M. J. (2001). Capitalizing on skill: Educational stratification in a rural industrial economy. Social Forces, 79(3), 859-892.
• Rumberger, R. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of students and schools. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 583-625.
• Shavit, Y., & Kraus, V. (1990). Educational transitions in Israel: A test of the status attainment model. Sociology of Education, 63(4), 269-281.
• Steelman, L. C., & Mercy, J. A. (1983). The reproduction of inequality? A review of the empirical literature on the causes and consequences of family size. Sociology of Education, 56(2), 85-94.
• Treiman, D. J. (1977). Occupational prestige in comparative perspective. New York: Academic Press.
• Wilson, W. J. (2001). The role of the neighborhood in the stratification process. In J. T. Mortimer, M. J. Shanahan, & J. T. Mortimer (Eds.), Handbook of the sociology of education (pp. 165-179). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
• Wojtkiewicz, R. A. (1993). Simplicity and complexity in the effects of parental structure on high school graduation. Demography, 30(4), 701-720.

Items of the strength of the status maintenance motive

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Antwortvorgaben

Stärke Statuserhaltsmotiv: 7-stufige Ratingskala mit Benennung der Endpole: 1 = gar nicht stören und 7 = sehr stören.

Wahrgenommene Eignung der Abschlüsse zum Statuserhalt: 7-stufige Ratingskalen mit Benennung der Endpole: 1 = ausgeschlossen und 7 = ganz sicher.