


Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
It is the study done by health sociologist Whitehall.
Typology: Essays (university)
1 / 4
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
The name 'Whitehall' originates from the first Whitehall study of 18,000 men in the Civil Service, set up in 1967. The first Whitehall study showed that men in the lowest employment grades were much more likely to die prematurely than men in the highest grades. The Whitehall II study was set up to determine what underlies this grade or social gradient in death and disease and to include women.
The Whitehall II study has shown evidence that the way work is organised, the work climate, social influences outside work, influences from early life, in addition to [health behaviours] all contribute to the social gradient in health. These lead to the uncomfortable (for some) finding that inequalities in health cannot be divorced from inequalities in society. The inescapable conclusion is that to address inequalities in health it is necessary both to understand how social organisation affects health and to find ways to improve the conditions in which people work and live.
While it is common for demands to increase as the occupational hierarchy is ascended, degree of control over work decreases with lower position. Whitehall II provides ample documentation of this: the lower the grade of employment, the less control over work. This combination of imbalance between demands and control predicted a range of illnesses. The evidence from Whitehall II suggested that low control was especially important. People in jobs characterised by low control had higher rates of sickness absence, of mental illness, of heart disease and pain in the lower back.
The study found that good levels of work social supports had a protective effect on mental health and reduced the risk of spells of sickness absence. Lack of support from supervisors and unclear or inconsistent information was associated with a twofold increased risk of poor general mental health. Similarly, a lack of support from colleagues was also associated with worse mental health.
Crucial to all social relationships is a sense of reciprocity. One way relationships are likely to be a source of stress and anything that is a source of stress has the possibility of increasing rates of illness. Reward is conceived and measured in three different ways; esteem, career opportunities including job security and promotion prospects, and financial remuneration. The Whitehall II Study examined the independent impacts of income and wealth on illness. Income, of course, is highly correlated with employment grade, so much so that once employment grade was taken into account, income made no additional contribution to predicting illness. There was, however, a continued importance of wealth in predicting illness. Wealth represents a balance of income and expenditure over the whole of life and includes contributions from previous generations. The association between wealth and health may, therefore, represent the effect of accumulation of material and psychosocial factors on health. In addition, wealth will relate to financial security and prospects for the future, which in turn are likely to have an impact on rates of illness.
The study found similar patterns of a social gradient in health when household income or wealth was used, instead of Civil Service employment grade, to measure social status. This suggests that, in addition to work related factors, factors related to family or home life may also contribute to the social gradient in health. Similar to the results about the negative effect of having low control at work on heart disease, we found that women who reported having low control at home had higher risks of heart disease. In contrast, among men, having low control at home was not a predictor of heart disease. Having control over one’s life thus appears to be important for health, although there may be differences between men and women in terms of control over work or home life. Having financial problems, and caring for dependent children and elderly relatives predicted low control at home.
For more see:
WORK STRESS AND HEALTH: the Whitehall II study http://www.ucl.ac.uk/whitehallII/pdf/Whitehallbooklet_1_.pdf
The Life Scientific – Sir Michael Marmot http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b016ld4q
The Whitehall Study Site http://www.ucl.ac.uk/whitehallII/