Come and education. These analyses revealed that, while controlling for SSS, income, and 
education, perceived stress mediated the relations AVE8062A manufacturer between PRD and global physical health (95 BCa CI of -0.27 and -0.12; total effect = -0.24; indirect effect = -0.19, SE = 0.04), and physical4 Three participants provided years of education that were not possible given their reported age. We recoded these values to the most post-16 years of education they could have achieved given their age. The results are virtually identical if we leave these values as reported or remove these participants entirely. We used mean replacement for two additional participants who did not provide values for education, which again made virtually no difference to the results (vs. removing them list-wise).Objective socioeconomic statusWe measured annual household 
get ONO4059 income using an 18-point ordinal scale with values ranging from 1 (less than ?000) to 18 (?5,001 and above), with each option spanning ?999 (M = 6.87, SD = 4.17). Because the measure of educational attainmentFrontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.orgSeptember 2015 | Volume 6 | ArticleCallan et al.Relative deprivationTABLE 5 | Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for measures in Study 3. Measures 1. SSS 2. PRDS 3. Income 4. Education 5. Perceived stress 6. Physical complaints 7. Global physical health M (SD) 5.00 (1.67) 3.04 (1.00) 6.87 (4.17) 4.82 (2.91) 2.85 (0.77) 2.15 (0.62) 4.64 (1.35) 1 ?-0.43** 0.38** 0.17** -0.24** -0.08 0.29** (0.82) -0.26** -0.04 0.49** 0.23** -0.28**?-0.05 -0.16** -0.17** 0.13*?-0.01 -0.06 0.07 (0.91) 0.46** -0.37** (0.91) -0.43**?SSS, Subjective Socioeconomic Status; PRDS, Personal Relative Deprivation Scale. When applicable, alpha reliabilities are presented along the diagonal. Higher values indicate more of each construct. *p < 0.05. **p < 0.01.health complaints (95 BCa CI of 0.10 and 0.18; total effect = 0.13; indirect effect = 0.14, SE = 0.02). Similar analyses with SSS controlling for PRD, income, and education revealed no significant indirect effects through perceived stress for either global physical health (95 BCa CI of -0.02 and 0.04; total effect = 0.18; indirect effect = 0.01, SE = 0.01) or physical health complaints (95 BCa CI of -0.02 and 0.02; total effect = 0.02; indirect effect = -0.01, SE = 0.01).SSS and PRDSParticipants completed the SES ladder measure as in Studies 1 and 2. For the measure of PRD, participants completed a single-item from Callan et al.'s (2011) PRDS: "When I compare what I have with what others like me have, I realize that I am quite well off," which was rated on a scale from 1 (very strongly disagree) to 10 (very strongly agree). We selected this item because, unlike other items from the larger PRDS (but like the SSS measure), it does not ask participants to rate how they feel about their relative standing. Crucially, however, the comparative target is "others like me" vs. the national population of the USA as for the SSS measure. To be consistent with the interpretation of the PRDS in Studies 1?, we reverse scored this item so that higher values indicate more PRD. As before, higher values for the SSS measure indicate a higher subjective relative standing.StudyDespite the apparent superiority of PRD over SSS in predicting self-rated mental and physical health across Studies 1?, one issue is that our findings might simply reflect differences in the psychometric properties of the measures we used. All else being equal, the internal reli.Come and education. These analyses revealed that, while controlling for SSS, income, and education, perceived stress mediated the relations between PRD and global physical health (95 BCa CI of -0.27 and -0.12; total effect = -0.24; indirect effect = -0.19, SE = 0.04), and physical4 Three participants provided years of education that were not possible given their reported age. We recoded these values to the most post-16 years of education they could have achieved given their age. The results are virtually identical if we leave these values as reported or remove these participants entirely. We used mean replacement for two additional participants who did not provide values for education, which again made virtually no difference to the results (vs. removing them list-wise).Objective socioeconomic statusWe measured annual household income using an 18-point ordinal scale with values ranging from 1 (less than ?000) to 18 (?5,001 and above), with each option spanning ?999 (M = 6.87, SD = 4.17). Because the measure of educational attainmentFrontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.orgSeptember 2015 | Volume 6 | ArticleCallan et al.Relative deprivationTABLE 5 | Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for measures in Study 3. Measures 1. SSS 2. PRDS 3. Income 4. Education 5. Perceived stress 6. Physical complaints 7. Global physical health M (SD) 5.00 (1.67) 3.04 (1.00) 6.87 (4.17) 4.82 (2.91) 2.85 (0.77) 2.15 (0.62) 4.64 (1.35) 1 ?-0.43** 0.38** 0.17** -0.24** -0.08 0.29** (0.82) -0.26** -0.04 0.49** 0.23** -0.28**?-0.05 -0.16** -0.17** 0.13*?-0.01 -0.06 0.07 (0.91) 0.46** -0.37** (0.91) -0.43**?SSS, Subjective Socioeconomic Status; PRDS, Personal Relative Deprivation Scale. When applicable, alpha reliabilities are presented along the diagonal. Higher values indicate more of each construct. *p < 0.05. **p < 0.01.health complaints (95 BCa CI of 0.10 and 0.18; total effect = 0.13; indirect effect = 0.14, SE = 0.02). Similar analyses with SSS controlling for PRD, income, and education revealed no significant indirect effects through perceived stress for either global physical health (95 BCa CI of -0.02 and 0.04; total effect = 0.18; indirect effect = 0.01, SE = 0.01) or physical health complaints (95 BCa CI of -0.02 and 0.02; total effect = 0.02; indirect effect = -0.01, SE = 0.01).SSS and PRDSParticipants completed the SES ladder measure as in Studies 1 and 2. For the measure of PRD, participants completed a single-item from Callan et al.'s (2011) PRDS: "When I compare what I have with what others like me have, I realize that I am quite well off," which was rated on a scale from 1 (very strongly disagree) to 10 (very strongly agree). We selected this item because, unlike other items from the larger PRDS (but like the SSS measure), it does not ask participants to rate how they feel about their relative standing. Crucially, however, the comparative target is "others like me" vs. the national population of the USA as for the SSS measure. To be consistent with the interpretation of the PRDS in Studies 1?, we reverse scored this item so that higher values indicate more PRD. As before, higher values for the SSS measure indicate a higher subjective relative standing.StudyDespite the apparent superiority of PRD over SSS in predicting self-rated mental and physical health across Studies 1?, one issue is that our findings might simply reflect differences in the psychometric properties of the measures we used. All else being equal, the internal reli.
