What's New

More In
Psychology Of Money

When It Comes to Social Skills, the Rich Are Poor

Laura Shin
Laura Shin
Posted on Mar 20, 2012

Most of us, at one point or another, have wished that we were rich.

Maybe we wished we didn’t have to worry about money … or that we could buy whatever we liked  … or that we could be free to pursue our passions … or (fill in your answer here).

And, yes, the rich (or, at least, the very rich) have money and can do all those things.

But at LearnVest we know money doesn’t buy everything. And now, new research proves it.

Case in point: empathy.

It turns out that the wealthier you are, the less adept you are at reading people’s emotions.

Three different experiments showed that people with more education, money and social status were less skilled at detecting emotions in pictures of faces and in face-to-face interactions during simulated job interviews.

“It was across gender, across ethnic backgrounds,” one of the researchers, Michael Kraus, at the University of California, San Francisco, told Live Science. “You really see lower-class individuals showing this greater empathic accuracy in the study … They’re vigilant of other people’s need, and they respond when they see it.”

So, we’re all here at LearnVest to gain control of our finances. Does this mean the cost of our wealth will be poor social lives?

How They Measured Empathy

Of all the things that scientists could measure, social skill seems like one of the more nebulous ones. But three separate experiments showed the same effect.

The three researchers—Kraus, plus Stéphane Côté, at the University of Toronto, and Dacher Keltner, at the University of California, Berkeley—used educational attainment and self-reported identification of family socioeconomic status to determine the social class of the study subjects.

  • The first experiment asked 200 participants, who were university employees ranging from administrative support to managers, to look at photos of faces and identify the emotions expressed in them. The upper-class subjects performed less well.
  • The second study asked 106 students to take part in fake job interviews in which they rated their own emotions as well as those of their partner. Again, the students of a higher socioeconomic status were worse at reading their partner’s expressions.
  • The third study showed an unusual effect: The researchers asked half of the 81 students to think about someone extraordinarily wealthy, such as Bill Gates. The other half of the students were asked to think about someone destitute. The students then were asked to judge the emotions portrayed in photographs of eyes. It turns out that subjects who just thought about a wealthy individual—which mentally tricked them into placing themselves lower on the socioeconomic ladder—performed 6% better than those who had visualized a poor person. So even just thinking of yourself as having lower status makes you more empathetic.

These findings correlate with earlier research showing that the poor give almost 30% more of their income than the middle-class and wealthy, and that wealthier people are ruder in conversation than poorer people and that they are even more unethical. (Hear why one woman chooses to give 10% of her salary to charity every year.)

Rich Friends, Poor Friends?

Wealthy or not, some friends can be toxic for your money. Divulge the most frustrating (or funniest) characters in your life in LV Discussions. SHARE

Why the Rich Are So Poor at Reading Faces

So, there’s no silver bullet answer here. But there is a good theory.

What it may boil down to is this: When people in the lower classes need help, they can’t just hire it. They need to rely on favors from neighbors, relatives and friends in order to get a ride to work or to find childcare for the day. So, the authors suggest, they are more attuned to the feelings of others, and develop social skills that help grease the wheels.

The wealthy, on the other hand, don’t develop those skills. “Upper-class people, in spite of all of their advantages, suffer empathy deficits,” Dr. Keltner told The New York Times.

How You Can Build Empathy and Wealth

This is the thing, though. Wealth and empathy aren’t mutually exclusive, and, being empathic can actually earn you more.

In fact, studies show that the more you can relate to people, the likelier you are to get ahead. A report by the Center for Creative Leadership stated that managers who demonstrate more empathy toward their direct reports are rated more highly in job performance by their bosses.

You can actively work on improving your empathy skills by

  • purposely giving time and attention to others
  • being an “active listener” who paraphrases what you hear from others
  • putting yourself into other people’s shoes to understand their point of view

So, don’t fear that pumping up your savings account or squirreling away money in your retirement account is going to mean you start missing social cues. Or that you have to be oblivious to others to get ahead.

There is always the option to be wealthy and warm.

More From LearnVest

If just reading this is making you feel more empathy, we’ve got an idea for you: Give to women.
Speaking of empathy, we’re on the fence about “poor” Wall Street bankers who are getting smaller bonuses.
Oh dear. It turns out the wealthy are not only less empathetic—they are also more unethical.

Posted in: , , ,
  • Anonymous

    I’m highly suspicious of these studies. Obviously, I’d need to look at them more closely, but the part that bothers me is that they allowed people to self report their socio-economic status. People consistently rate themselves wrong,  in study after study. The bias is toward the middle class… wealthy people see themselves as middle class, underestimating their wealth, while the poor also see themselves as middle class, overestimating their wealth. I’d be interested in knowing what guidelines they gave the study participants to help them determine their status. 

    • http://www.bmwysp.deviantart.com Jennifer Megan Varnadore

      While that may be true…I wouldn’t. I’m broke as broke could be. Ha ha.

  • Sarah

    The theory of poor people “needing” better social skills to get by probably has some truth to it, but I think there is something else at work too. When you go through something painful, you develop more compassion for others because you know how hard it can be. If you’ve gone through a period of grief, for example, you develop greater empathy for others dealing with depression or loss. Their pain becomes much more real to you. I think it’s also true of finances. Being broke helps you understand other people’s vulnerabilities much more deeply.

    • Lori Gunton

      I think you hit the nail on the head, I totally agree with your view :) )

  • Jillian

    I feel like LearnVest is trying to start some sort of class warfare — so much hate-mongering towards the evil, evil wealthy people!

    • http://www.bmwysp.deviantart.com Jennifer Megan Varnadore

      I don’t think that’s necessarily true. They aren’t saying that more wealthy people are “evil” or anything of the sort. I think that when you don’t have to worry as much about things in your life you become more complacent, because you don’t have that emotional attachment to what you’re going through anymore. You feel more when you have to worry more. When you go through trouble, you know you need to get help, or do something about it, or else you will be stuck in that situation. As our Pastor would put it in a similar terms just more religiously than financially…”We never need Jesus unless we are in trouble.” We don’t feel with others either if we are more complacent about our own lives.

    • pamorama

      This response lacks content. There was no hate-mongering. Funny how indignant folks become when a study like this calls into question the elite. Yet the response to the Occupy movement and other attempts to expose or at least interrogate systemic inequalities that privilege one class over another receive meritless responses like “get a job,” or the vulgar champagne-drinking binge on the balcony above the marchers. This article has nothing to do with “hate,” and everything to do with reminding us ALL that there are always those who need our help and as part of a social contract, we care for those around us as best we can (and should).

  • C. Michael McAuley

    LearnVest- what I appreciate about your team is that you generally seek to provide articles that engage your readers in constructive conversation.  I enjoy that we have a forum where all ideas are welcomed and respected.  But, here’s the thing.

    This isn’t just a divisive line between wealthy and less fortunate, this is a divisive line that separates WOMEN from other WOMEN.  We have been working our tails off (as have the women who’ve paved the way before us) to get into board rooms, into C-level positions, and to have equal earnings with men….

    …So we’re just going to gang up on the women who’ve worked hard to narrow that gap?   

    Laura, I read your LV bio and it looks like you’re quite an accomplished writer.  It surprises me that you chose to write something like this, as it shows wealthy folks in a very negative standpoint.  This does not read as independent journalism.  Your two lines at the end are not powerful enough to corral your argument around in a completely different direction.  

    I don’t see why an accomplished woman like yourself would seek to hurt the reputation of other women who’ve been helping to pave the same road you’ve been paving for us younger women.  Laura, I believe you have more to offer us. 

    I’m disappointed you ran this, LearnVest.  We should not be about ganging up on anyone, especially women.

    • Anonymous

      Hi C. Michael,

      Thanks for your comment. We did not intend in any way to gang up on anyone. Quite the opposite. The conclusions of the article are those of the scientists running the studies, not our own. The reason we thought the studies were of interest to our readers is that empathy and lack of empathy aren’t ingrained characteristics — anyone can be born into any socioeconomic class, so these are essentially learned traits. And of course there will be exceptions to both of those rules. 

      Our take is that anyone who reads this article will now be aware of the human tendency for people who perceive themselves to be higher on the socioeconomic ladder to be less empathetic, and vice versa. And people who are aware of that can proactively work on being more empathetic, no matter their socioeconomic class.  

      Laura

    • pamorama

      I actually very much disagree with your assessment. This is an op-ed piece citing a study. The division simply IS, at least according to this study. I resent the implication that all wealthy people have worked hard to achieve their wealth (you presume that the wealthy people studied were all top-level, high-performing executives), as well as the notion that discussing a removal from empathy (no matter what the cause) shouldn’t occur because it can somehow divide us. Empathy and compassion seem to be often-mocked character traits in our current social landscape. It bears examination. There are a good number of wealthy folk who are extremely giving, but more and more we hear of studies that demonstrate how giving occurs far more generously in the other socio-economic spheres.

      If we don’t write about this, examine it and consider how it affects society as a whole, we lose our humanity in my opinion. I do not seek (as a writer) to select topics with an eye to outcome, but by what moves me and what is relevant to a particular publication. Learnvest has set an example by not being afraid to call into question the effects of increased (or decreased) wealth, and by reminding us that wealth and its accumulation should accompany a sense of philanthropy, gratitude and the knowledge that there are many people out here working damn hard in industries that do not reap justified financial rewards.

  • Karen

    It’s a logical conclusion.  The less you have to worry about money, the less you need to worry about others for help.  It’s not intentional, you just become out of tune or out of practice.  Or maybe you never were in tune, ie, book smart but no common sense.  The level of focus you need to stay rich would take most of your time, maybe to a point of numbing your other senses.