OBJECTIVES: To determine the association between area and individual measures of social disadvantage and infant health in the United Kingdom (UK). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analyses. DATA SOURCES: 26 databases and web sites, reference lists, experts in the field and hand-searching. STUDY SELECTION: 36 prospective and retrospective observational studies with socio-economic data and health outcomes for infants in the UK, published from 1994 to May 2011. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality of the studies and abstracted data. Where possible, study outcomes were reported as odds ratios for the highest versus the lowest deprivation quintile. RESULTS: In relation to the highest versus lowest area deprivation quintiles the odds of adverse birth outcomes were 1.81 (1.71 to 1.92) for low birth weight, 1.67 (1.42 to 1.96) for premature birth and 1.54 (1.39 to 1.72) for still birth. For infant mortality rates the odds ratios were 1.72 (1.37 to 2.15) overall, 1.61 (1.08 to 2.39) for neonatal and 2.31 (2.03 to 2.64) for post-neonatal mortality. For lowest versus highest social class, the odds were 1.79 (1.71 to 1.92) for premature birth, 1.52 (1.44 to 1.61) for overall infant mortality, 1.42 (1.33 to1.51) for neonatal and 1.69 (1.53 to 1.87) for post-neonatal mortality. There are similar patterns for other infant health outcomes with the possible exception of failure to thrive, where there is no clear association. CONCLUSIONS: This review quantifies the influence of social disadvantage on infant outcomes in the UK. The magnitude of effect is similar across a range of area and individual deprivation measures and birth and mortality outcomes. Further research should explore the factors that are more proximal to mothers and infants, to help throw light on the most appropriate times to provide support and the form(s) that this support should take.

The aim of the Relative Deprivation and Social Justice study was to examine social inequality in twentieth-century England, touching on such topics as party preference and self-rated social class. The dataset held by the Archive was originally compiled from interview schedules lent by W.G. Runciman, used for his well-known study reported in: Runciman, W.G. (1972) Relative Deprivation and Social Justice, Pelican Books.

An exercise based on data from this survey has been developed by the Sociology Department at the University of Surrey (see file 'deprived.sav'). The exercise is included in the user guide and is a fairly detailed example of the elaboration of a bivariate relation through the introduction of a 'control' variable. A description of a simple data transformation is provided. In addition, there is a description of the main aspects of SPSS usage.

In 2024, the average annual full-time salary for men in the United Kingdom was 40,035 British pounds, compared with 34,000 pounds for women, a difference of just over 6,000 pounds. In the previous year, men earned an average annual salary of 37,382, compared with women who earned 31,672.

The Poverty and Social Exclusion Living Standards Survey provided crucial information about the living standards experienced by UK households, with particular interest in issues of income inequality, poverty and social exclusion. Survey fieldwork was conducted separately in Great Britain (England, Scotland, Wales) and Northern Ireland. In Great Britain the study was conducted by the NatCen Social Research on behalf of the University of Bristol. In Northern Ireland the study was conducted by Central Survey Unit (CSU) of the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) on behalf of Queen's University Belfast.

The International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) is a continuous programme of cross-national collaboration running annual surveys on topics important for the social sciences. The programme started in 1984 with four founding members - Australia, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States – and has now grown to almost 50 member countries from all over the world. As the surveys are designed for replication, they can be used for both, cross-national and cross-time comparisons. Each ISSP module focuses on a specific topic, which is repeated in regular time intervals. Please, consult the documentation for details on how the national ISSP surveys are fielded. The present study focuses on questions about social inequality.
The release of the cumulated ISSP ´Social Inequality´ modules for the years 1987, 1992, 1999 and 2009 consists of two separate datasets: ZA5890 and ZA5891. This documentation deals with the main dataset ZA5890. It contains all the cumulated variables, while the supplementary data file ZA5961 contains those variables that could not be cumulated for various reasons. However, they can be matched easily to the cumulated file if necessary. A comprehensive overview on the contents, the structure and basic coding rules of both data files can be found in the following guide:

Guide for the ISSP ´Social Inequality´ cumulation of the years 1987,1992, 1999 and 2009

Social Inequality I-IV:

Importance of social background and other factors as prerequisites for personal success in society (wealthy family, well-educated parents, good education, ambitions, natural ability, hard work, knowing the right people, political connections, person´s race and religion, the part of a country a person comes from, gender and political beliefs); chances to increase personal standard of living (social mobility); corruption as criteria for social mobility; importance of differentiated payment; higher payment with acceptance of increased responsibility; higher payment as incentive for additional qualification of workers; avoidability of inequality of society; increased income expectation as motivation for taking up studies; good profits for entrepreneurs as best prerequisite for increase in general standard of living; insufficient solidarity of the average population as reason for the persistence of social inequalities; opinion about own salary: actual occupational earning is adequate; income differences are too large in the respondent´s country; responsibility of government to reduce income differences; government should provide chances for poor children to go to university; jobs for everyone who wants one; government should provide a decent living standard for the unemployed and spend less on benefits for poor people; demand for basic income for all; opinion on taxes for people with high incomes; judgement on total taxation for recipients of high, middle and low incomes; justification of better medical supply and better education for richer people; perception of class conflicts between social groups in the country (poor and rich people, working class and middle class, unemployed and employed people, management and workers, farmers and city people, people at the top of society and people at the bottom, young people and older people); salary criteria (scale: job responsibility, years of education and training, supervising others, needed support for familiy and children, quality of job performance or hard work at the job); feeling of a just payment; perceived and desired social structure of country; self-placement within social structure of society; number of books in the parental home in the respondent´s youth (cultural resources); self-assessment of social class; level of status of respondent´s job compared to father (social mobility); self-employment, employee of a private company or business or government, occupation (ILO, ISCO 1988), type of job of respondent´s father in the respondent´s youth; mother´s occupation (ILO, ISCO 1988) in the respondent´s youth; respondent´s type of job in first and current (last) job; self-employment of respondent´ first job or worked for someone else.

Demograpy: sex; age; marital status; steady life partner; education of respondent: years of schooling and highest education level; current employment status; hours worked weekly; occupation (ILO, ISCO 1988); self-employment; supervising function at work; working-type: working for private or public sector or self-employed; if self-employed: number of employees; trade union membership; highest education level of father and mother; education of spouse or partner: years of schooling and highest education level; current employment status of spouse or partner; occupation of spouse or partner (ILO, ISCO 1988); self-employment of spouse or partner; size of household; household composition (children and adults); type of housing;...

BackgroundChildren living in disadvantaged socio-economic circumstances (SEC) are more commonly victims of bullying, but pathways leading to social inequalities in being bullied are unclear. We assess how early life risk factors might mediate the increased risk of being bullied at age seven for children living in disadvantaged circumstances.Material and methodsUsing data from 5,857 children in the UK Millennium Cohort Study (MCS) we calculate risk ratios (RR) for being bullied at age seven (child-reported), by household income quintile. Socially patterned risk factors for being bullied relating to social networks, family relationships and child characteristics from birth to age five were adjusted for to assess if they mediated any association between SEC and being bullied.Results48.6% of children reported having been bullied. Children living in the lowest income households were at 20% greater risk of being bullied compared to those from the highest (RR1.20, 95%CI 1.06,1.36). Controlling for social networks, family relationships and child characteristics attenuated the increased risk for children in low income households to aRR 1.19 (95%CI 1.05, 1.35), aRR 1.16 (95%CI 1.02,1.32) and aRR 1.13 (95%CI 1.00,1.28) respectively. Our final model adjusted for risk factors across all domains attenuated the RR by 45% (aRR 1.11,95%CI 0.97,1.26).ConclusionsAbout half of children reported being bullied by age seven with a clear social gradient. The excess risk in children growing up in disadvantaged circumstances was partially explained by differences in their early years relating to their social network, family relationships and the child’s own abilities and behaviours. Policies to reduce inequalities in these risk factors may also reduce inequalities in the risk of being bullied in childhood.

Abstract (en): The International Social Survey Program (ISSP) is an ongoing program of crossnational collaboration. Formed in 1983, the group develops topical modules dealing with important areas of social science as supplements to regular national surveys. This collection, the third module in the series, contains data from Australia, Austria, the Federal Republic of Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Great Britain, the United States, and Switzerland. Questions asked of respondents focused on equality of income, wealth, and opportunity. Respondents were asked for their perceptions of the extent of present inequality, explanations for inequality, and support for government programs to reduce inequality. Demographic data on respondents such as age, sex, employment, income, marital status, education, religion, political affiliation, and trade union membership also are provided. Persons aged 18 years and older from nine nations: Australia, Austria (16 to 69 years), the Federal Republic of Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands (16-80 years), Great Britain (excluding the Scottish highlands and islands), the United States (noninstitutionalized English-speaking only), and Switzerland (16 years and older). Multistage probability samples, black oversample in the United States. Data were made available through the Zentralarchiv fuer empirische Sozialforschung, Universitaet zu Koeln, from whom a printed codebook (ZA-No. 1680) may be obtained. Records for Great Britain, Italy, Austria, and the United States have a weight variable that must be used in all analyses. No weighting was done for the Federal Republic of Germany, Hungary, or the Netherlands. Weighting for Australia and Switzerland is unknown.

The International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) is a continuous programme of cross-national collaboration running annual surveys on topics important for the social sciences. The programme started in 1984 with four founding members - Australia, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States – and has now grown to almost 50 member countries from all over the world. As the surveys are designed for replication, they can be used for both, cross-national and cross-time comparisons. Each ISSP module focuses on a specific topic, which is repeated in regular time intervals. Please, consult the documentation for details on how the national ISSP surveys are fielded. The present study focuses on questions about social inequality.
Importance of social background, merit, discrimination, corruption and good relations as prerequisites for success in society (wealthy family, well-educated parents, good education, ambitions, hard working, knowing the right people, political connections, giving bribes, person´s race and religion, gender); attitude towards equality of educational opportunity in one´s country (corruption as criteria for social mobility, only students from the best secondary schools have a good chance to obtain a university education, only rich people can afford the costs of attending university, same chances for everyone to enter university, regardless of gender, ethnicity or social background); opinion about own salary: actual occupational earning is adequate; estimation of actual and reasonable earnings for occupational groups: doctor, chairman of a large national corporation, shop assistant, unskilled worker in a factory, cabinet minister in the national government; income differences are too large in the respondent´s country; responsibility of government to reduce income differences; government should provide a decent standard of living for the unemployed and spend less on benefits for poor people; demand for higher taxes for people with high incomes; opinion on taxes for people with high income; justification of better medical supply and better education for people with higher income; perception of class conflicts between social groups in the country (poor and rich people, working class and middle class, management and workers, people at the top of society and people at the bottom); self-assessment and assessment of the family the respondent grew up in on a top-bottom-scale; social position compared to father (social mobility); salary criteria (scale: responsibility, education, needed support for family and children, quality of job performance or hard work at the job); feeling of a just payment; characterisation of the actual and the desired social system of the country, measured by classification on pyramid diagrams (image of society).

Demography: sex; age; marital status; steady life partner; years of schooling; highest education level; country specific education and degree; current employment status (respondent and partner); hours worked weekly; occupation (ISCO 1988) (respondent and partner); supervising function at work; working for private or public sector or self-employed (respondent and partner); if self-employed: number of employees; trade union membership; earnings of respondent (country specific); family income (country specific); size of household; household composition; party affiliation (left-right); country specific party affiliation; participation in last election; religious denomination; religious main groups; attendance of religious services; self-placement on a top-bottom scale; region (country specific); size of community (country specific); type of community: urban-rural area; country of origin or ethnic group affiliation; occupation status and profession of respondent´s father and mother during the youth of the respondent (ISCO 88); number of books in the parental home during the youth of the respondent (cultural resources); occupational status and profession in the first job and the current job (ISCO 88 and working type); self-assessment of the social class; estimated amount of family wealth (monetary value of assets); work orientation: self-characterisation at this time and in the youth of the respondent concerning his performance at work respectively at school.

Additionally coded: administrative mode of data-collection; weighting factor; case substitution.

This is a mixed method data collection. The study is part of the Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU) programme. The data result from two RELU projects carried out by the same research team:
• Social and environmental conditions in rural areas (SECRA), 01/10/2004 - 30/09/2005
• Social and environmental inequalities in rural areas (SEIRA), 01/08/2007 -31/07/2009

Both SECRA and SEIRA consist of a series of social and environmental variables for the same 6,027 rural Lower Super Output Areas in England. SECRA is the base dataset produced during the pilot project. The SEIRA dataset contains additional variables. In addition, SEIRA also contains interviews with rural residents on perceptions of inequality and inequity. Interview results revealed that people recognise that rural areas offer limited opportunities for recreation and local services, and a lack of affordable housing.

SECRA: The dataset on social and environmental conditions in rural areas was intended to encourage and enable researchers and policy makers to include both social and environmental perspectives in their consideration of rural problems.

The original objectives of the one-year scoping study to produce the dataset were:
1. to compile a rural sustainability dataset incorporating both socio-economic and
environmental characteristics of rural census output areas in England;
2. to highlight and address the methodological difficulties in working with spatial and
survey data from sources in the social and environmental science domains;
3. to identify the limitations of currently available data for rural areas;
4. to pilot the use of the rural sustainability dataset for classifying rural areas according to socio-economic and environmental conditions and hence allowing the construction of typologies to provide sampling frames for further research and to inform policies for sustainable rural development;
5. to explore the possibilities of extending dataset coverage to Scotland and Northern
Ireland given differences in census data infrastructures and output design processes.

The SECRA dataset has been compiled at the level of the new Super Output Areas (SOAs) for England. The rural extent has been identified from the new Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) definition of urban and rural areas which relies primarily on the morphology and context of settlements.

Further information and documentation for this study may be found through the ESRC Research Catalogue: Developing spatial data for the classification of rural areas.

SEIRA: This research project has investigated the nature and extent of social and environmental inequalities and injustice in rural England addressing the questions:
1. How can we measure rural spatial inequalities in (a) socio-economic and (b) environmental-ecological characteristics of small-scale areas of England?
2. How can inequality measures inform our understanding of the distributions of social and environmental deprivation in rural England?
3. How do rural residents experience the kinds of inequality identified by the research, and what types of inequalities do they perceive as inequitable?
4. Are there identifiable areas of rural England where the potential for environmental and social inequity suggests a need for policy intervention?

Inequality in social, economic and environmental conditions has important implications for individuals or groups of people experiencing its negative effects, but also for society as a whole. In urban areas, poor environments are associated frequently with deprivation and social exclusion. Where the unequal distribution of social and environmental goods is considered unfair, it constitutes social or environmental injustice. This project has quantified inequalities in social and environmental conditions throughout rural England and identified those areas where inequalities are greatest. It has also enhanced understanding of perceptions of inequality and injustice in rural areas. The work shows how rural policy can be refined and targeted to tackle these multi-faceted problems in the most appropriate way for the benefit of society.

Further information for this study may be found through the ESRC Research Catalogue webpage: Social and environmental inequalities in rural areas.

This indicator measures inequalities in life expectancy at birth within England as a whole, each English region, and each local authority. Life expectancy at birth is calculated for each deprivation decile of lower super output areas within each area and then the slope index of inequality (SII) is calculated based on these figures.

The SII is a measure of the social gradient in life expectancy, i.e., how much life expectancy varies with deprivation. It takes account of health inequalities across the whole range of deprivation within each area and summarises this in a single number. This represents the range in years of life expectancy across the social gradient from most to least deprived, based on a statistical analysis of the relationship between life expectancy and deprivation across all deprivation deciles.

Life expectancy at birth is a measure of the average number of years a person would expect to live based on contemporary mortality rates. For a particular area and time period, it is an estimate of the average number of years a newborn baby would survive if he or she experienced the age-specific mortality rates for that area and time period throughout his or her life.

The SII for England and for regions have been presented alongside the local authority figures in order to improve the display of the indicators on the overview page. However, they should not be considered as comparators for the local authority figures. The SII for England takes account of the full range of deprivation and mortality across the whole country. This does not therefore provide a suitable benchmark with which to compare local authority results, which take into account the range of deprivation and mortality within much smaller geographies.

Data is Powered by LG Inform Plus and automatically checked for new data on the 3rd of each month.

This survey is part of a continuing series designed to monitor trends in a wide range of social attitudes in Great Britain. The British Social Attitudes Survey (BSA) is similar in purpose to the General Social Survey carried out by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) in the United States. The BSA questionnaire has two parts, one administered by an interviewer and the other completed by the respondent. As in the past, the 1999 interview questionnaire contained a number of "core" questions covering the major topic areas of defense, the economy, labor market participation, and the welfare state. The 1999 self-enumerated questionnaire was devoted to a series of questions on a range of social, economic, political, and moral issues. Topics covered (by section) are: (1) newspaper readership, (2) party identification, (3) housing, (4) public spending and social welfare, (5) health, (6) economic activity and labor market, (7) English nationalism, (8) constitutional issues, (9) begging, (10) religion, (11) administration, (12) countryside, (13) transport, (14) education, and (15) taste and decency. An international initiative funded by the Nuffield Foundation, the International Social Survey Program (ISSP), also contributed a module to the BSA. The topic of the ISSP module in this collection was social inequality. Additional demographic data gathered included age, gender, education, occupation, household income, marital status, social class, and religious and political affiliations.

This graphic illustrates which class sector should be the most powerful in Great Britain according to residents in 2017. Of respondents ** percent believed none of the classes should be the most powerful. Only * percent of respondents believed the upper class should be the most powerful class in Great Britain

This dataset brings together information on the number of gambling premises across UK parliamentary constituencies, along with detailed socio-economic and deprivation indicators.

For each constituency, the dataset includes:

• The count of licensed gambling premises

• The percentage of the population in five socio-economic groups

• The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) rank, broken down by domains such as income, crime, employment, education & skills, and health & disability

The dataset is designed for both exploratory analysis and purpose-driven research into the relationships between gambling accessibility, socio-economic class, and regional deprivation in the UK.

The preparation pipeline and source data are fully documented in the project’s GitHub repository: gambling_premises_uk

This dataset may be of particular interest to data scientists and researchers exploring social inequality, public health, or regional planning. The included source datasets also provide inspiration for feature engineering in machine learning and AI-driven analysis.

The project infrastructure is built on Google Cloud Platform, and the codebase has been refactored accordingly. Future updates may follow as GCP evolves.

The International Social Survey Program (ISSP) is an ongoing program of crossnational collaboration. Formed in 1983, the group develops topical modules dealing with important areas of social science as supplements to regular national surveys. This collection, the second module on social inequality (see INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SURVEY PROGRAM: SOCIAL INEQUALITY, 1987 [ICPSR 9383]), contains data from Australia, Germany (West and East), Great Britain, the United States, Austria, Hungary, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Czechoslovakia, Slovenia, Poland, Bulgaria, Russia, New Zealand, Canada, and the Philippines. Questions asked of respondents focused on equality of income, wealth, and opportunity. Respondents were asked for their perceptions of the extent of present inequality, explanations for inequality, and support for government programs to reduce inequality. Demographic data on respondents such as age, sex, employment, income, marital status, education, religion, political affiliation, and trade union membership also are provided.

This study consists of transcripts of interviews conducted as part of the research project Identity, Inequality and the Media in Brexit-Covid-19-Britain. These transcripts report verbatim on in-depth interviews conducted with interviewees who live in the South West, East Midlands and North East of England. The interviews were designed to explore the ways in which participants perceived and experienced the social and political impacts of COVID-19 and Brexit. They explore the impact of both the pandemic and Brexit on individuals’ daily lives, their sense of belonging (or not) to place and nation, as well as the ways in which individuals engage with the media. Some of the interviews include a discussion of images that the participants felt captured the processes of Brexit and the pandemic. Furthermore, some of the interviews conducted in the South West focussed specifically on the project artist’s representation of the research themes.

The study authors conducted 90 interviews for this research. Of these, 80 are included in the UKDS version due to confidentiality considerations.

The interviews were conducted between October 2020 and July 2021. During this time England was experiencing national lockdowns and varying degrees of social distancing restrictions due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

aSII: Slope Index of Inequality; RII(mean): Relative Index of Inequality for the mean; and RII(ratio): Relative Index of Inequality for the ratio.

The slope index of inequality (SII) in the percentage of low birth weight births. The SII gives a single score describing the extent of inequality in each local authority, and is broadly comparable between areas. See below for further details on the SII. Low birth weight is defined by the World Health Organisation as a birth weight less than 2500 grams.(1) Low birth weight infants account for approximately 8% of all live births in England and Wales.(2) In the UK and other developed countries, it is a major cause of infant mortality.(3) In addition, low birth weight is also associated with health problems in adulthood such as neuro-cognitive and pulmonary morbidity and other long-term health difficulties including deficits in growth, cognitive development, diabetes and heart disease.(4,5) Low birth weight varies widely according to socio-economic status. For example, Macfarlane and colleagues, looking at births in England and Wales between 1991 and 1995, found that the percentage of low birth weight births was 5.4% in social class I (professional) (based on the occupation of the father), compared with 8.2% in social class V (unskilled).(2) Reducing the proportion of low birth weight infants is, therefore, of public health importance. The stratified indicator by local deprivation quintile has been produced in order to quantify inequalities in low birth weight births by deprivation. This indicator has been discontinued and so there will be no further updates. Legacy unique identifier: P01405

Men in their 40s, who work in full-time jobs earned an average of 876.3 British pounds a week in the United Kingdom in 2024, compared with women in this age group who earned an average of 750.9 pounds a week. This was the highest earning age group for both genders.

The purpose of this study was to provide descriptive data on the changing nature of inequality and its perception, especially with reference to social class and social mobility.
This study formed part of the Comparative Project on Class Structure and Class Consciousness at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.