No matter how much you have, if you feel worse off than others, you're less likely to flourish
A sweeping study of more than 200,000 people across 22 countries has confirmed what philosophers and poets have long suspected: human contentment is measured not in absolutes, but in relation to those around us. Researchers at McGill University found that perceiving oneself as financially worse off than peers diminishes happiness, health, meaning, and connection—regardless of actual income. The finding points to something ancient in our nature, now dangerously amplified by the architectures of modern digital life, and asks whether a society can be wealthy and still leave its people impoverished in spirit.
- Even when two people earn nearly identical salaries, the one who feels poorer by comparison reports measurably lower wellbeing—and that gap persists a full year later.
- Young women are bearing the sharpest psychological burden, with upward social comparisons correlating to rising anxiety, fraying social bonds, and a deepening sense of an uncertain future.
- Researchers describe the resulting state as 'languishing'—not clinical depression, but a quiet stagnation that quietly hollows out purpose and vitality.
- Social media's curated highlight reels and algorithmic feeds act as an engine for endless upward comparison, potentially widening the harm far beyond what any income statistic can capture.
- Elgar points toward deliberate countermeasures—gratitude, conscious reframing of one's reference group, and community investment—as practical ways to interrupt the comparison spiral.
A person earning $60,000 a year can feel either prosperous or impoverished depending entirely on who stands beside them. McGill University researchers have now documented this intuition at scale: analyzing data from over 200,000 people across 22 countries, they found that those who perceived themselves as financially worse off than their peers reported significantly lower happiness, health, sense of meaning, and relationship quality—even when their actual incomes were nearly identical. A year later, the disparities held.
Lead researcher Frank Elgar illustrates the mechanism with a simple image: two colleagues earning the same salary can have entirely different psychological lives depending on their reference group. One, surrounded by peers at a similar level, feels secure. The other, working alongside people earning substantially more, experiences a persistent sense of falling behind. Elgar calls this state 'languishing'—a term that gained currency during the pandemic to describe a psychological stagnation distinct from clinical depression but deeply corrosive to flourishing.
The effect is not evenly distributed. Young people, and young women in particular, showed the greatest vulnerability to upward social comparison—a finding Elgar connects to broader trends of rising anxiety, weakening social ties, and uncertainty about the future. Though the study did not examine social media directly, its findings align closely with concerns about how digital platforms engineer endless upward ladders through curated feeds and algorithmic comparison.
The antidote Elgar proposes is deliberate: appreciate what you have, consciously reframe your reference group, and invest in community rather than isolated comparison. The deeper implication is structural—a society where everyone earns more but everyone also sees everyone else earning more may not produce happier people. What matters, the research suggests, is not the size of the paycheck, but whose paycheck you're measuring it against.
A person earning $60,000 a year can feel prosperous or impoverished depending entirely on who they're standing next to. McGill University researchers have now documented what many people intuitively know: the comparison itself matters more than the actual number in the bank account.
The study, which analyzed data from over 200,000 people across 22 countries, found that individuals who perceived themselves as financially worse off than their peers reported significantly lower levels of happiness, health, sense of meaning, and relationship quality. The striking part is that these patterns held true even when the people being compared had nearly identical incomes. A year later, the same disparities persisted.
Frank Elgar, the lead researcher at McGill's School of Population and Global Health, frames the mechanism simply: two colleagues earning the same salary experience entirely different psychological outcomes depending on their reference group. One surrounded by peers earning similar amounts feels reasonably secure. The other, working alongside people making substantially more, experiences a constant sense of falling behind. "No matter how much you have, if you feel worse off than the people you compare yourself to, you are less likely to flourish," Elgar explained. The researchers call this state "languishing"—a term that gained prominence during the pandemic to describe a particular kind of psychological stagnation, distinct from clinical depression but deeply corrosive to wellbeing.
The research reveals that upward social comparison—always looking up the ladder—erodes the sense of groundedness and purpose that people need to thrive. This effect is not evenly distributed. Young people, particularly young women, showed the strongest vulnerability to these comparisons. Elgar connects this finding to broader mental health trends among young people: rising anxiety, deteriorating social connections, and deepening uncertainty about the future. The languishing documented in the study may help explain part of what's driving these patterns.
While the researchers did not directly examine social media, Elgar notes that their findings align closely with concerns about how digital platforms fuel constant comparison. The architecture of social media—curated highlight reels, algorithmic feeds designed to show you what others have—creates an endless upward ladder to climb. The antidote, according to Elgar, involves deliberate shifts in perspective: appreciating what you already have, consciously reframing your reference group, and investing time in community engagement rather than isolated comparison.
The implications are significant. If happiness and flourishing depend partly on relative position rather than absolute circumstances, then addressing inequality requires attention not just to income distribution but to the psychological mechanisms of comparison itself. A society where everyone earns more but everyone also sees everyone else earning more may not produce happier people. The research suggests that what matters is not just the size of your paycheck, but whose paycheck you're measuring it against.
Notable Quotes
The constant upward comparisons can erode how grounded and purposeful people feel.— Frank Elgar, McGill University
What can help is to appreciate what you have, shift your perspective and get involved with your community.— Frank Elgar, McGill University
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
So the study found that two people with the same income can have completely different levels of happiness based on who they're comparing themselves to?
Exactly. It's not about the absolute amount of money. It's about the gap you perceive between yourself and the people around you. That gap is what erodes your sense of wellbeing.
Why would young women be hit harder by this than other groups?
The research doesn't specify the mechanism, but you can imagine young women are navigating multiple comparison hierarchies at once—career, appearance, relationships, financial independence. The cumulative effect of constant upward comparisons across all those domains is probably more exhausting.
The study mentions "languishing" as distinct from depression. What's the difference?
Languishing is that stuck, empty feeling—you're not clinically ill, but you're not thriving either. You feel disconnected and stagnant. Depression is more acute. Languishing is the slow erosion of purpose and meaning.
If social media wasn't directly studied, why bring it up?
Because the mechanism the study identified—constant upward comparison—is exactly what social media is designed to facilitate. You're always seeing curated versions of other people's lives, which naturally triggers that sense of falling behind.
What would actually help someone break this pattern?
The researcher suggests three things: appreciating what you have, shifting your reference group deliberately, and getting involved in community. Basically, you need to interrupt the comparison cycle by changing what you're comparing yourself to and why.