Psychological Effects of Poverty

1

Poverty has been a problem for a very long time, affecting people from many places in

these people fail to provide for themselves and their families a balanced diet and a proper

standard of living. Catering to basic needs becomes difficult for them. It is also noted by Mani et

damaging cognitive function through stress, distorting judgment through a scarcity mindset, and

limiting potential through environmentally induced hopelessness and depression.

In addition to the short-term loss of resources, poverty changes the emotional regulation

and decision-making of individuals in the long term. Prolonged suffering of economic hardship

tends to breed learned helplessness, the mental condition where individuals believe that their

behavior would not have much effect on the result (Haushofer and Fehr, 2014). This attitude

minimizes motivation and creates loops of inactivity, which again lands people in poverty. The

perception of control through the recurring stressors, like unemployment and debt, can change,

and passive coping patterns emerge as a result of emotional exhaustion (Evans, 2016). In

addition, chronic poverty is likely to increase the levels of shame and inferiority which make

people disconnect with one another and shun away any opportunity that could change their lives.

Studies indicate that the effects may not be unique to adults, but also may also manifest during

childhood because children absorb the struggles faced by their parents and start perceiving self-

and, thereby, become even more emotionally isolated and weaker (Poluektova et al., 2015). The

absence of social capital, relations, and helpful connections decreases the access to both

and act as a further demoralizing force to change. The resulting alienation destroys trust and

community cohesion which are two protective elements needed to sustain mental health. Poverty,

therefore, does not only strip people of material resources but it also destroys the psychological

and social infrastructure upon which individuals and communities can rely on to be able to resist.

Effects of Poverty on Brain Development

Studies have shown that poverty causes psychological problems and complications.

Yoshikawa, Aber, and Beardslee (2012) note that stress due to poverty makes the brain

atrophied, which means that it shrinks. It further explains that the effects are rampant on children

raised in low-income families. The effect occurs by making the thymus gland develop more

slowly than expected. Later, when the child grows into adulthood, they are likely to suffer from

thyroid cancer due to less neuron activity in the brain. Noble, Kan, and Sowell (2012) add that it

weakens and reduces the brain’s cells due to stress that eventually malfunctions the entire brain.

It is also more severe for the children as parents transfer their stress into the unborn children,

between the important brain parts that handle learning, emotion, and executive functioning.

According to Johnson, Riis, and Noble (2016), children with poor backgrounds always

regulate and flex cognition. The clarification of this phenomenon is that over time the brain starts

to lose its ability to handle stress and emotional state and this provides a feedback mechanism to

support negative behavioral consequences. Synaptic pruning, which slows down neural

development and cognitive maturation, is also a result of chronic exposure to adversity in

childhood (Luby et al., 2013). Consequently, the child will have a very limited capacity to

concentrate, memorise new data and to formulate complex ways of solving problems, which will

demonstrate that the neurological effects of poverty go much beyond the lack of immediate

deprivation.

The mediating factors of determining the effect of poverty on the development of the

brain include care giving environment. Luby et al. (2013) found out that the harmful effects of

economic poverty on the brain can be countered by emotional responsive care giving to an

extensive extent particularly in the regions of the brain like the hippocampus and amygdala.

Warm and supportive interactions activate the neural pathways on learning and emotional

result in lower emotional availability by the caregivers and, consequently lower the resilience

skills among their offspring (Blair and Raver, 2016). Repeated exposure to stressful situations,

Noteworthy of care giving, in an additional manner, poverty interrupts biological systems

that interact to mediate neurodevelopment. Jensen et al. (2017) underscore that these three stress-

inducing factors (malnutrition, chronic stress, and exposure to environmental toxins) work

together to change the endocrine, immune, and neural systems simultaneously. This systemic

stress impairs neuroplasticity and influences the white matter integrity, which results in delayed

information processing and emotional regulation disorders. The epigenetic alterations caused by

persistent adversity might also silence or activate genes that mediate the resilience of the brain,

so even with no ongoing exposure, the impacts of poverty may still be present (Johnson et al.,

2016). Blair and Raver (2016) further stipulate that this biological embedding of stress can

actually start during pregnancy, with the anxiety of the mother and the lack of nutrition affecting

how the fetus brain connects with emotion regulation. These physiological uproars intensify with

the child, exposing him/her more to vulnerability to mental health illnesses like anxiety and

attention disorders. Hence, poverty is not only a social or psychological phenomenon but a

developing evidence indicates that preventive interventions can mitigate these impacts. Brody et

al. (2017) showed that emotional communication, cognitive stimulation, and consistent

children can be reduced in cortisol levels through programs that teach stress management

techniques that lead to improved executive function and improved learning (Blair and Raver,

2016). As per Johnson et al. (2016), such initiatives may be effective not just in the provision of

resources, but also in the learning of how to re-construct the psychosocial environment on which

the child is situated. In this way, the neurological impact of the phenomenon of poverty can be

alleviated by strategic investment in the education, mental health, and community-based

parenting programs and contribute to cognitive resilience in the long run.

The presence of socioeconomic inequality results in differences in the development of the

brains due to the limitation of access to stimulating and supportive environment. According to

Johnson et al. (2016), children of wealthy households are exposed to a richer linguistic language

and more often cognitive tasks and these impose neural development and advanced reasoning.

Conversely, low access to quality education, safe environments, and varied social interactions

restricts the development of the brain in the face of poverty in children (Jensen et al., 2017).

increase cortisol levels and decrease the hippocampal volume (Brody et al., 2017). Moreover,

there are no community resources such as libraries, recreation centers, and counseling services,

cross-disciplinary approach in terms of healthcare, education, and social policy (Luby et al.,

2013). The biological entrenchment of disadvantage can be prevented by early interventions

based on nutritional support, educating parents and providing psychological counseling. Jensen

et al. (2017) suggest prenatal care initiatives, where maternal stress is followed and emotional

support is offered to decrease the exposure of a fetus to harmful stress hormones. According to

Blair and Raver (2016), emotional learning and mindfulness techniques should be incorporated

in the process of building cognitive control and empathy with the idea of early childhood

education. The policymakers should focus on equal opportunities in terms of healthcare services

and community building programs to enhance family stability (Johnson et al., 2016). Also, long-

term financial and psychosocial resources among the low-income families encourages a feeling

of security that is needed to develop the brain optimally. Addressing poverty, thus, is not an

economic or social goal but a moral duty to protect the brain development and human potential

in the generations to come (Brody et al., 2017).

The Scarcity Mindset and Cognitive Limitation

The situation makes people blind to the future as they emphasize and focus more on their current

matters and positions rather than the long-term significant troubles that can redefine their future

issues, such as vaccinating their children. It is also said that their IQ falls, especially before the

harvesting period.

Scarcity thought process occurs when people believe that there is chronic shortage of

resources and the only focus could be survival at present and not planning in the long term.

According to Zhao and Tomm (2018), when the scarcity aspect is strong, it leads to a

psychological tunnel effect - that is, concentration on the most urgent needs, and the limited

cognitive resources to address other issues. This cognitive load reduces how one could think

strategically, plan in the future or make the best decision in the face of uncertain situations.

Huijsmans et al. (2019) concluded that scarcity causes neural changes in brain areas related to

decision-making which include the prefrontal cortex, which makes it less flexible in considering

alternatives. This means that people who are in constant low supply can afford many things. This

scarcity mentality therefore becomes a self perpetrating cycle because urgency to solve

endangering thinking comes first before the thinking of the future leaving people trapped in the

Curiously, scarcity may also enhance focus and creativity under certain conditions where

people are inspired to make each limited resource count. Mehta and Zhu (2016) noted that under

allocation of scarce resources. However, this benefit manifests only for short periods of time and

fades if scarcity becomes a constant threat or overwhelming anxiety. Zhao and Tomm (2018)

note that prolonged stress induced by scarcity shifts cognitive processing away from exploration

of creativity towards risk management and cognitive exhaustion. If scarcity becomes a long-term

issue, it constricts mental bandwidth and inhibits thinking beyond short-term requirements. Kruft

et al. (2019) similarly discovered resource scarcity influences persuasive communication and

idea development, but only if individuals are convinced they are capable of overcoming their

limitations. Therefore, whereas scarcity may evoke fleeting inventiveness, its long-term

psychological cost inhibits the higher-order cognitive flexibility required to maintain

innovativeness, entrenching the self-same constraints it helps, on a short-term basis, rise above.

Social context also determines how individuals suffer and recover from depression about

being poor. One's surroundings usually determines if individuals are encouraged or isolated.

Lachman et al. (2014) demonstrate that positive parenting and strong community support

decrease individuals’ sense of protection and connection. Li et al. (2018) emphasize that social

capital, both familial and neighborhood, serves as a defense against hopelessness by giving a

treatment and stimulate assist-seeking behavior.

Poverty depression tends to restructure cognitive and affective processing, debilitating

motivation and forward thinking. Scarcity- and hopelessness-induced mental fatigue inhibits

problem-solving and forward thinking about decisions. Cook and Sadeghein (2018) propose that

recurring financial stress diminishes mental bandwidth, leading to decision fatigue and a

pessimistic bias. Such psychological depletion reveals itself both as inertial behavior and

withdrawal behavior. Scarcity-experienced individuals become more susceptible to maladaptive

thinking patterns, maintaining depressive conditions. Lund and Cois (2018) reported that

depression causes “social drift,” whereby individuals are incrementally drawn into deeper

poverty by lost aspiration or diminished work ability. This loss of motivation tends to lead to

disconnection from productive activities. Mendenhall et al. (2017) note that cognitive fatigue can

induce avoidance behavior, as individuals struggle to initiate or maintain goal-directed behavior.

Such psychological freezing sustains the grip of poverty over time periods. Nevertheless,

Environmental and Social Impacts on Mental Health

A community with high levels of poverty is associated with negative concerns such as

limited access to social amenities like healthcare, discrimination, and high exposure to crime,

usual, hence not seeing the need to work for a better future. It creates a false sense of security

and satisfaction. Shah et al. (2012) assert that people living in poverty are satisfied with the little

they get and do not think about the future but only the present. All these lead to minor

educational achievement, lower IQ scores, and depressed cognitive processes.

The physical and social setting significantly influences psychological well-being, even

more so in poor communities. Compton and Shim (2015) discuss how social determinants of

mental health, including living conditions, access to education, and neighborhood protection,

directly affect cognitive function and emotional steadiness. Those who live amidst crowded,

noisy, and toxic conditions are more likely to exhibit elevated stress hormone levels, causing

depression and anxiety. Tost, Champagne, and Meyer-Lindenberg (2015) emphasize how

constant exposure to stressors impacts a limbic system disturbance, impairing emotion and

memory regulation. Long-term exposure diminishes stress management capacity and positive

social connection, leading to a breakdown of relational trust and systems of community

structures exacerbates a sense of isolation, inhibiting group aggregation and suppressing motive

for positive action, which entrenches distress even further. The aggregate effect of these setting

emotional stability. As Nutsford, Pearson, and Kingham (2013) state, residents of neighborhoods

adjacent to green areas are less likely to report stress, anxiety, and depression compared to

residents of vegetication-poor neighborhoods. Exposure to nature recovers your mind, causes

relaxation, and exposes individuals to reduced cortical states, which results in recuperation of

emotions. Halpern (2014) explains how local physical configuration, structure of buildings,

lighting, and supply of quiet space results in mental relaxation and socialization. Environments

seen as being beautiful and safe result in heightened strength of activities outdoors and social

involvement. Mitchell (2013) discovered that exercise outdoors, compared to a similar exercise

indoors, yields larger advantages for mental health, supporting how access to space outdoors

benefits cognitive clear-headedness. Without clean and safe green space, resettlement of

physically active individuals is limited, and chances of stress release are limited as well.

Incorporating green space and careful planning into urbanization can therefore mitigate

psychological distress and lead to improved well-being of disadvantaged communities.

disorder, anxiety, and ongoing depression. These problems become more severe when disasters

result in loss of property, displacement, or the death of family members. Cunsolo and Ellis

severe psychological toll that erodes community strength and social bonds. Tackling these

effects needs both environmental recovery programs and accessible mental health services for

those affected.

When communities are poor and disordered, it really affects individuals’ mental health.

Destructed relationships, low trust, and weak community bonds make it more difficult for

individuals to be stable and assisted. Eriksson and colleagues (2018) employ Bronfenbrenner’s

ecological systems theory to describe how stress at a community level does not remain at a

community level; it migrates into lives, causing a risk to mental health. In communities beset by

poverty, social connection is weakest, individuals are less engaged in community activities, and

there’s usually more exposure to violence or bias (Compton & Shim, 2015). It all erodes a sense

of emotional security, and being anxious all the time becomes a common occurrence. Halpern

(2014) further points out that if individuals actually witness obvious signs of abandonment,

graffiti, abandoned buildings, or heaps of ungarbageged trash, it cements a sense of

that upgrading neighborhood infrastructure and getting individuals to reconnect can be of

Lachman et al. (2014) describe how parental depression disrupts caregiving activities, and poor

living conditions further compromise family patterns and affective bonding. Tost et al. (2015)

report noticing children who are exposed to unsafe surroundings have changed brain

development and less capacity for stress regulation, putting them at a higher risk of anxiety

disorders and behavioral issues later in life. Compton and Shim (2015) contribute further that

poor communities of women also face other barriers, including hazardous communities and

gender-violence, which escalate fear and emotional strain. The intersecting stressors reflect how

poverty impacts mental health based on family roles, social demands, and surroundings. Policy

addressing these factors need be sex-sensitive, upgrading homes, protection, and affective

protection systems for families.

Memory loss has also been associated with extreme poverty. Studies conducted by Farah,

Betancourt, Brodsky, and Hurt (2008) show that people raised in low socioeconomic status

et al. (2008) add that these children grow under conditions of depressed cognitive processes,

leading to increased vulnerabilities that cause mental disorders and other acute problems such as

leaving less cognitive capacity for information encoding and retrieval. Zhao and Tomm (2018)

clarify that if individuals are engrossed by survival needs, like transferring bills money or money

for food, thoughts become overwhelmed by working memory of the brain. The cognitive

overwhelm diminishes capacity to process new information and build enduring memory.

Johnson, Riis, and Noble (2016) also mention neural activity shifts of the hippocampus, a

structure critical for memory consolidation, due to long-term exposure to economic distress.

With passage of times, it creates diminished cognitive flexibility and capacity for learning. Blair

and Raver (2016) also mention stress-induced hormonal alterations of children, particularly

increased cortisol, hurt neural circuitries linked to recall and focus. Cumulative effect of

psychological weariness, stress, and diversion eventually leads to short-term forgetfulness and

long-term learning and memory retention deficiency among poor groups of people.

Memory impairments in poverty also originate from a constraint of access to enriching

in books, instructive toys, and interactive adult contact, whereas poor children are deprived of

analogous exposure (Blair & Raver, 2016). Huijsmans et al. (2019) report discovering that

rich, supporting, learning context thereby builds-up cognitive growth, memory store, and school

performance disadvantages over a longer period of time.

Social-emotional stressors associated with poverty also impair memory performance by

disrupting motivation and affect regulation. Scarcity stress, according to Norris et al. (2019),

causes individuals to make short-term, emotionally based choices, diminishing their capacity for

reflective thinking and memory retrieval. Routine exposure to unpredictability and insecurity

depletes cognitive capacity, so there is little ability for reflective, strategy-based thinking (Zhao

& Tomm, 2018). According to Blair and Raver (2016), exhaustion of a state of mind hinders

executive processes, so it becomes hard to direct attention and bring stored information to mind.

Johnson et al. (2016) contribute to information by noting childhood chronic stress reorganizes

neural circuits related to learning, so working memory is diminished in adulthood. Poverty's

emotional impacts, including fear, shame, and insecurity, also dampen curiosity and self-

efficacy, both of which are essential for effective studying. Chronic psychological stress, over a

including stress alleviation and restablishment of cognitive equilibrium.

opportunities, stress due to the inability to produce a male child, forced marriages, and the

migration of men to urban areas in search of job opportunities. Shah et al. (2012) add that the

stigma and hopelessness created by these situations lead to no choice but suicide among most

people, especially women. They find no other option than suicide as they feel ashamed of their

situations.

Hopelessness is among the most universal psychological outcomes of poverty, and it

tends to result from episodic exposure to insecurity and limited opportunity. People growing up

under conditions of pervasive deprivation come to feel a sense of powerlessness, a corrosive of

motives and resilience. Compton and Shim (2015) describe how poverty serves as a social

determinate of mental health, where environmental factors like unemployment, unsafe homes,

and discrimination serve to exacerbate feelings of depression. As it accumulates, hopelessness

becomes learned helplessness, a psychological condition during which individuals cease to

believe their efforts are capable of bettering their lives (Barry & Halfmann, 2016). The social

intellectual idiocy, especially for children who internalize their parent's stress state.

Hopelessness, then, becomes both a social condition reinforced condition as well as an emotional

value and a sense of being affiliated to their communities. Perceived “less thanness” invokes

anxiety, humiliation, and depressive patterns fogging their mindset. Mendenhall et al. (2017)

observed that poverty stigma normally coexists with other socio-behedral loads of prolonged

sickness or dismemberment, thereby giving rise to a multi-dimensional oppression process.

Cross-cutting stigma prohibits individuals from accessing relief or enrollment into programs of

societal communities, thereby eliminating relief for hardship. Cook and Sadeghein (2018)

believe material scarcity also warps cognitive perception, and individuals direct their thoughts to

survival as opposed to societal engagement. As a result, isolated individuals are isolated both

from societal and institution-focused supporting systems. It is imperative for systemic

interventions to re-create societal narrative of poverty and instead invoke empathy rather than

guilt.

Poverty-caused hopelessness is also perpetuated by family and community systems

and trust, buffers the psychological burden of poverty by shaping how youth view their potential.

As families face ongoing deprivation, emotional attachments disintegrate, and youth learn to

feed off one another. It takes a community-based intervention breaking communication of

despair and recreating family resilience to shatter this cycle.

Hopelessness inclines decisions-making procedures to distort, predisposing individuals

towards short-run thinking and hasty decisions. Cheung et al. (2015) mention that if self-

regulation is weak, individuals under scarcity depend on psychological shortcuts or “scarcity

heuristics” for few resource management. While beneficial short, run, they normally worsen

negative economic outcomes. Cook and Sadeghein (2018) noted that cognitive stress under

scarcity closes off focus to short-run needs, shrinking one’s ability to plan ahead. Barry and

Halfmann (2016) add that it undermines rational thinking and self-efficacy, predisposing

individuals towards remaining poor. The outcome is a psychological vicious cycle of despair,

Farah, M. J., Betancourt, N., Brodsky, N. L., & Hurt, H. (2008). Environmental stimulation,

parental nurturance and cognitive development in humans. Developmental Science, 11,

793–801. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008. 00688.

the National Academy of Sciences, 116(24), 11699-11704.

Jensen, S. K., Berens, A. E., & Nelson, C. A. (2017). Effects of poverty on interacting biological

systems underlying child development. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 1(3), 225-

239.

Johnson, S. B., Riis, J. L., & Noble, K. G. (2016). State of the art review: poverty and the

developing brain. Pediatrics, 137(4).

Kruft, T., Tilsner, C., Schindler, A., & Kock, A. (2019). Persuasion in corporate idea contests:

The moderating role of content scarcity on decision‐making. Journal of Product

Innovation Management, 36(5), 560-585.

Lachman, J. M., Cluver, L. D., Boyes, M. E., Kuo, C., & Casale, M. (2014). Positive parenting

for positive parents: HIV/AIDS, poverty, caregiver depression, child behavior, and

Li, C., Liang, Z., Yin, X., & Zhang, Q. (2018). Family social capital mediates the effect of

poverty on children's anxiety and depression. Journal of community psychology, 46(8),

983-995.

396-402.

Makwana, N. (2019). Disaster and its impact on mental health: A narrative review. Journal of

family medicine and primary care, 8(10), 3090-3095.

Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E., & Zhao, J. (2013). Poverty impedes cognitive function.

Science, 341, 976–980. doi: 10.1126/science.1238041

Mehta, R., & Zhu, M. (2016). Creating when you have less: The impact of resource scarcity on

Mendenhall, E., Kohrt, B. A., Norris, S. A., Ndetei, D., & Prabhakaran, D. (2017). Non-

communicable disease syndemics: poverty, depression, and diabetes among low-income

Mitchell, R. (2013). Is physical activity in natural environments better for mental health than

Noble, K. G., Houston, S. M., Kan, E., & Sowell, E. R. (2012). Neural correlates of

socioeconomic status in the developing human brain. Developmental Science, 15, 516–

527. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012. 01147.

health, 127(11), 1005-1011.

Poluektova, O., Efremova, M., & Breugelmans, S. (2015). Poverty and psychology. Higher

School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP, 49.

Scarff, J. R. (2019). Postpartum depression in men. Innovations in clinical neuroscience, 16(5-

6), 11.

Shah, A. K., Mullainathan, S., & Shafir, E. (2012). Some consequences of having too little.

Tost, H., Champagne, F. A., & Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2015). Environmental influence in the

brain, human welfare and mental health. Nature neuroscience, 18(10), 1421-1431.

emotional, and behavioral health of children and youth: implications for prevention.

American Psychologist, 67(4), 272.

Zhao, J., & Tomm, B. M. (2018). Psychological responses to scarcity. In Oxford research

encyclopedia of psychology.