近年來不論是國內或國外的量化社會階層化研究，大多把分析的焦點擺在"影響一個人所取得的階層位置之囡"，就如地位取得研究所作的；而有關"一個人所取得的階層位置之果"的研究，如探討客觀階層位置對於"生活機會或風格"，與相關連的"心理幸福"的影響之研究，特別是後者，卻還做得不充份。固然地位取得研究者很可能也預設著"一個人所取得的階層位置，如職業，對其生活機會有很大的影響，進而對於心理幸福也有很大的影響"，不但為社會上多數人所爭取，亦值得階層化研究者詳加研究，然而這項預設是否正確，仍有待探究。 本研究運用已蒐集許多年的"台灣地區社會變遷基本調查"全國性大樣本資料，針對上述預設作探究；在概念架構上，除了分析客觀階層位置，如職業、收入、教育，以及階級對於心理幸福的影響之外，並進一步探討最近在社會學理論發展上廣受矚目的"社會網絡"，相對於階層的影響，所具有的影響大小又是如何！ 研究發現顯示：就台灣地區民眾而言，一個人的教育、職業、收入，以馬派階級位置所代表的本人社會階層，與心理幸福，這包括整體的快樂、煩惱程度以及相關的心理健康，可說是沒有多大的關連；低階層的人並不會由於知足而快樂一些，而降低煩惱，並減少心理健康問題；相對而言，高階層者也不會因為工作的條件較佳，資源較多，而增加多少快樂，降低煩惱，以及減少心理健康問題。 就台灣地區民眾而言，與心理幸福的整體關連較強的，主要是個人社會網絡的社會整合與關係品質。社會整合越密，關係品質越佳，心理越幸福。固然個人的社會整合與關係品質，對於心理幸福有著重要的影響，然而社會階層對於社會整合與關係品質的影響往往不大，社會階層透過對於社會整合與關係品質的影響，進而對於心理幸福的間接影響也就很小。 本研究的發現，與林南在中國大陸的研究發現顯相當一致；相形之下在西方社會所得到的研究發現，較能凸顯出客觀社會階層變項的影響力。在同樣是受到中國文化影響的台灣與中國大陸所得到的研究發現，有別於西方社會，很可能與兩種不同社會對於"個人主義"的關注程度不一樣有關。很可能在西方社會比較強調個人主義，追求個人成就，因而本人客觀社會階層對心理幸福的影響較為明顯；與中國大陸同樣受到中國文化影響的台灣社會，特別強調"他人取向"，因而社會網絡的影響也就顯得特別重要，本人社會階層的影響就小多了！

Recently, most researches on quantitative social stratification focus on the analysis of "the cause to influence attainment of one's social strata," as well as researches on status attainment. But the research on "the consequence of attainment of one's strata," for example, the consequence of objective strata on "life chance or style" and the associated "psychological well-being" is not sufficient, especially the latter. Researches on status attainment assume that " one's strata, like occupation, have much influence on life chance, and further on psychological well-being," the accuracy of assumption needs further study. The study is based on the national data "Social Change Survey in Taiwan." In concept construction, besides analyze the consequence of objective strata, like occupation, income, education, Marxism class, on psychological well-being, and explore "the consequence of social network," a new focus on the sociological theory﹒ The findings show that for the residents in Taiwan, one's education, occupation, income, and Marxism class have no much consequence on his psychological well-being, including happiness, worriment, and mental health. People in lower strata don't feel happy and decrease worry for their contentment; contrastively, people in higher strata don't increase happiness, reduce worry and mental health problem for better work and resource. The stronger association with the whole psychological well-being, for the residents in Taiwan, consists in the social integration and relationship quality from one's social network. The closer the social integration, the better the relationship quality, the happier the psychological well-being. Personal social integration and relationship quality are influential to psychological well-being. But social strata don't influence social integration and relationship quality much, and through both, have little influence on psychological well-being. The findings are consistent with those of Lin Nan's study in Mainland China. By comparison, the findings in Westem society appear much consequence of objective social strata variables. The study in Taiwan and Mainland China, both influenced by Chinese culture, is different from Westem society, probably because of their different emphasis on "individualism." Because the Western society probable weights much on individualism and seeks for personal achievement, the objective social strata has stronger relationship with psychological well­being. However, Taiwan stresses "collectivism," as Mainland China influenced by Chinese culture, and the influence of social network is stronger and that of personal social strata becomes weaker.