4.2. The Impact of Demographic Characteristics on Social Environment and Relative Deprivation Perception

To further investigate, a homogeneity of variance test was conducted for perceived inequality, group identity, and individual emotional relative deprivation, with significance levels of 0.425, 0.190 and 0.566, respectively—all above the 0.05 threshold—indicating no significant differences in variance. Subsequently, a multiple comparison analysis was performed using the least significant difference (LSD) method. The results reveal that perceived inequality scores are highest among ‘46–69 year olds’. The ranking of perceived identity scores across age groups, from highest to lowest, show that there is a positive correlation between a resident’s age and the sense of group identity, with the sense of social identity becoming stronger as the resident gets older. Additionally, the relative emotional deprivation scores for individuals aged 18–30 and 70+ age groups were higher than those for the 31–45 and 46–69 age groups.

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to examine the effects of educational level and annual income on various social and psychological variables among the respondents. The analysis revealed that the significance levels for the impact of educational level on environmental facility construction and group identity were 0.566 and 0.378, respectively—both of which are greater than the conventional threshold of 0.05. Thus, no significant differences were observed in the variables of environmental facility construction and group identity across different educational levels.

However, the significance levels for inequality, discrimination experiences, social support, and group emotional relative deprivation were all below 0.05. This indicates that there are significant differences in these variables based on respondents’ educational levels. A homogeneity of variance test was also conducted, revealing that the significance levels for inequality, individual cognitive relative deprivation, group cognitive relative deprivation, and group emotional relative deprivation were all greater than 0.05, suggesting no significant variance differences among groups.

For multiple comparison analysis, the minimum significant difference method was applied. The results show that the significance levels for discrimination experiences, social support, environmental facility construction, and individual emotional relative deprivation were all less than 0.05. Consequently, Tamhane’s T2 test was used to further analyze the perceived differences in discrimination experiences and social support among groups with varying educational levels.

The multiple comparison analysis of educational levels revealed several trends. In terms of perceived inequality, respondents with “primary school and below” and “junior high school” education levels scored higher, while those with “high school or vocational school” and “college or above” education levels scored lower. For social support, the “high school or vocational school” group had higher perceived scores, whereas the “primary school and below” and “junior high school” groups had lower scores. When examining individual cognitive deprivation, the scores for the “primary school and below” and “junior high school” groups were significantly lower compared with the “high school or vocational school” and “college or above” groups. In terms of individual emotional deprivation, scores increased progressively from “elementary school or below” to “college or above”. Lastly, for group cognitive and emotional relative deprivation, the “primary school and below” and “junior high school” groups reported significantly lower scores than the “high school or vocational school” and “college or above” groups.

The one-way ANOVA results for annual income levels indicated that the significance levels for social support, individual emotional relative deprivation, and group emotional relative deprivation were all greater than 0.05. This suggests no significant differences in the perception of these variables among residents with varying annual incomes. Conversely, the significance levels for perceived inequality, discrimination experiences, group identity, environmental facility construction, individual cognitive relative deprivation, and group cognitive relative deprivation were all below 0.05. This indicates significant differences in these variables based on annual income levels. Further tests for homogeneity of variance and multiple comparison analyses were conducted to explore these differences more thoroughly.

According to the multiple comparison analysis of annual income levels, several patterns emerged. In terms of perceived inequality, respondents with annual incomes of “30,001–50,000 RMB” and “50,001–70,000 RMB” scored higher, while those earning “over 70,000 RMB” scored lower. For perceived discrimination experiences, respondents in the “10,000–30,000 RMB” group scored the highest, followed by the “30,001–50,000 RMB”, “50,001–70,000 RMB”, and “above 70,000 RMB” groups. Regarding environmental facility perception and group identity, individuals with annual incomes below 10,000 RMB scored higher, while those in other income groups scored lower. For individual cognitive relative deprivation, the highest scores were found among those earning below 10,000 RMB, with lower scores in the other income groups. Finally, for group cognitive relative deprivation, respondents in the “30,001–50,000 RMB” income group scored lower, while those in the “50,001–70,000 RMB” and “above 70,000 RMB” groups scored higher.