Is the social status of a person more important than his or her economic status? No, not really! Practically speaking, after all it's money that matters the most! Or may be there is something that matters more? What is this 'something'? A study trying to explain the differences in the performances of children, in France during the 1960s, suggested about this 'something'. Even today, kids in higher classes can easily relate to the environment in school, which is not different from the environment, for them, at home. However, students from the lower classes face difficulties in adjusting with the atmosphere at school, as there are stark differences at times. This study in France was the source behind the coining of the term 'cultural capital', which was thereafter frequently used worldwide. Pierre Bourdieu is known to have formulated the term 'cultural capital'. Bourdieu and John-Claude Passeron first used the term in their work called 'Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction' (1973). The French term is le capital culturel. They used the term to justify a different theory, but the term, individually became popular. As Bourdieu elaborates in his work 'The Forms of Capital' (1986), there are three kinds of capital: Economic: This refers to purely financial assets, like cash. Social: This form of capital comprises all relationships, group memberships, networks of influence, and acquaintances, which act as resources for people. Cultural: A person's skills, knowledge, attitude, advantages, etc., mostly transmitted from parents form cultural capital. It helps an individual attain a higher social status. Unlike economic resources that directly determine an individual's social and economic status, cultural capital can be seen as an implicit and indirect determinant. So, it represents those non-financial social assets that aid social mobility. Bourdieu puts forth the idea of a society where different forms of capital is being exchanged. His concept of 'field' (a situational or social context) is thus based on this idea of society. Another key concept from Bourdieu is that of 'habitus'. This denotes the system of socially established tendencies or temperaments that we mostly acquire at an early stage in life. These dispositions shape our orientation to the world around us. So, when cultural capital, in the embodied form, is transmitted, it greatly contributes to the formation of habitus. Pierre Bourdieu categorized cultural capital in three distinct types, based on the nature of the cultural asset. Examples of these are: 1. Embodied: The capital inherited or acquired, not genetically, but mainly through the process of 'socialization' falls under this type. This includes cultural aspects like norms and traditions learned as a member of a family. Influence and consciously or willingly acquired tastes over a long period of time shape an individual's preferences. 2. Objectified: Owning physical objects which are precious or have a very unique cultural value, characterize the objectified type of capital. 3. Institutionalized: This refers to the institutional recognition of the cultural capital held by a person. Academic credentials and qualifications serve as a measure of comparing individuals in the labor market, for example. Many researchers have utilized and further developed Bourdieu's concept of cultural capital, especially in relation to the education system. A criticism against the concept relating to social inequalities was discussed, but it took a backseat later on.