Subjective Well-Being is Not Unitary

Ed Diener Daniel Kahneman

Raksha Arora William Tov

International Differences in Well-BeingPrinceton, 2008

SWB or WBIs Not one thing

• Which are the happiest nations?

• Does money influence happiness?

• What are the causes of happiness?

Such questions assume there is one variable in “happiness”

BUT• Empirically – no

– Diener, Lucas, etc.Life satisfaction, positive affect, etc. are separate

• Conceptually– Kahnamen – judgment vs. momentary

feelings are separate

Let’s take seriously the idea that “happiness” is more than one thing

We Propose a Dimension

Global life judgments, reflective

V

• Life satisfaction

• Reports of happiness

V

Momentary affect, feelings at the moment

Intercorrelation of Well-Being Measures

Well-Being LifeVariables Ladder Satisfaction Happiness

Life Satisfaction .74

Happiness .62 .71

Affect Balance .53 .56 .71

Intercorrelation of Well-Being Measures

Well-Being LifeVariables Ladder Satisfaction Happiness

Life Satisfaction .74

V

Happiness .62 < .71

V V

Affect Balance .53 < .56 < .71

• Predicting Life SatisfactionLadder Score Beta = .61 (p < .01)

Affect Balance Beta = .28 (p < .01)

• Predicting Happiness Ladder Score Beta = .23 (NS)

Affect Balance Beta = .54 (p < .01)

Indicates the Ordering:

Judgment ------------------------------------- Feelings

Ladder Life Satisfaction Happiness Affect Balance

Distributions Also Support a Distinction:

Feelings versus Judgment different

Cacioppo – “Positivity offset”

Diener and Diener“Most people are happy” – but happy

how?

Life Satisfaction of Nations

Num

ber of N

ato

ins

20

15

10

5

0

Std. Dev = .96

Mean = 6.62

N = 64.00

Happiness Score of Nations

3.88

3.63

3.38

3.13

2.88

2.63

2.38

2.13

1.88

1.63

1.38

1.13

Num

ber of N

ations

20

15

10

5

0

Std. Dev = .29

Mean = 3.05

N = 52.00

Affect balance of Nations

Num

ber of N

atio

ns

50

40

30

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 14.02

Mean = 47.5

N = 127.00

Nations' Ladder Scores

Num

ber of N

ations

30

20

10

0

Std. Dev = 1.16

Mean = 5.40

N = 129.00

Life Judgments Are Dramatically

Less Positive than Affect

• Biological?

• Therefore more room to move?

What Predicts Judgments versus

Feelings?

Predictors Correlated with Four Measures of Well-Being

Well-Being Income Per Choose How to Possession of

Capita Spend Time Conveniences

Ladder Score .83 a .33 a .80 a

Life Satisfaction .58 b .51 b .46 b

Happiness .34 bc .54 b .16 bc

Affect Balance .31 c .57 b .16 c

Judgment ------------------------------------- Feelings

Ladder Life Satisfaction Happiness Affect Balance

Income Psychological

Conveniences Needs???

Prosperity e.g. Autonomy

Positive

Easterlin Paradox:What About Changes in Income?

Are changes in national income more associated with judgments than with feelings?

Two Waves of Data for Each SWB Variable

Criterion – two surveys using same instrument more than five years apart

Years Apart

Ladder 36

Life Satisfaction 21

Happiness 20

Per Capita Income

Ladder Life Sat. Happiness

Wave 1 PPP $ 8,148 $ 10,702 $ 11,187

Wave 2 PPP $ 19,938 $ 22,114 $ 20,332

Log10 Change .39 .33 .26

Well-Being

Ladder Life Sat. Happiness

Wave 1 5.58 6.68 3.01

Wave 2 6.31 6.91 3.08

Difference: +.72 +.23 +.07

p < .01 .05 .10

Size of Mean Well-being Changes

Ladder Life Sat. Happiness

Percentage of

scale change 7 2 2

Between-nation .70 .23 .25

SD units

Correlations of Changes with Income

Ladder r = .56, p < .05

Life satisfaction r = .33, p < .10

Happiness r = .24, NS

Change Regression Analyses:

Over time predictions (Betas):

Log income

T1 SWB Change

Ladder .85 .37 (p < .06)

Life satisfaction .83 .26 (p < .01)

Happiness .58 .22 (p < .10)

Income and Ladder Scores

Early and Recent Times

Log Income Per Capita

5.04.54.03.53.02.5

Ladder S

core

8

7

6

5

4

3

Time 1

Time 2

LossesVersusGains?

Box Score AnalysesAcross 3 SWB Measures:

SWB ChangeIncomeChange Down Up

Down 7 1

Up 25 65

Change Log GDP/Capita

.8.6.4.20.0-.2

Sta

ndard

ized H

appin

ess

Change

3

2

1

0

-1

-2

-3

-4

Thus:

• Asymmetry

– When income down, SWB down 88 %

– When income up, SWB up 72 %

Happiness Change GDP Up versus Down

– Absolute change in Happiness• GDP up -- .16 scale score change• GDP down -- .37 scale score change

p < .01

Suggests Asymmetry-- Losses loom larger

than gains

Conclusions• Types of SWB are not the same things

• They can be ordered on the dimension from judgment to feelings

• Judgments reflect income more

• For the Ladder there appears to have been little scale recalibration

• Feelings of SWB have changed less over time in response to income

• Downward income change more powerful than upward income change

Easterlin’s Paradox?

• Judgments more likely to change in response to changing income, although they do not invariably do so

• Happiness is less related to income, and has been less responsive to income changes

Thank You

Predictors Correlated with Four Measures of Well-Being

Well-Being Income Per Choose How to Possession ofVariables Capita Spend Time Conveniences

• Affect Balance .31c .57a .16a

• Ladder Score• Time 1 .82b• Time 2 .83d .33b .80c• Life Satisfaction• Time 1 .66a• Time 2 .58e .51a .46b• Happiness• Time 1 .35a• Time 2 .34ce .54a .16ab

Figure 4: Declining Marginal Utility

Household Income

160000

140000

120000

100000

80000

60000

40000

20000

0

Subje

ctiv

e W

ell-

Bein

g1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

0.0

SWB Variables

Positive Feelings

Negative Feelings

Ladder/10

Job Satisfaction

Satisf. St. Living

Raw vs. Log Income

• Ladder change and income change:• Log income r = .56, p < .05• Raw income r = .16, NS

Listwise N = 18

Income Up

• Life Satisfaction down in 39 percent of nations when income rose

• Happiness down 22 % when income up

• Ladder down 22 % when income up