Intrapersonal and Extrapersonal Determinants of Life Satisfaction in Married Couples Ulrich Schimmack University of Toronto Mississauga.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory
Advertisements

AP STUDY SESSION 2.
1
& dding ubtracting ractions.
Cost Behavior, Operating Leverage, and Profitability Analysis
STATISTICS INTERVAL ESTIMATION Professor Ke-Sheng Cheng Department of Bioenvironmental Systems Engineering National Taiwan University.
Disability status in Ethiopia in 1984, 1994 & 2007 population and housing sensus Ehete Bekele Seyoum ESA/STAT/AC.219/25.
David Burdett May 11, 2004 Package Binding for WS CDL.
Create an Application Title 1Y - Youth Chapter 5.
Add Governors Discretionary (1G) Grants Chapter 6.
CALENDAR.
Development and Implementation of a Recovery-Based System: Comparison of Instruments for Assessing Recovery Jeanette M. Jerrell, Ph.D. Professor of Neuropsychiatry,
Tessa Peasgood Centre for Well-being in Public Policy Sheffield University Modelling Subjective Well- being. Do strong social relations lead to increases.
Chapter 7 Sampling and Sampling Distributions
The 5S numbers game..
Part Three Markets and Consumer Behavior
A Fractional Order (Proportional and Derivative) Motion Controller Design for A Class of Second-order Systems Center for Self-Organizing Intelligent.
Biostatistics Unit 5 Samples Needs to be completed. 12/24/13.
Stationary Time Series
Break Time Remaining 10:00.
The basics for simulations
Introduction to Cost Behavior and Cost-Volume Relationships
PP Test Review Sections 6-1 to 6-6
Oil & Gas Final Sample Analysis April 27, Background Information TXU ED provided a list of ESI IDs with SIC codes indicating Oil & Gas (8,583)
Regression with Panel Data
The Definition and Measurement of Well-Being Ulrich Schimmack University of Toronto Mississauga CIFAR, October 1, 2010, Toronto.
Defining and Measuring Well-Being
TCCI Barometer March “Establishing a reliable tool for monitoring the financial, business and social activity in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki”
Measurement Concepts Operational Definition: is the definition of a variable in terms of the actual procedures used by the researcher to measure and/or.
Writing a Method Section
Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved. 1 Chapter 7 Modeling Structure with Blocks.
Biology 2 Plant Kingdom Identification Test Review.
National Differences in Well Being: Beyond Individualism and Wealth Ulrich Schimmack University of Toronto.
Adding Up In Chunks.
MaK_Full ahead loaded 1 Alarm Page Directory (F11)
TCCI Barometer September “Establishing a reliable tool for monitoring the financial, business and social activity in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki”
2011 WINNISQUAM COMMUNITY SURVEY YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR GRADES 9-12 STUDENTS=1021.
Before Between After.
2011 FRANKLIN COMMUNITY SURVEY YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR GRADES 9-12 STUDENTS=332.
: 3 00.
5 minutes.
©2003 Prentice Hall Business Publishing, Cost Accounting 11/e, Horngren/Datar/Foster Determining How Costs Behave Chapter 10.
Converting a Fraction to %
Ch 14 實習(2).
Clock will move after 1 minute
& dding ubtracting ractions.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved Chapter 11 Simple Linear Regression.
Physics for Scientists & Engineers, 3rd Edition
Select a time to count down from the clock above
16. Mean Square Estimation
Murach’s OS/390 and z/OS JCLChapter 16, Slide 1 © 2002, Mike Murach & Associates, Inc.
Copyright Tim Morris/St Stephen's School
Patient Survey Results 2013 Nicki Mott. Patient Survey 2013 Patient Survey conducted by IPOS Mori by posting questionnaires to random patients in the.
ACCEPTANCE AND MINDFULNESS IN MS: INDIVIDUAL AND COUPLE PERSPECTIVES Kenneth Pakenham School of Psychology The University of Queensland Australia.
1 Dr. Scott Schaefer Least Squares Curves, Rational Representations, Splines and Continuity.
Personality and Life Satisfaction: A Facet-Level Analysis Ulrich Schimmack Shigehiro Oishi R. Michael Furr David C. Funder.
Dianne Vella-Brodrick. Comparison of sociodemographic, personality and social support variables as predictors of quality of life. Thanks.
Personality, 9e Jerry M. Burger
Indexes, Scales, and Typologies
Unanswered Questions in Typical Literature Review 1. Thoroughness – How thorough was the literature search? – Did it include a computer search and a hand.
Measuring Subjective Wellbeing. Two types of wellbeing Eudaimonic Hedonic Definitions of happiness by early philosophers. – Eudamonia : self actualization,
Factor validation of the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale: An Assessment and Review Tom R. EikebrokkEllen K. NyhusUniversity of Agder.
Measurement Experiment - effect of IV on DV. Independent Variable (2 or more levels) MANIPULATED a) situational - features in the environment b) task.
Participants and Procedure 1,447 participants representing 64 countries (mostly India and the United States) completed a cross-sectional survey via Amazon’s.
Joane Adeclas & Taekyun Hur
Personality and Life Satisfaction
53% (n = 93) males, 47% (n = 84) females
Subjective Happiness and Meaning in Life as Mediators of the Mindfulness-Life Satisfaction Relationship Lawrence Boehm Results Summary Mindfulness training.
Presentation transcript:

Intrapersonal and Extrapersonal Determinants of Life Satisfaction in Married Couples Ulrich Schimmack University of Toronto Mississauga

Subjective Well Being A. Subjective Well Being (SWB) researchers search for the determinants of “Happiness.” B. The everyday construct of “Happiness” is too vague for scientific purposes. C. SWB has been defined as a multidimensional construct that has an affective and a cognitive component (Diener, 1984). D. The affective component is the balance of pleasant and unpleasant experiences (hedonism).

Life Satisfaction A. The cognitive component is the evaluation of one’s life as good or bad. B. It is typically assessed by life-satisfaction judgments (I am satisfied with my life.) C. Sumner (1996), a philosopher at UofT, pointed out that life-satisfaction is a better indicator of well-being than hedonistic measures. D. One reason is that somebody could choose a life with less pleasure.

Life Satisfaction Judgments A. Although life satisfaction is theoretically the best indicator of SWB, life satisfaction judgments may be invalid. B. The use of life satisfaction judgments assumes that people are able to assess their own life satisfaction and that they are willing to report it accurately.

Are Life Satisfaction Judgments Valid? Retest Stability A. If life satisfaction judgments are valid, they should be stable over short time intervals. B. In contrast, low retest-correlations would indicate that people’s judgments are based on temporarily accessible information (e.g., the weather, finding a dime).

“Measures of SWB have low test-retest correlations, usually hovering around.40, and not exceeding.60 [italics added] when the same question is asked twice during the same one- hour interview (Andrews & Whithey, 1976; Glatzer, 1984)” (p. 62). Source: Schwarz and Strack, 1999, p. 62

A. A meta-analysis of published retest- correlations of life satisfaction judgments. B. 80 coefficients with retest intervals ranging from less than 1 hour to 15 years. Source: Schimmack, U. & Oishi, S. (in press). Chronically accessible versus temporarily accessible sources of life satisfaction judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Andrew & Whitey, 1976

Conclusion A. Life satisfaction judgments are highly stable over short time intervals (r =.70, for multi-item scales). B. Stability decreases over time, indicating that people’s satisfaction changes in response to changing life-circumstances.

Validity of Life Satisfaction Judgments: Experimental Evidence A. Some studies have manipulated the order of life satisfaction judgments and domain satisfaction judgments. B. For example, a preceding question about marital satisfaction could increase the accessibility of this domain and inflate the correlation between marital satisfaction and life satisfaction.

“When life satisfaction is assessed in a survey with other questions, they may be “subject to pronounced [italics added] question order- effects because the content of preceding questions influences the temporary accessibility of relevant information” Source: Schwarz & Strack, 1999, p. 79

Empirical Evidence StudyG-SS-G Schwarz et al. (1991a) Schwarz et al. (1991b) Schuman & Presser (1981) Smith (1982) General Social Survey Tourangeau et al. (1991) Average.42.46

Conclusion A. Temporal accessibility has a negligible influence on life satisfaction judgments. B. Marital satisfaction is correlated with life satisfaction even when life satisfaction is assessed first. A recent meta-analysis also found that the average correlation is r =.42 and estimated that the true relation (corrected for random measurement error) is.52. Heller, Watson, & Hies, (2004). Psychological Bulletin.

Causality A. Correlations between life satisfaction and domain satisfaction do not prove causality. B. Three causal models have been proposed in the literature: - Bottom Up Model - Top Down Model - Top Down/Bottom Up Model Sources: Brief, Butcher, George, & Link (1993), JPSP, Schimmack, Diener, & Oishi (2002), Journal of Personality; Heller, Watson, & Hies, (2004). Psychological Bulletin.

Illustration with Attractiveness A. Body-Mass Index (kg / m 2 ) B. Satisfaction with Attractiveness - 4-item “Appearance Esteem” scale - “How often do you have the feeling that you are unattractive?” Source: Pliner, P., Chaiken, S., Flett, G. L., PSPB, 1990 C. Life Satisfaction - Satisfaction With Life Scale - “I am satisfied with my life” Source: Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S., Pers. Assess., 1985.

D. Depression - 5-item short scale, alpha =.90 “I tend to feel depressed” Based on Schimmack, Oishi, Funder, & Furr (2004), PSPB, 10-item scale. Participants UTM students (347 males, 777 females).

Bottom Up Model BMI ATT SWLS r = -.03 (N = 1124) m r =.07 (N = 347) f r = -.05 (N = 777) r =.36* (N = 1124) m r =.40* (N = 347) f r =.37* (N = 777) r = -.05 (N = 1124) m r =.01 (N = 347) f r = -.15* (N = 777)

Top-Down Model BMI ATT SWLS r = -.03 (N = 1124) m r =.07 (N = 347) f r = -.05 (N = 777) r =.36* (N = 1124) m r =.40* (N = 347) f r =.37* (N = 777) r = -.05 (N = 1124) m r =.01 (N = 347) f r = -.15* (N = 777)

Top-Down/Bottom-Up Model DEP BMI ATTSWLS n.s

In general, it has been difficult to find objective predictors of life-satisfaction. “…researchers are often disappointed by the relatively small effect sizes for the external, objective variables that were explored in most early studies.” Source: Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith (1999). Psychological Bulletin.

Marital Satisfaction and Life Satisfaction: Top-Down or Bottom-Up Effects? The correlation between marital satisfaction and life satisfaction can be due to top-down or bottom-up effects. Studies that rely on ratings of a single spouse cannot distinguish top-down from bottom-up effects.

A Dyadic Approach A. Extrapersonal effects of relationship quality should have similar effects on marital satisfaction of both spouses. B. Intrapersonal effects of personality should produce correlations among personality and life satisfaction within one spouse. C. Thus, dyadic studies allow the separation of extrapersonal and intrapersonal determinants of life satisfaction.

University of Toronto Marriage Study Poppy Lockwood Rebecca Pinkus Ulrich Schimmack Participants. 113 married couples were recruited through newspaper ads in the Metro. Participants completed questionnaires during a 2-hour intake session.

Measures A. Life satisfaction: Satisfaction with Life Scale B.Marital satisfaction: A highly reliable 4-item scale (“I am extremely satisfied with my marriage”) C. Personality self-ratings: The Big Five & Depression and Cheerfulness

W-DepW-MSW-LS H-DepH-MSH-LS RQAEPF a a’ d b’ b e e’ f f’ c c’ c’ Theoretical Model

W-DepW-MSW-LS H-DepH-MSH-LS RQAEPF -.39*.35*.60.60*.44*.43* -.19* Model fit: chi-square (df = 12) = 22, p =.03, CFI =.955, RMSEA =.088

Predictor Explained Variance Depression18% Perception of Marital satisfaction17% Intrapersonal 35 Relationship Quality14% Additional EP Factors15% Extrapersonal29% Total64%

Conclusion The first dyadic study of SWB demonstrates a large contribution of extrapersonal factors to life satisfaction. One important extrapersonal factor is relationship quality. Future research needs to examine the specific processes that contribute to extrapersonal determinants of life satisfaction.