Subjective Well-Being is Not Unitary Ed Diener Daniel Kahneman Raksha Arora William Tov International Differences in Well-Being Princeton, 2008

SWB or WB Is 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 Life Variables Ladder SatisfactionHappiness Life Satisfaction.74 Happiness Affect Balance

Intercorrelation of Well-Being Measures Well-Being Life Variables Ladder SatisfactionHappiness Life Satisfaction.74 V Happiness.62 <.71 V V Affect Balance.53 <.56 <.71

Predicting Life Satisfaction Ladder 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 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 Ladder36 Life Satisfaction21 Happiness20

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

Well-Being Ladder Life Sat. Happiness Wave Wave Difference: p <

Size of Mean Well-being Changes Ladder Life Sat. Happiness Percentage of scale change Between-nation SD units

Correlations of Changes with Income Ladder r =.56, p <.05 Life satisfactionr =.33, p <.10 Happinessr =.24, NS

Change Regression Analyses: Over time predictions (Betas): Log income T1 SWBChange Ladder (p <.06) Life satisfaction (p <.01) Happiness (p <.10)

Losses Versus Gains?

Box Score Analyses Across 3 SWB Measures: SWB Change Income ChangeDownUp Down 7 1 Up 2565

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 scale score change GDP down 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-BeingIncome PerChoose How toPossession of VariablesCapitaSpend TimeConveniences 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

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