Subjective Well-Being.pdf

Wednesday, January 24, 2024 Objective well-being: material conditions (housing, income, etc.) as well as objective physical health Subjective well-being: report on how a person feels relative to the preceding day, week, etc.; sometimes calculating in terms of affect balance [summing positive and neg...

Wednesday, January 24, 2024 Objective well-being: material conditions (housing, income, etc.) as well as objective physical health Subjective well-being: report on how a person feels relative to the preceding day, week, etc.; sometimes calculating in terms of affect balance [summing positive and negative affect] and other times calculated on one or more judgements of life satisfaction, or a combination of all three (less common) 1. Level of positive affect (happy, pleased, excited) 2. Level of negative affect (sad, nervous, anxious) 3. Judgements of life satisfaction assessed for life satisfaction overall Assessed domain by domain - Distinct and separate from one another - Correlation of.50 (25% shared variance) SWB Subjective well-being is not strongly related to objective well-being, except for extreme conditions - correlation between OWB and SWB is around.30 (9% shared variance) i.e. income r = 0.11 (1% shared variance in North America) - Regardless of income, if money is spent on things you life, it increases SWB - Correlation is low except for extreme conditions (i.e. homelessness) Report lower SWB - Also across countries, where income overlaps with other factors (i.e. war, political crises) Individuals in poorer countries report lower SWB (below the mid-point) - Having more money matters: correlation between SWB and income is higher and stronger As income increases, so does life satisfaction Individual SWB set-points People have set-points for SWB: for positive affect, negative affect, and for judgments of satisfaction - Set-point: can be inferred from looking at the average of how people vary over time in SWB - Different people have different set-points influencing people’s well-being above and beyond the influence of life condition An event can alter the set point and its effect can linger - Set point is determined in part by his/her genetic background Twin study: 1 ✓ Higher SWB was accounted for by unique genetic influences via lower neuroticism (N), higher extraversion (E), and to a lesser extent higher conscientiousness (C) ✓ SWB was also determined in part by a common underlying genetic factor of better adjustment across all the Big Five: low N, high E, high openness, high agreeableness, and high C ✓ genetics influence your SWB, but do so only through your Big Five Study: Money, Genetics & SWB — Johnson & Krueger - How the relative impact of genetics depends on individual income Controlling for genetic influences - Correlational study ✓ Income & Life satisfaction = 0.12 ✓ Income & Perceived control over one’s life = 0.10 ✓ Beta = 0.41 ✓ Income & Perceived financial situation = 0.30 ✓ Beta = 0.24 - Conclusions: income influenced people’s life satisfaction completely in terms of perceived financial situation, and having a sense of control Higher income seems to allow for better management and/or less exposure to some negative stressful events or conditions ✓ people with higher income can feel comfortable about their finances and feel in control of their lives better income might allow a person’s genetic background to ‘shine through’ more on their well-being ✓ For higher incomes, their genetic inheritance is relatively more important as an influence on life satisfaction Because money accounts for all the rest, their personality (Big 5) will show more Money helps buy more conveniences leading to increased life satisfaction Money increases the standard of living leading to increased life satisfaction ✓ For higher incomes, unique negative life events and conditions are less impactful Genetics and SWB: attenuating the impact of neuroticism People may have lower SWB set-points if they are higher in neuroticism Study — Murray et al., 2007 - individuals higher in N were less likely to experience negative affect if they had high levels of social participation social participation allows people to reality test unproductive assumptions might provide distraction from anxiogenic thoughts ✓ Short-term solutions only 2 might facilitate venting and support - People high on N will ruminate over their negative affect (upset about being upset) = cycle - Therapy has been developed to target tendencies seen in N = reduced N Mindfulness COGNITIVE PROCESSING STYLE Cognitive processing: Being an expert at judging whether something is good or bad Study — Cognitive processing style as a contributor to set-points (Robinson, 2004) - Experts at judging negative: Some people are experts at judging negative stimuli quickly, as reflected in greater speed they are well practiced at making negative evaluations - Faster judges have lower SWB: more negative affect in daily life and greater dissatisfaction with their current life situation - expertise is distinct from personality, such as N and E, and has its own impact on well-being origins of this expertise are unknown Beyond set-point: Personal life events - Major personal life events can influence people’s SWB Negative events, such as losing your job, can lower SWB Positive events, such as marriage, can increase SWB IMPACT OF MAJOR LIFE EVENTS ON SWB - Large panel studies goal is to have representative samples people experience various life events and a range of negative events - One can examine: How people on average react to an event, and follow their SWB over time. Even better, one can look at what SWB was like on average before a certain event occurred, which allows for a better understanding of the effects of the event Study - Methods: When studying the effects, life event is called “year 0” Place life satisfaction scores in a timeline in relation to year 0 - Results Marriage: slight increase at wedding year Widowhood: constant decrease until death of partner and slowly increases years after 3 Divorce: slight constant decrease until death/year 0 of partner and slowly increases years - after Unemployment: sharp/sudden decrease until year 0 and slight increase after Question/debate: do we ever go back to the way we were before? Between culture and individual characteristics - Religious people have higher SWB in religious nations but not in nonreligious nations stronger correlation between E and SBW in countries which have higher mean E scores - E individuals are happier in more E countries i.e. if you have high E, SWB is higher in Canada vs China - Being more like other people = happier - Self-esteem is a stronger predictor of life satisfaction in individualistic than in collectivistic cultures more important to how people feel generally about their lives in individualistic cultures IMPORTANCE OF CULTURE (INDIV. VS COLLECT.) - In general, individuals living in individualistic cultures report higher SWB than those living in collectivistic cultures Study: acceptance and life satisfaction - The life satisfaction of Asian Americans was related to: How much they perceive their friends and parents accept them ✓ SWB tied to relationships Their emotions (also related to acceptance) - For European Americans, their life satisfaction was related to : Their emotions Perceived acceptance did not have any influence independent of emotions Study: daily vs weekly life satisfaction - European Americans reported more life satisfaction than Asian Americans - European Americans’ life satisfaction judgment of the week was significantly higher than the average of their daily satisfaction European Americans seem to be showing a bias for self-enhancement (make them feel better about themselves) ✓ Exaggerating how they’re feeling - Asian Americans’ life satisfaction of the week was almost identical to the average of their daily satisfaction Asian Americans are not showing any evidence of self-enhancement - suggest that there may not be differences in daily experience, but only in more abstract judgments of life satisfaction 4 Universal determinants of subjective well-being - people (cross-culturally) have higher SWB to the extent that: feel that they can have an impact on their environment (autonomy) competent at one or more valued tasks (competence) have good caring relationships with important others (relatedness) - in line with Self-Determination Theory: all humans have basic core needs that when they are met, people are satisfied with their life SWB a methodological artifact? - Are people saying that they’re happy because of the way the question is asked? - Are the results coming solely from the way they are measured? - Answer: No, because positive responses are found with methods other than direct one shot self-report Asking close others Experience sampling indicates positive mood Asking people to recall as many positive and negative events from their life as they can Study: SWB inflated due to self-enhancement - Highlighting the benefits of positive emotions for people as opposed to noting their costs leads them to report higher life satisfaction those who are higher is self-deceptive enhancement report even higher life satisfaction - Implication: Hard to compare across cultures or groups that differ in self-enhancement tendencies, or general evaluative bias 5