Samman Psych Subj Wellbeing Final

OPHI Working Paper Series
Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI)

Department of International Development, Queen Llizabeth House, University of
Oxford
www.ophi.org.uk ophiqeh.ox.ac.uk

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND
SUBJLC1IVL WLLLBLING: A
PROPOSAL IOR
IN1LRNA1IONALLY
COMPARABLL INDICA1ORS

Lmma Samman
University of Oxford

PrepureJ jor the uorkshop Missing Dimensions oj Pouerty Dutu'
29-30 Muy 2007, OxjorJ UK
1

Pleuse senJ comments or suggestions to emmu.summunQqeh.ox.uc.uk

OPlI grateully acknowledges the support o the International Deelopment Research Council
,IDRC, and the UK Department o International Deelopment ,DlID, or this research.

1
Sabina Alkire, 1ania Burchardt, Laura Camield and Geeta Kingdon proided detailed comments on an earlier
ersion o this paper. I am also grateul or the input o Proochista Ariana, Valery Chirko, Ld Deci, Ld Diener,
Rachel Diprose, Carol Graham, Anna liltunen, Ron Inglehart, Mara Ana Lugo, Michael Steger, Diego Zaaleta and
other workshop participants on the content o this paper. All errors remain my own.
avvav vb;ectire c P.,cbotogicat !ettbeivg

OPlI !or/ivg Paer 2 rrr.obi.org
Abstract

1his article sets out a proposal to measure psychological and subjectie states o
wellbeing in indiidual and household sureys. In particular, it proposes a short list o
seen indicators, and a module containing the releant questions needed to construct
them. 1he indicators address both evaaivovic and beaovic criteria, and coer our aspects
o wellbeing: 1, meaning in lie, 2, psychological wellbeing - ollowing sel-determination
theory, this includes the three basic psychological needs` o autonomy, competence and
relatedness, 3, domain-speciic and oerall lie satisaction, and 4, happiness. 1he article
recommends that urther research explore the connections between these indicators, as
well as their relationship with objectie measures o disadantage. \hile reairming that
perceptual states should not be treated as aims o goernment policy, it is argued that
they may proide a richer understanding o peoples` alues and behaior - and thereore
that urther research on the subject could deepen our understanding o capability poerty.

Table of contents

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................. 4
2. BACKGROUND: DEFINITIONS AND MEASUREMENT ISSUES................ 6
3. MEASURING POSITIVE FUNCTIONING...................................................... 8
vaaivovic measures................................................................................................ 8
R,ff: Dovaiv. of .,cbotogicat rettbeivg ......................................................................10
Meavivg iv tife......................................................................................................10
etfaetervivatiov tbeor,..........................................................................................13
ledonic measures: happiness and lie satisaction ...................................................15
Measures o mental illbeing....................................................................................25
4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS...............................................................................27
5. CRI1IQUING PS\ClOLOGICAL,SUBJLC1IVL MLASURLS AS A POLIC\
GOAL......................................................................................................................31
Nature o happiness...............................................................................................32
Conlict with other alues ......................................................................................33
Democratic process ...............................................................................................33
Adaptie preerences .............................................................................................34
Richer appraisal o policy options at a micro- and macro-leel .................................36
6. CONCLUSION................................................................................................37
RLlLRLNCLS ........................................................................................................39
Appendix 1: Complete shortlist ..................................................................................45
Appendix 2: Domains and items coered in arious household sureys on perceied
satisaction,happiness ...............................................................................................47
Appendix 3: Long orm o questionnaires included in paper in modiied orm.............48
Appendix 4: Questionnaires not used in paper ............................................................52



Box I World Values survey question of meaning of life.........................................11
Box II Stegers Meaning in Life questionnaire.......................................................13
Box III Questions on self-determination ................................................................14
Box IV Question on overall life satisfaction...........................................................17
Table I Requirements for human flourishing .......................................................19
Table II Cummins (1996) identification of domains contributing to Quality of Life
.................................................................................................................................21
Box V Selected domains and items of interest within each.....................................22
Box VI Question on domain-specific satisfaction...................................................23
Box VII: Question on happiness ...............................................................................25
Figure I Per capita income and happiness in the 1990s, numerous countries ..........30
Figure II Income and life satisfaction in the United States, 1940-2000...................30

J. IN1RODUC1ION

Recent years hae witnessed an outpouring on research on subjectie wellbeing, and
growing calls or some ariant o happiness to be adopted as a policy goal o both
deeloping and deeloped countries. 1he now-common inding that income and
happiness are not linked aboe ery low income leels has prompted an upsurge o
interest in non-material aspects o wellbeing. As early as 192, the King o Bhutan
announced that the nation`s objectie would be to maximize what he termed Gross
National lappiness` in place o gross national product.
2
More recently, policymakers in
Australia, Canada, lrance, Germany, Italy, New Zealand and the United Kingdom hae
expressed interest in measuring lie satisaction as a component o wellbeing.
3
Research
organizations and media outlets regularly publish happiness rankings, one recent eort
concluded, or instance, that the Danes are the happiest people in the world, and
inhabitants o Burundi and Zimbabwe, the least happy.
4
Scholars too hae taken up this
call. In an inluential book, aive..: e..ov. frov a ver .cievce, economist Richard Layard
,2005, states, I can think o no nobler goal than to pursue the greatest happiness o all`
,p. 234,, and adocates seeral policies with this end in mind.
5
1he appeal o happiness as
an indicator is maniold: it is uni-dimensional, easy to capture and emotionally appealing.

1his emphasis on happiness has also been critiqued on many ronts - chie among them
or its leeting nature, possible conlict with other alues, potential undermining o
democracy and implicit acceptance o adaptie preerences. At the same time, it is hard
to dispute that psychological and subjectie states o wellbeing hae intrinsic and

2
A new measure o wellbeing rom a happy little kingdom`, 1be êr Yor/ 1ive., 4 October 2005.
3
bia. and \hat about gross national happiness`, 1M 10 January 2005.
4
Rating countries or the happiness actor`, v.ive.. !ee/ 11 October 2006.
5
lis recommendations include increasing taxes to oster better work-lie balance, remoing perormance-related pay,
discouraging geographic mobility, deoting more resources to the poor and mentally ill, introducing more amily-
oriented employment policies, subsidizing community lie, lowering unemployment, reducing commercial adertising
and proiding better moral education` ,Layard 2005, Ch. 14,.

instrumental alue. 1hey are a key component o the dimensions we propose -
employment, saety, empowerment and respect - as well as an end result o their
attainment. Moreoer, they stand to contribute a richer perspectie to our understanding
o human experience and alues, and particularly the importance o its non-material
components.

1his paper argues that while the new emphasis on subjectie wellbeing draws into relie
an important topic, its current usage may blur conceptual dierences between happiness
and satisaction, and largely oerlooks more robust measures o psychological wellbeing.
Although use o perceptual measures as policy aims has been critiqued on seeral
grounds, and we reiterate this cautionary approach, the degree to which one inds one`s
lie to be meaningul, unctions positiely, and perceies its arious aspects approingly
does seem to be capturing something important that might proide a richer
understanding o capability, and perhaps o the interactions between capability poerty
and subjectie well-being. \e outline some research questions that these measures could
address, and their potential releance.

Our proposal is to derie seen indicators rom questions measuring psychological
wellbeing, lie satisaction and happiness. 1he irst indicator assesses the extent to which
people perceie meaning in their lies. 1he second set o indicators measures the ability
to deine and to progress towards meaning, ollowing sel-determination theory, it is
concerned with the extent to which indiiduals exhibit relatedness, autonomy and
competence. 1he third indicators seek to determine oerall and domain-speciic lie
satisaction, considering 11 domains that philosophical and psychological accounts raise
as important components o a good lie`. 1he inal indicator measures happiness.
Lxploring the relationships between these our types o indicators and the objectie`

criteria typically aailable in national sureys, and their eolution oer time, could
signiicantly complement the content and process o anti-poerty policy making.

1he remainder o this paper is organized as ollows. Section 2 clariies deinitional and
measurement issues. Section 3 gies an oeriew o three main streams in the literature,
recommends a ocus on particular indicators, and ealuates their strengths and
weaknesses. It proposes a short set o questions needed to construct these indicators.
Section 4 reiews the limited empirical eidence aailable on psychological and subjectie
wellbeing, and puts orth seeral hypotheses that better data could permit us to explore.
Section 5 discusses how this inormation could enable a richer understanding o anti-
poerty policy. Section 6 concludes.

2. BACKGROUND: DLIINI1IONS AND
MLASURLMLN1 ISSULS

Seeral terms recur in the literature and are used in arious ways. \e ollow the basic
distinction drawn by seeral researchers ,c.. \aterman 1993, Deci and Ryan 2000,
between evaaivovic and hedonic measures, with the ormer comprising a multiaceted
measure o lourishing`, and the latter, happiness and satisaction - which we suggest are
distinct concepts. In this paper, we consider seeral evaaivovic and hedonic measures.
1aken together, we consider the evaaivovic measures to indicate psychological wellbeing
and the hedonic measures to relect subjectie wellbeing. 1he umbrella term used to
denote both the evaaivovic and hedonic measures is psychological and subjectie
wellbeing.

A uniorm response structure is adopted or all the recommended questions. Limited
work has been done on the optimal response structure or psychological and subjectie

questions. Generally, respondents are asked to rank their PS\B on a Cantril ladder scale,
at least 4 categories are recommended. In his work on Quality o Lie measures,
Cummins recommends 11 steps as it optimizes respondent discriminatie capacity`
,I\B 2006, p. ,, but this may not be easible in a deeloping country context where low
educational leels preail.
6
Moreoer there is some eidence that in dierent cultural
contexts, people may not perceie such scales to be linear with equi-distant interals. In
such cases, it appears more accurate to use a shorter scale and to hae labels attached to
each interal - though there is a paucity o systematic work comparing the ability o
populations rom dierent educational and cultural backgrounds to place themseles on
dierent types o scales ,personal correspondence with Robert Cummins, Ld Deci and
Michael Steger,. Gien this lack o rigorous eidence, a cautious approach would suggest
use o a reduced set o options.

A recent task orce report on ealuating states o health in cross-cultural contexts
proides some guidance.

lollowing a reiew o response structures, the authors
conclude, using ie response categories.would seem to be quite reasonable.based
on some classic psychological research in the areas o human inormation processing and
questionnaire deelopment` ,p. 10,. In particular, they argue that ie to nine
independent pieces o inormation represent a maximal cognitie load or most persons`,
and that ie response categories appears to be the most eicient.increasing the
number o categories beyond ie resulted in a progressie loss o discriminatie power`
,p. 10,. lere we adopt a our-response ariant or each question, with an een number o
responses selected to deter respondents rom settling on the mean. In work on

6
1hough note that the \orld Values surey uses a 10 step ladder, Diener`s Satisaction with Lie Scale - implemented
in 61 countries ,see Suh et at. 1998, - is based on a step ladder.
Paper submitted by the 1ask lorce on lealth Status to the Joint UNLCL,\lO,Lurostat meeting on the
measurement on health status, Budapest, lungary 14-16 Noember, 2005. Aailable at:
http:,,www.unece.org,stats,documents,ece,ces,ge.13,2005,wp.3.e.pd.

empowerment, Alkire ,n.d., ound that this response structure worked well among poor
respondents in Ll Salador in India.
8
lurther research is needed to test the eect o
response scales and their interpretation across cultures.

3. MLASURING POSI1IVL IUNC1IONING

1he main strands o the literature on psychological and subjectie wellbeing ocus on
evaaivovic, hedonic and mental health measures, respectiely. vaaivovic conceptions also
derie rom ancient Greek philosophy - notably the work o Aristotle - and were later
championed by Mills among others. vaaivovic measures emphasize human lourishing`
- literally ev ,wellbeing - or good, and aaivovia ,demon or spirit, - and irtuous action,
which is argued to be not always congruent with happiness or satisaction, but to relect a
broader and multi-aceted set o needs. ledonic measures ollow the criteria o
maximizing pleasure and aoiding pain, an approach dating back to ancient Greek
philosophy that ound later expression in the work o Bentham and his ollowers. 1he
mental health literature is concerned with psychological disorder, the diagnosis o which
is based on clinical criteria, but we argue that multi- and cross-cultural contexts call these
criteria into question, and or the need to ocus more on positie unctioning.

vaaivovic measures
1he irst category o measures we consider ocuses on evaaivovia or human lourishing`.
Based on Aristotelian philosophy, evaaivovic measures incorporate a more dierse set o
principles than their hedonic counterparts, which ocus more on pleasure. Sen ,1996,
writes that Aristotle saw eudaimonia` as being constitutiely dierse, leading to a
heterogeneous iew o ulillment.proceeding.in the direction o a structured

8
http:,,www.as.harard.edu,~acgei,PDls,Capabilities,Intro20to20the20study.pd

diersity o joys` ,p. 489,. Ry and Singer ,1989, deine evaaivovia as the idea o striing
toward excellence based on one`s own unique potential`. 1he measure has the adantage
o incorporating process and outcome, giing it both instrumental and intrinsic
importance. It also gies due recognition to the role o indiidual internal cognition in
conditioning outcomes. Lyubormirsky et at. ,2005, ind that external circumstances may
account or just about 10 percent o ariation between indiiduals in measures o lie
satisaction, with most accounted or by intentional actiities` - i.e., aspects o
unctioning oer which indiiduals hae some control ,cited in luppert et at. 2006, p. 2,.
In addition, this ocus on process ties in with lrey and Stutzer`s ,200, arguments that
indiiduals beneit rom what they label procedural utility` as well as outcomes ,p. 9,, and
that they should become better able o adancing what constitutes their idea o the
good lie` ,p. 15,.

\e argue or a two-pronged approach to measuring evaaivovia based on: 1, perception o
meaning in lie - deined by the indiidual based on his,her own unique potential, and 2,
the ability to strie towards excellence in ulilling this idea. 1o deelop these concepts,
we draw upon Steger`s Meaning in Lie questionnaire ,Steger et at. 2006,, and on Deci
and Ryan`s measures o the psychological needs associated with goal identiication and
pursuit, which in turn predict optimal unctioning` ,Ryan and Deci 2000, 2001,. 1his
ocus also ties in with Ry`s assertion that purpose in lie and personal growth are the
two most evaaivovic aspects o wellbeing.


R,ff: Dovaiv. of .,cbotogicat rettbeivg
Psychologist Carol Ry and her colleagues ,c.. Ry and Singer 1989, 2006, sought to
operationalize the concept o evaaivovia through constructs culled rom an array o
psychological literature. 1hey conclude that six constructs represent distinct points o
conergence as to what constitutes psychological wellbeing: autonomy, personal growth,
sel-acceptance, lie purpose, enironmental mastery and positie relatedness. In
subsequent work, they examine the extent to which indiiduals combine these
characteristics, and their correlations with socio-demographic characteristics, notably age,
gender, race,ethnicity and education. lor our purposes, these scales hae seeral
problems. It is impractical to collect data regarding all six constructs. 1he cross-cultural
comparability o the scale has been challenged ,Christopher 1999,. lurther, it is oerly
restrictie - or our purposes - in dictating not only what constitutes psychological
wellbeing in terms o process - but also what wellbeing i.. low to combine the six
domains and what the presence o arious combinations o the constructs indicates is
also unclear.

Meavivg iv tife
1he importance o the search or and presence o meaning recurs in philosophical
accounts o the good lie rom ancient Greece onwards. Psychological attention grew
rom the 1940s on, in particular through the work o Victor lrankl who asserted that the
need or meaning is a basic human drie ,lrankl 1963,. More recently, seeral empirical
studies ind strong links between meaning in lie and psychological wellbeing ,Zika and
Chamberlain 198, Reker, Peacock and \ong 198, Ry and Singer 1989, Steger and
lrazier 2005, King et at. 2006, Steger et at. in press,. lor instance, Zika and Chamberlain
,198, report that meaning in lie was the most consistent predicator they ound o
psychological wellbeing among college students in the United States. Chamberlain and

Zika ,1992, and Shek ,1993, ind that meaning is positiely linked with lie satisaction,
Debats et at. ,1993, report a positie link with happiness, while Bonebright et at. ,2000,
establish a positie connection with work enjoyment.
9
1he presence o meaning is also
reported to be a powerul means o coping with negatie circumstances ,King et at. 2006,.
Although dierent theorists disagree oer how to deine meaning, they uniormly agree
that haing meaning in lie is crucial ,Steger et at. 2006,. Steger et at. ,2006, make the case
or a relatiistic conception o meaning, which leaes the concept open to respondent
determination, as noted aboe, this argument accords well with the meaning o evaaivovia
which stresses that lourishing comes rom striing or excellence based on one`s own
unique potential.

Very little surey work seeks to elicit respondent perceptions o meaning in their lies.
All ie waes o the \orld Values surey proide a rare example, posing the ollowing
question in a section on spirituality ,Box I,.
10

Box I - \orld Values surey question o meaning o lie
Source: \orld Values surey ,arious,. See www.worldvaluessurvey.org,.

loweer, this question conounds the search or with the presence o meaning, two
constructs that Steger et at. ,2006, argue are independent. Steger`s Meaning in Lie
questionnaire contains separate sub-scales to assess these two concepts. \e recommend
his scale or presence` o meaning or seeral reasons. lirst, it is indicatie o meaning

9
Cited in Steger et at. ,2006,.
10
See Inglehart and Baker ,2000, discuss the results o this question, inding that in many countries, the share o the
population that oten` thinks about meaning increased oer time.
or oftev, if at att, ao ,ov tbiv/ abovt tbe veavivg ava vro.e of tife.
1 Oftev
2 ovetive.
Raret,
1 êrer


rather than simply a desire or meaning. According to Steger ,in press, p. 2,, ,p,eople
theoretically experience the presence o meaning when they comprehend themseles and
the world, understand their unique it in the world, and identiy what they are trying to
accomplish in their lies`. \hile haing meaning is associated with psychological
wellbeing, the search or meaning is not necessarily healthy, Steger et at. ,in press, show
that it can arise rom dierent underlying motiations in dierent people and thereore
hae positie or negatie eects on psychological health. It ollows that the re.evce o
meaning is more closely linked with lie satisaction than the .earcb ,Steger and Oishi
2004,. In addition, Steger`s scale exhibits stronger psychometric properties than other key
scales o meaning in lie, e.g. Crumbaugh`s Purpose in Lie scale and the Lie Regard
Index ,both said to conlate lie purpose and satisaction,,
11
and Ry`s purpose in lie
scale ,which has a lower alpha score than Steger`s scale,.
12

1he questionnaire deised by Steger has not yet been used in many cross-cultural
contexts ,Steger et at. 2006, p. 90, howeer, the limited existing eidence suggests its
alidity in the contexts in which it has been employed,
13
Steger reports actorial
inariance in US and Japanese samples, and the indication o a similar structure in
Spanish samples - though the latter is too small or actorial inariance analysis ,personal
communication, Michael Steger,. 1he ull ersion o the presence` questionnaire has ie
questions, and the short orm, three. \e draw upon the short orm to acilitate surey
implementation ,Box II,.

11
Zika and Chamberlain ,1992, gather critiques o the Purpose in Lie Scale and Steger ,in press, critiques the Lie
Regard Index.
12
Cronbach`s alpha is a common test o the extent to which items on a scale are inter-related. 1he alpha or Ry`s
scale has been reported as .31 while or Steger`s scale it is .5 or higher ,Steger, personal correspondence,.
13
Steger is aware o ersions in German, Portuguese, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, 1urkish, South Lesotho, Arikaans,
lindi and Lebanese ,personal communication, Michael Steger,.

Box II - Steger`s Meaning in Lie questionnaire
SOURCL: Short-orm o Steger questionnaire or presence o Meaning in Lie.

etfaetervivatiov tbeor,

1he ocus on meaning in lie is complemented by sel-determination theory ,SD1, which
posits three innate psychological needs - or competence, autonomy and relatedness -
and theorizes that ulillment o these needs is essential or psychological growth,
integrity and wellbeing ,Deci and Ryan 2000, Ryan and Deci 2001,. 1hey conceie o
these constructs as actors that oster wellbeing by maximizing one`s potential, rather
than as indicatie o wellbeing itsel. lurther they argue that the thwarting o any o these
three needs is psychologically harmul. Deci and Ryan deeloped SD1 to explain both
goal content and the processes through which goals are pursued. 1hey posit that process
and goal content make distinct contributions toward psychological wellbeing - and stress
whether goal ulillment is made in a way that acilitates the three basic needs, and
whether it is intrinsically or extrinsically motiated ,with the ormer associated with
better motiation, perormance and wellbeing,.

Please take a moment to think about what makes your lie eel important to you.
Please respond to the ollowing statements as truthully and accurately as you can, and
also please remember that these are ery subjectie questions and that there are no
right or wrong answers. Please answer according to the scale below.

1 2 3 4
Not at all true Not ery true Somewhat true Completely true

S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
My lie has a clear sense o purpose
I hae a good sense o what makes my lie meaningul
I hae discoered a satisying lie purpose


Lidence suggests SD1 is applicable across cultures. Despite cultural, ideological and
locational dierences, Kenny and Kenny ,200, report, it appears that status, control,
and leels o social interaction are uniersal determinants o subjectie happiness across
cultures` ,p. 153,. Ryan and Deci ,2001, ind that SD1 does not . suggest that the
basic needs are equally alued in all amilies, social groups, or cultures, but it does
maintain that thwarting o these needs will result in negatie psychological consequences
in all social or cultural contexts ,p. 14,. 1heir Basic Psychological Needs Scales
14

addresses needs satisaction in the three domains. 1he original scale has 21 items -
howeer, the authors o the scale proided us with a short-orm which contains 9 items,
3 in each category ,Box III,.

Box III - Questions on sel-determination
Source: Short-orm o Ryan and Deci Basic Psychological Needs scales.

14
http:,,www.psych.rochester.edu,SD1,measures,needs.html.
Please read each o the ollowing items careully, thinking about how it relates to your lie,
and then indicate how true it is or you. Use the ollowing scale to respond:
1 2 3 4

A, AU1ONOM\
S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
I eel like I am ree to decide or mysel how to lie my lie.
I generally eel ree to express my ideas and opinions
I eel like I can pretty much be mysel in daily situations

B, COMPL1LNCL
S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
People I know tell me I am competent at what I do.
Most days I eel a sense o accomplishment rom what I do.
I oten eel ery capable.

C, RLLA1LDNLSS
S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
I get along well with people I come into contact with.
I consider the people I regularly interact with to be my riends.
People in my lie care about me.


laing discussed the importance o evaaivovic wellbeing and adocated a ocus on
meaning in lie, and on the three basic determinants o optimal unctioning, we now
explore hedonic measures and their contribution to an understanding o wellbeing.

ledonic measures: happiness and lie satisaction

Subjectie perceptions o wellbeing hae three components: a cognitie component
,oten described as lie satisaction,, and positie and negatie aect ,Diener 1984,. 1he
preponderance o positie oer negatie aect can be described as happiness ,Bradburn
1969,. 1he extent to which happiness and unhappiness constitute a single dimension has
been challenged,
15
but most recent research inds that they are not independent: most
moments o experience can be adequately characterized by a single summary alue on the
Good,Bad dimension` ,Kahneman 1999, p. 8,. \e argue or the separate measurement
o lie satisaction and happiness, and that satisaction consider both lie oerall and
seeral distinct domains that are argued to be important.

1hough psychologists careully distinguish happiness and lie satisaction, many
economists use the two measures interchangeably.
16
1his blurring is relected in some
ways that these terms appear in national surey instruments.
1
Layard ,2005, justiies this
interchangeable use on the basis o high correlations between the two ariables ,p. 255,
note 32,, Di 1ella et at. ,2003, inds a correlation o .56 or 195-86 using Lurobarometer
data, and Graham ,200, reports correlations o between .50 and .56 or British and
Latin American data ,p. 4,. loweer, the correlations are not close enough to suggest the
indicators are necessarily capturing the same concept. In his analysis o US Gallup poll

15
Kahnemann ,1999, proides a rich discussion o this literature. See also Diener ,1984, or a reiew o this work or
the 190s and early 1980s, and Layard ,2005, on more recent research.
16
Lasterlin ,2003, writes, I take the terms well-being, utility, happiness, lie satisaction, and welare to be
interchangeable` ,p. 3,.
1
Key examples occur in the Lnglish ersions o the 2004 Malawi Integrated household surey and 200 German
Socio-economic panel surey.

data, Ld Diener reports that what he labels judgment ariables` ,domain and lie
satisaction, and aectie ariables are distinct ,personal correspondence,. Moreoer,
Suh et at. ,1998, compare eidence rom 61 countries and report that that the extent o
correlation aries greatly amongst them, a dierence that they attribute to the extent o
indiidualism ersus collectiism. \orld Values data rom 1990,93 suggest an aerage
correlation o .41, but a range rom .20 ,Nigeria, to .5 ,\est Germany,. Surey data
,1995,96, rom uniersity students in 40 countries yield an aerage o .46 and
correlations o between .0 ,Nepal, and .6 ,Lgypt,.
18
1he authors conclude that inner
emotional eelings play a more signiicant role in one`s judgment o oerall lie
satisaction in indiidualist nations than in collectiist nations` ,p. 486,. Because
collectiism and per capita income are ery highly correlated,
19
the conlation o
happiness and lie satisaction appears more important in poor countries than rich ones.
loweer, it has been suggested that the terms happiness and satisaction - which carry
dierent connotations in Lnglish - may translate more or less clearly into other
languages and that thereore the range o correlations between the terms may result rom
such dierences ,personal communication, Geeta Kingdon,, this possibility requires
urther study.
20
On the basis o the aailable eidence, we adocate collecting data on lie
satisaction and on happiness separately, gien that these terms may measure a deep-
seated cognitie outlook and aectie inclinations, respectiely, and could potentially
inorm research on poerty in somewhat dierent ways.

1he question on oerall lie satisaction can be phrased in the ollowing manner ,Box IV,:

18
Lgypt appears as an outlier in this case.
19
lostede ,2001, reports a correlation o .84 between his index o Indiidualism-Collectiism and per capita GDP in
50 countries ,cited in Allik and Realo 2004, p. 46,.
20
Kingdon comments: the words satisaction` and contentment` both would be translated into lindi as santushti`
and this is closer in meaning to contentment than to satisaction, and thus perhaps urther rom the notion o
happiness` ,khushi or prassanata in lindi, than is the case in Lnglish` ,personal communication,.

Box IV - Question on oerall lie satisaction
Source: Lurobarometer, www.za.uni-koeln.de,research,eurolabor.

Comparing surey responses with the results o physiological, psychological and third-
party indicators leads to the conclusion that subjectie well-being sureys do capture an
underlying psychological reality`` ,Kenny and Kenny 200, p. 151, see also lrey and
Stutzer 200, p. 3,. A global measure, such as lie satisaction, has the strong adantage
that it coers all releant resources, and not just the ew that are easily measurable and
deemed releant` ,Veerhoen 200, p. 219,. loweer, in our iew, this strength is oset
by a clear weakness. Asked in isolation rom domain-speciic satisaction, global
questions ail to proide inormation regarding the components o subjectie wellbeing.
1hereore they ultimately tell us ery little about rb, people eel as they do, as well as
how people may aggregate arious components o their lies to reach an oerall
assessment. Moreoer, global questions are more prone to cognitie or mood biases
than domain-speciic ones` ,Schwartz and Strack 1999, cited in Camield 2003, p. ,.

Gien these limitations, some work - particularly that ocusing on capturing Quality o
Lie
21
- considers satisaction with respect to speciic domains deemed to be important
to indiiduals. Satisaction in arious domains might be reinorcing or osetting. lor
instance, in a study o paement dwellers in Calcutta and homeless people in lresno,
Diener and Biswas-Diener ,2006, ind that the ormer are more satisied than the latter
oerall. \hile both groups perceie dissatisaction relating to their lack o housing, this is

21
See lagerty et at. ,2001, or a reiew o 22 indicators commonly used in this area.
v geverat, rovta ,ov .a, tbat ,ov are .ati.fiea ritb ,ovr tife. !ovta ,ov .a, tbat ,ov are:
1 1er, .ati.fiea
2 airt, .ati.fiea
ôt rer, .ati.fiea
1 ôt at att .ati.fiea


somewhat oset in the Calcutta sample by the satisaction the respondents deried rom
their social relationships.

Some research on this theme asks the respondent to identiy the domains they consider
releant,
22
but this would be unmanageable in large-scale internationally comparable
sureys. Moreoer, philosophical and psychological studies suggest considerable
agreement as to the components o human lourishing, which can be drawn upon to
identiy domains that are likely to be important. Ranis et at. ,2006, put orth
requirements or human lourishing` that they identiy in six key philosophical and
participatory accounts - Rawls ,192,, linnis et at. ,198,, Doyal and Gough ,1993,,
Nussbaum ,2000,, Narayan-Parker ,2000, and Camield ,2005, - and group these items
into twele domains: material wellbeing,
23
mental wellbeing, empowerment, political
reedom, social relations, community wellbeing, inequalities, work conditions, leisure
conditions, political security, economic security and enironmental sustainability ,1able I,.

22
1he Bath research group on \ellbeing in Deeloping Countries in its Person Generated Index o Quality o Lie`
asks the respondent to think o the areas o your lie that are most important` and to identiy up to ie such areas.
23
lere they consider the human deelopment index particularly.

1able I - Requirements or human lourishing`

Source: Ranis et at. 2005, p. 4, 1able 1.
Notes: Deried rom Alkire 2002, Doyal and Gough 1991, Narayan et at. 2000, Camield
2000. a. Intermediate needs are instrumental or the achieement o Basic needs, Basic
needs are in bold and intermediate are in normal type.


Cummins and his colleagues propose additional criteria or domain selection, two o
which are important here:
24
the domains must be able to contribute unique ariance to
the prediction o Lie as a \hole` as determined by regressing potential domains against
an oerall satisaction with lie` indicator, and that they should be able to be
represented both objectiely and subjectiely` ,Cummins 2002, n.p.,.

lollowing a reiew o oer 1,500 psychological studies, Cummins ,1996, identiies seen
domains as commonly releant: material wellbeing, health, productiity, intimacy, saety,
community and emotional wellbeing ,1able II,. le later remoes emotional wellbeing,
claiming that it cannot be measured objectiely, and adds spirituality or religion` and,
ollowing September 11, an amorphous uture security` category ,I\G 2006,.
25

Cummins reports that these domains contribute a unique amount o ariance o oerall
lie satisaction` and that correlation avovg the domains exceeds correlations within each
category. \hile the domains contribute uniquely to oerall wellbeing on aerage, this
does not imply that each is important in eery country they study.
26
Cummin`s scales,
which ask the respondent to identiy on a 0-10 scale how satisied they are with each
domain, has demonstrated strong psychometric properties, notably construct and
conergent alidity, reliability and sensitiity ,I\B 2006,. I\B ,2006, reports that
ariance within the eight domains together account or about 50-55 percent o ariance
in oerall lie satisaction. In a reiew o 22 QOL studies, lagerty et at. ,2001, score
Cummin`s measure more highly than 20 others.
2

24
See Cummins 1996, Cummins 199, Cummins 2002, International \ellbeing Group 2006, and Cummins and Lau
200.
25
1he respondent is let to determine how she or he deines security.
26
lor example, spiritual or religious wellbeing does not make a unique contribution to oerall S\B in Australia but it
is important in Columbia ,I\B 2006, p. 9,.
2
It shares top ranking with Veerhoen`s lappiness-Adjusted Quality o Lie measure, although this is a measure o
oerall happiness and does not address domain-speciic contentment.

1able II - Cummins` ,1996, identiication o domains contributing to Quality o Lie

Source: Cummins 1996, p. 309.

Although deriing rom dierent scholarly approaches, the domains identiied by these
two approaches exhibit ery strong conergence, with the exception o empowerment
and political reedom, which eature strongly in the philosophical accounts but not in the

psychological studies. Because we consider empowerment as a separate missing
dimension` ,see Ibrahim and Alkire, this olume,, we do not dwell on this discrepancy.

\e use Cummin`s ramework to structure the basic list o domains ,Box V, that appears
in the recommended surey question ,Box VI,. \e propose speciic items within each
domain, though this selection remains open to debate. \ithin the material wellbeing
domain, we select ood and housing as the most basic o needs or the poor, and income
- which represents a catch-all or other types o material needs. Under productiity, we
select work. lor security, we speciy an interest in physical saety. \e clariy intimacy`
with reerence to riends and amily. Under community - which emerges as important
particularly in Cummin`s work and also in 1oice. of tbe Poor - we ocus on education,
one`s neighborhood and also on the ability to help others.
28
linally, we include a category
ocusing on wellbeing deried rom spiritual, religious or philosophical belies ,which
could include nature, art, music,.
Box V - Selected domains and items o interest within each

28
Ld Diener inds helping others - through acts such as donating time and money to charity, and helping strangers -
to strongly inluence wellbeing ,personal correspondence, Ld Diener,. See also Luropean Social Surey Round 3
proposal, http:,,www.europeansocialsurey.org.
DOMAINS I1LMS OI IN1LRLS1

Material wellbeing lood | lousing | Income

lealth lealth

Productiity \ork

Security Physical saety

Intimacy lriends and amily

Community Neighborhood| Lducation
Ability to actiely helping others

Spirituality,religion \ellbeing rom spiritual religious
or philosophical belies.

Box VI - Question on domain-speciic satisaction
Source: 1he domains used are adapted rom 1he International \ellbeing Group ,2006,
Personal \ellbeing Index.
Note: 1he 4-scale measure has been used in Lurobarometer sureys since 193
,www.za.uni-koeln.de,research,eurolabor, and is easible or enumerator-administered
questionnaires in deeloping countries.

Nationally-representatie sureys o deeloped countries now routinely include both
global and domain-speciic questions regarding lie satisaction, and global questions are
increasingly in eidence in deeloping country settings.
29
lagerty et at. ,2001, comment
o the \lO Quality o Lie instrument that no justiication or rationale` is gien or
the selection o the included domains ,p. 14, - which coer education, job, standard o
liing, accommodation, amily lie, health and social lie - howeer this comment applies
more generally to all the nationally-representatie sureys that we reiewed.

29
Appendix I lists the domains included in seeral major surey instruments ,the US General Social Surey, German
socio-economic panel surey, British panel surey, Luropean Social Surey, Luropean quality o lie surey and \orld
alues surey,.
Oerall, how satisied are you with ,domain, Are you.

1 Very satisied
2 lairly satisied
3 Not ery satisied
4 Not at all satisied

Domain Specific item(s) Satisfaction level

Material wellbeing lood
lousing
Income
lealth lealth
Productiity \ork
Intimacy lriends & amily
Community Lducation
Neighborhood
Ability to help others
Religion,spiritual
wellbeing
\ellbeing rom spiritual,
religious or philosophical
belies


1he question o how to aggregate satisaction in the arious items and,or domains o lie
to derie an oerall indicator o lie satisaction is an important one. Larly ersions o
Cummins`s index sought to combine the perceied importance o each domain with a
satisaction score to derie a multiplicatie composite, but numerous subsequent studies
hae concluded that such eorts are lawed conceptually and psychometrically ,1rauer
and Mackinnon 2001, Russell and lubley 2005, I\B 2006,. 1he critiques o this practice
are numerous. Key amongst them are the iews that the resulting composite blur
satisaction and importance - the same score can result rom high satisaction,low
importance or the opposite combination, that satisaction scores already contain a
judgment as to their importance, with ery low and high scores suggesting that the
respondent alues these categories highly, and that respondents might be predisposed to
adapt their iew o the importance o a domain relatie to their satisaction with it.
Moreoer, a number o authors hae ound that the weights deried rom such an
exercise perormed either no better or modestly better than a similar exercise with no
weights ,Andrews and \ithey 196, lagerty et at. 2001, 1rauer and MacKinnon 2001,.
Russell and lubley ,2005, sum up the preailing scholarly consensus on this issue:
,i,mportance weighting, in the orm o the multiplicatie model, should be abandoned
or the present` ,p. 12,. As a result, we do not propose collecting inormation on
domain importance.

linally we employ the ariant o the happiness` question that has been used most
requently, haing appeared in 190 nationally-representatie sureys worldwide ,Box VII,.
Note that we recommend placing this question aboe domain-speciic questions in actual
sureys to aoid response bias.


Box VII: Question on happiness
Source: \orld database o happiness,
http:,,worlddatabaseohappiness.eur.nl,hap_quer,hqs_p.htm.

In short, we propose considering two aspects o subjectie wellbeing - satisaction and
happiness - and recognizing the distinction between them. Beore proposing speciic
indicators and questions to ground the concepts this paper has adocated so ar, the
decision not to include mental health measures is briely reiewed.

Measures o mental illbeing
In theory, measures o mental ill-being - which purport to be based on objectie` clinical
criteria, and to be associated with clear thresholds - would seem to present clear
measures o negatie unctioning. loweer, depression and suicide, which emerged as
the most obious measures, and hae been incorporated into certain sureys,
30
were both
discarded. Suicide may indicate a lack o meaning,happiness howeer it has numerous
causes, or instance, it has been documented as one response to acute negatie shocks
such as unemployment or crop ailure ,See Sen 2001, lAO 2004,. lurther, a growing
body o eidence suggests suicides are strongly inluenced by cultural norms ,Boldt 1988,
Vijayakumar et at. 2005, Colucci 2006,. Measures o depression were also rejected owing
to a lack o cross-cultural comparability - the maniestation o depression is in some
ways socially and culturally constructed ,Patel 2001, Patten 2003,, while diagnostic
questionnaires are oten biased by \estern standards ,Patten 2003,. Consequently, it
would not be ruitul to obtain measures o either depression or suicidal

30
1he British lousehold Surey and Luropean Social Surey ,Round 3, contain seeral questions relating to
depression.
1a/ivg att tbivg. togetber, rovta ,ov .a, ,ov are:
1 1er, ba,
2 Ratber ba,
ôt rer, ba,
1 ôt at att ba,


attempts,tendencies rom household sureys to undertake international comparisons.
lurther, it is not clear that the measurement, diagnosis and treatment o mental illness
should be considered apart rom policies geared toward other health issues. linally,
positie mental states are more than the absence o symptoms` ,luppert and
\hittington 2003, p. 10,. A ocus on these illnesses would not discriminate at all
amongst the majority o people at any time that do not suer rom either condition.
Gien a context in which most work on psychological wellbeing has ocused on illness,
31

there is a need or a greater emphasis on measures o positie unction.

So ar, we hae presented eidence or the importance o measuring both psychological
and subjectie wellbeing, and argued or particular approaches to measuring each
concept. 1he next section proposes speciic indicators and questions to accomplish this
task.

1he questionnaires used to derie the evaaivovic indicators hae yet to be incorporated on
a large scale in national sureys, two partial exceptions are the British lousehold Panel
Surey and the third round o the Luropean Social Surey.
32
1he questionnaires
psychologists use to derie these indicators hae been subjected to extensie testing or
alidity, reliability and accuracy, but largely among US college students: urther scrutiny is
needed, particularly in deeloping countries. Since the 1950s, in deeloped countries,
researchers hae captured data on hedonic measures such as lie satisaction ,Keyes
2006,, while eorts in the last two decades hae extended to deeloping countries -
giing an ample body o data upon which to build.

31
Myers ,2000, inds 100 times the number o mentions o anxiety as lie satisaction in psychological abstracts since
198 ,cited in lelliwell 2002, p. 4,.
32
1his round o the Luropean Social surey contained a module on personal and social wellbeing` ,luppert et at.
2006,, howeer questions rom arious scales seem to be included in a somewhat aa boc manner, so it is diicult to
discern exactly what is being measured. Data rom this round will not be released until September 200 and so the
indings are not yet in circulation.

4. RLSLARCH QULS1IONS

Collecting this data would permit testing o a number o potentially interesting research
hypotheses regarding the relationship between arious psychological and subjectie
aspects o wellbeing, and the relationship between these measures and objectie`
conditions, particularly those relating to poerty. \e put orth the ollowing issues as a
potential research agenda.

aevtificatiov of rvtverabte grov.
Research is needed to better understand the extent to which external actors ,i.e., actors
beyond the indiidual, inluence psychological and subjectie wellbeing, ersus the extent
to which they are conditioned by internal actors such as optimism, extroersion, etc.
loweer this is a complex undertaking with onerous data requirements, and thereore
alls beyond the scope o most large-scale sureys.
33
Some work suggests some consistent
socio-demographic correlates o these subjectie,psychological indicators - though more
work is needed to illuminate mechanisms and the direction o causality. lere, panel data
would be ery aluable.

Lidence rom seeral sureys identiies a common set o correlates o subjectie
wellbeing. Lmpirical work points to a U-shaped relationship between satisaction and age
,lelliwell 2002, \orld Values surey, Graham and lelton 2006, Latinbarometer,, and
posits positie relationships with between subjectie wellbeing indicators and education,
marriage, health, wealth, employment and retirement ,Blanchlower and Oswald 2002,
US General Social Surey and Lurobarometer, lelliwell 2002, Di 1ella et at. 2003,
Lurobarometer, Graham and lelton 2006,.

33
Potential data needs might include basic temperament ,optimism, extroersion, neuroticism etc,, detachment rom
material things, current mood, extent o aith in the diine ,Geeta Kingdom, personal communication,. Knight and
Song ,2006, include mood in their panel work in China.

Relatiely little work so ar ocuses on the evaaivovic indicators. Using small US samples,
Ry and colleagues ,Ry et at. 2003, Ry and Singer 2006, explore the socio-
demographic correlates o arious acets o psychological wellbeing. Ry and Singer
,2006, ind that autonomy and enironmental mastery increase with age, while purpose
in lie and personal growth - which they cite as the two most evaaivovic aspects o
wellbeing - decline with age, calling attention to current societal challenges in proiding
older persons with meaningul roles and opportunities or continued growth` ,n.p.,.
1hey also report that psychological wellbeing tends to increase with education -
particularly the constructs o purpose in lie and personal growth. 1his limited eidence
seres to demonstrate that opportunities or sel realization are not equally distributed
but occur ia the allocation o resources, which enable only some to make the most o
their talents and capabilities` ,Dowd 1990 cited in Ry and Singer 2006, n.p.,. lurther,
Ry et at. ,2003, ind that women and racial,ethnic minorities tend to exhibit greater
purpose in lie and autonomy than the reerence group ,o white males,, but this is oset
to the extent that they perceie high leels o societal discrimination.

vtergrov retatiov.bi. ;.,cbotogicat ava .vb;ectire ivaicator.)
Psychological wellbeing, happiness, meaning and lie satisaction appear to be distinct
concepts but positiely associated. 1he orm o association between them requires
urther exploration. Steger et at. ,2006, ind a correlation o .41 between meaning and lie
satisaction.
34
As noted aboe, correlations between happiness and lie satisaction
aerage about .5, but span a wide range. 1here is a urther question o causation.
Presently, the literature does not yet conincingly distinguish means and ends with
respect to the arious indicators,
35
e.g., it is unclear the extent to which the psychological

34
Some earlier studies o meaning o lie ind higher correlations ,e.g. Zika and Chamberlain 1992, but the purpose o
lie` scale used in these studies was shown to be psychometrically lawed ,Steger, personal communication,.
35
Geeta Kingdon made this comment in relation to this study but it applies more generally to the literature presently.

needs may determine the subjectie states or ri.a rer.a. Diener reports on the basis o US
Gallup poll data that learning something new ,one measure o competence, and deciding
how to spend one`s time ,indicatie o autonomy, are strong predictors o subjectie
wellbeing ,Ld Diener, personal correspondence,. le urther obseres that the social and
autonomy ariables predict positie aect quite well. loweer, ar more work is needed
to determine which indicators appear to be causal or i indeed they are jointly determined.

Retatiov.bi. betreev .vb;ectire,.,cbotogicat ivaicator. ava ob;ectire` cbaracteri.tic., articvtart, tbo.e
a..ociatea ritb orert,.

Aailable data suggest objectie` conditions and subjectie satisaction do not always
correlate, raising the need to be aware o this diergence and o temporal trends. lurther,
while psychologists hae amassed a wealth o eidence regarding determinants o optimal
psychological unctioning, little is known about how they relate to objectie` indicators.

So ar, work has concentrated largely on the correlation o subjectie indicators and
income,material wellbeing. 1he so-called Lasterlin paradox ,see Lasterlin 194, 1995,
reers to the now-widely accepted inding that while within any gien country, wealthier
people tend to be happier than poorer ones, aboe a certain low leel ,pegged
somewhere between USD 10,000 and 20,000,, there is no relationship between aerage
income and subjectie wellbeing either among countries or within countries oer time
,ligures I and II,.


ligure I - Per capita income and happiness in the 1990s, numerous countries
36

ligure II - Income and lie satisaction in the United States, 1940-2000

Source: Diener and Seligman 2004, p. 3.

1his lack o correlation recurs in other measures based on perceptions o income. lor
instance, subjectie measures o poerty are sometimes ound to be higher than

36
1aken rom Layard 2003, p. 18.

externally-deried measures - see lachamps & Shilpi ,2003, on Nepal, Mangahas ,2003,
on Phillipines, Milanoic and Joanoic ,1999, on Russia - or simply to identiy dierent
indiiduals,households - Kingdon and Knight ,2003, 2004, on South Arica,
Razaindrakoto & Roubaud ,2000, 2004, on Madagascar and sub-Saharan Arica, Leer
,2004, on Mexico, lerrera et at. ,2003, on Peru, Kalugina and Najman ,2002, on Russia,
Lokshin and Raallion ,2002, on Russia.

Apart rom this work on income-based poerty lines, little research engages the
relationship between other aspects o poerty and subjectie indicators, and no
nationally-representatie work was ound in any country exploring the connections
between any o the psychological indicators and any objectie measures. lurther work is
needed to reconcile these subjectie and objectie dimensions, and particularly to probe
the role o adaptie preerences - which we discuss in more detail below.

S. CRI1IQUING PSYCHOLOGICAL/SUBJLC1IVL
MLASURLS AS A POLICY GOAL

A ocus on happiness in particular, and psychological and subjectie states more
generally, as aims o goernment policy hae been subject to strong critiques on seeral
grounds. 1hese include the nature o happiness, a possible conlict with other important
alues, the potential undermining o democratic process, and an implicit acceptance o
adaptie preerences. \e argue that these objections are serious enough to caution
against policy seeking to maximize psychological and subjectie wellbeing, but that the
indicators nonetheless hae a role in inorming policy.


Nature o happiness
lappiness is acutely responsie to short-term circumstances` ,lelliwell 2002, p. 5,. In
other words, it is a leeting, transient emotion that can be aected by numerous actors
ranging rom bad weather to the time o day at which a surey is conducted. It can be
swayed by the ate o the national ootball team or a recent election. as much as
economic actors` ,Graham and Pettinato 2000, p. 8,. 1hese obstacles appear intrinsic to
the nature o happiness rather than suggestie o the need or methodological reinement.

Moreoer, a ocus on happiness does not proide a means o ealuating the potential
trade-o between happiness in the short- and long term. One might derie happiness
rom haing written a book, this does not imply eery day o writing is blissul. I we
condition our actiities on current positie aect, ew long-term projects would be
attained. People oten willingly undergo considerable sacriices in the short-term in the
expectation that this will bolster their long-term happiness, a single-minded ocus on
maximizing current positie aect attributes little weight to this potential-trade o.

1hird, repression o emotion not healthy, happiness not always a positie response to lie
circumstances: under some conditions ,e.g. the death o a loed one, a person would be
considered to be more ully unctioning, and, ultimately, to hae greater well-being, i he
or she experienced rather than aoided the negatie eeling o sadness` ,Ryan and Deci
2001, p. 150-151,. Ryan and Deci ,2001, cite seeral studies suggesting that emotional
disclosure is indicatie o psychological wellbeing ,p. 151,.


Conlict with other alues
Subjectie wellbeing may conlict with other alues and the logic or putting it ahead o
other alues is unclear. \hile some philosophers - notably Bentham - hae priileged
happiness, Scotus argued that happiness should be equal with justice, while Kant argued
or the primacy o duty ,Kenny and Kenny 200, p. 35-36,. Sen ,1996, discusses the
potential pursuit o plural alues, putting orth the Aristotelian concept o a structured
diersity o joys` ,p. 490,. In their daily lies, people oten priilege other alues - such
as sel-reliance or duty - oer happiness. lrey and Stutzer ,200, obsere that a single
mother might alue responsibility to her children oer her own happiness. McGregor
and Little ,1998, point to the seeming paradox that while parenthood is associated with
lower hedonic indicators, this does not deter many couples rom haing children.

Democratic process
1he extent to which the subjectie indicators could and should be proided by the state
has been questioned. One problem is that indiiduals, communities and,or nation states
may derie meaning rom causes that can harm others ,e.g., ascist ideologies,. lurther,
lrey and Stutzer ,200, discuss the pernicious consequences or the democratic process
o a ocus on maximizing happiness - irst, o targeting an outcome oer procedure, and
second, o policies that seek to maximize happiness. 1hey argue:

a baive.. vaiviatiov aroacb i. ivivicat to aevocrac,. t ai.regara. tbe ivteractiov
betreev citiev. ava otiticiav., tbe ivtere.t rere.evtatiov b, orgaviea grov. ava tbe
covcovitavt ivforvatiov ava tearvivg roce... Peote bare referevce. for roce..e. orer
ava abore ovtcove. ,p. 9,.


1aking away procedural utility` reduces indiidual autonomy and thereore wellbeing.
Moreoer, a happiness maximization policy would ail to proide any rule regarding the
scope and limitations o goernment limitations in the priate sphere` ,p. 9,. lurther,
such policy has the potential to distort the relationship between goernment and
indiiduals - both by giing goernment an incentie to manipulate happiness ,or use
happiness to justiy policies that would be otherwise unjustiiable,,
3
and by giing
indiiduals an incentie to misrepresent their wellbeing ,p. 10-11,. Rather than
maximizing happiness, they argue that happiness research should seek to improe the
nature o the political processes. Indiiduals should become better able to adance what
constitutes their idea o the good lie, both indiidually and collectiely` ,p. 15,.

Adaptie preerences
Any measure o subjectie wellbeing undamentally cannot account or the act that
people`s happiness is in part a unction o their reerence rame, the expectations that
they hold or themseles - and in the case o depried persons, these may adapt quite
sharply. Amartya Sen has repeatedly drawn attention to this signiicant problem, oten
called adaptie preerences`. lor example, economic theory usually interprets welare in
terms o psychological happiness. Sen has obsered both empirically and theoretically
that the magnitude o change in subjectie well-being may not track in any predictable
ashion the objectie change that occurs. le oten gies the example o how the
perennially depried become reconciled with their circumstances and appreciatie o
small mercies, thus their desires are muted and their psychic pleasure at small
improements to their situation is disproportionate to the beneit judged rom another
perspectie. Lmpirically, he has demonstrated this using data rom Kerala and Bihar in
India. In the ormer, where widows` lie expectancies were relatiely high, and

3
1he goernment o Bhutan`s policies toward Nepalese reugees are oten considered in this light.

morbidities low, the sel-reported health status was ar lower than widows in Bihar whose
objectie circumstances were ar more disconcerting. 1he widows in Bihar had become
used to their circumstances and reported satisaction with their health.
38

Adocates o policy based on subjectie,psychological indicators cannot address
adequately the problem that people`s aluations o their circumstances are crucially
conditioned by their rames o reerence. On the one hand, people liing in an abject
state oten perceie themseles to be ar better o than their objectie circumstances
would suggest. On the other hand, there is eidence o a hedonic treadmill` ,Brickman
and Campbell 191, such that once people`s objectie conditions begin to improe, their
tastes alter also, negating much o the subjectie impact o the objectie gain, recent
research ound that a 1 percent gain in income raises aspirations by between .35 and .65
percent ,Van Praag and lritjers 1999, see also Stutzer 2003,. Similarly, Brickman et at.
,198, demonstrate that paraplegics ater a period o hardship, return to almost their
preious leels o happiness, while lottery winners become not much happier than they
had been preiously ,cited in lrey and Stutzer 200, p. ,. Some research suggests that
income inequality is associated with lower subjectie well-being ,Blanchlower and
Oswald 2003, Alesina et at. 2004, dÀmbrosio and lrick 2004, Graham 2005 and Graham
and lelton 2006,. At the same time, considerable empirical eidence supports the iew
that those experiencing relatie depriation are rarely the most objectiely depried,
rustrated achieers` in the middle o the income ladder are more likely to be dissatisied
than those at the bottom ,Graham and Pettinato 2000,.

1he aorementioned studies are all concerned with habitation to income. Some recent
work probes whether such eects apply to other dimensions o wellbeing such as

38
Sen ,199, 1985, 198, 1993, 2002,.


marriage, diorce, and spending time with riends and amily. On the one hand, lrank
,2004, argues that adaptation sets in with regard to conspicuous consumption but not
with respect to consumption o intangible` goods, Clark ,2003,, on the other hand, inds
eidence o limited habituation with respect to unemployment, marriage and social
actiity - but that it is likely to be weaker than or income. 1his tentatie eidence clearly
complicates the use o subjectie data to inorm policy decisions, urther work is needed
to better illuminate adaptie preerences and their maniestation.

Richer appraisal o policy options at a micro- and macro-leel
1hese reserations notwithstanding, psychological and subjectie measures can proide
one basis on which to ealuate ,potentially competing, policies. An understanding o
subjectie perceptions sheds light on what people alue and the extent to which they
alue material and non-material criteria. lor instance, past studies hae highlighted the
importance o relational dynamics among indiiduals and within communities to
wellbeing. lurther, the limited empirical eidence shows some systematic dierences in
the way people perceie arious macro-economic conditions too, an understanding o
these dierences might allow or the uller appraisal o policy options. luppert et at.
,2006, write:

\hilst it is not clear that the role o goernments is to try to make us happy,
it is clear that policies do hae a proound eect on the societies and cultures
that we lie in. \ithout clear systematic eidence on how successul their
policies are at enhancing people`s wellbeing, goernments risk operating in the
dark`.` ,n.p.,.


A growing amount o eidence suggests satisaction and happiness are negatiely linked
with unemployment and inlation ,Blanchlower and Oswald 1999, US General Social
Surey, Graham and Pettinato 2000, Latinbarometer, Di 1ella et at. 2003,
Lurobarometer,. 1he eects o unemployment on happiness are stronger than those o
inlation ,Di 1ella et at. 2001,, one consequence is that the misery index`, which weights
inlation and unemployment equally, may be underestimating the eects o
unemployment on wellbeing.
39
Moreoer, unemployment appears to aect long-term
leels o lie satisaction, een once an indiidual becomes re-employed ,Lucas et at.
2004,, in part because o the associated stigma ,Graham 200,. In addition, lie
satisaction has been linked with good goernance, social and community networks, and
trust ,lelliwell 2002, \orld Values Surey,. lrey and Stutzer ,1999, ind that greater
leels o direct democracy result in more happiness. In the study reerred to earlier,
Biswas and Biswas-Diener`s ,2006, inding o the satisaction paement dwellers in
Calcutta derie rom their social relationships suggest that both material and social needs
may matter equally or wellbeing. In practice, this might caution against a housing
strategy that would disperse communities, as has oten occurred in slum resettlement
projects in India and elsewhere. In sum, despite numerous well-ounded reasons to aoid
adopting psychological,subjectie alues as policy goals, work that assesses reactions to
particular policies might make a pertinent contribution to policymaking.

6. CONCLUSION

1his paper has proposed collecting data to derie seen indicators o psychological
wellbeing ,namely, the presence o meaning, and relatedness, autonomy and competence,,
lie satisaction ,global and domain-speciic,, and happiness. \e hae argued that

39
lrey and Stutzer ,2002,, cited in Graham ,200,, p. 10.

exploring the relationship between these indicators, and also with the objectie` criteria
typically aailable in national sureys and their eolution oer time, could signiicantly
complement the content and process o anti-poerty policy making.

\e do not propose these indicators because we beliee policy should be designed around
them. At the same time, we eel strongly that these indicators capture something
important about why people eel and act as they do, and that better elucidating the extent
to which people perceie their wellbeing positiely, and how these perceptions change
between countries, oer time, and in relation to objectie measures would ill an
important gap in our understanding o capability poerty.


RLILRLNCLS

Allik, J. & Realo, A. ,2004,, Indiidualism-Collectiism and social capital`, ]ovrvat of
cro..cvttvrat .,cbotog, 35, p. 29-49.

Andrews, l. M. & \ithey, S. B. ,196,. ociat ivaicator. of rettbeivg: .verica. ercetiov of tife
qvatit,, New \ork: Plenum Press.

Biswas-Diener, R. and L. Diener ,2006,, 1he subjectie wellbeing o the homeless, and
lessons or happiness`, ociat vaicator. Re.earcb 6:2, p. 185-205, April.

Blanchlower, D.G. and A.J. Oswald ,2002,, !ettbeivg orer tive iv |. ava Creat ritaiv,
Drat paper aailable at:
http:,,www2.warwick.ac.uk,ac,soc,economics,sta,aculty,oswald,inaljpubecwellb
eingjune2002.pd.

Boldt, M. ,1988,, 1he meaning o suicide: Implications or research`, Cri.i. 9:2, p. 93-
108.

Bradburn, N.M. ,1969,, 1be .trvctvre of .,cbotogicat rettbeivg, Chicago: Aldine.

Brickman, P. & Campbell, D. 1. ,191,. ledonic relatiism and planning the good
society. In M. l. Apley ,Ld.,, .aatatiovteret tbeor,: . .,vo.ivv, New \ork: Academic
Press.

Camield, L. ,2003,, |.ivg .vb;ectire vea.vre. of rettbeivg iv aeretoivg covvtrie., Paper prepared
or the DSA Conerence on Globalisation and Deelopment
Uniersity o Strathclyde, Glasgow, 10-12 September 2003. Aailable at:
http:,,www.destud.org.uk,publications,papers,con03,dsacon03camield.pd.

Cantril, l. ,1965,, 1be atterv of bvvav covcerv.. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Uniersity
Press.

Chamberlain, K., & Zika, S. ,1992,. Religiosity, meaning in lie, and psychological
well-being. In J. l. Schumaker ,Ld.,, Retigiov ava vevtat beattb, New \ork: Oxord
Uniersity Press.

Christopher, John Chambers ,1999,, Situating psychological well-being: Lxploring the
cultural roots o its theory and research`, ]ovrvat of Covv.etivg ava Deretovevt :2, p. 141-
152.

Clark, A. ,2003,, aive.., babit ava bigb rav/: vvav ava ociat Caitat. Unprocessed.
Aailable at: http:,,www.delta.ens.r,clark,happhh.pd.

Colucci, L. ,2006,, 1he cultural acet o suicidal behaiour: Its importance and neglect`,
.v.tratiav e;ovrvat for tbe aaravcevevt of vevtat beattb ;.e].M) 5:3, p. 1-13.

Cummins, R.A., Mellor, D., Stokes, M. & Lau, A. ,200,, Measures o subjectie
wellbeing`, in: L. Mpou & 1. Oakland ,200,, ...e..vevt iv Rebabititatiov ava eattb, New
\ork: Person Allyn & Bacon.


Deci, L. L., and R.M. Ryan ,2000,. 1he what` and why` o goal pursuits: luman needs
and the sel-determination o behaior`, P.,cbotogicat vqvir, 11, p. 22-268.

Di 1ella, R., R.J. MaCulloch and A.J. Oswald ,2001,, Preerences oer inlation and
unemployment: Lidence rom sureys o happiness`, 1be .vericav covovic Rerier 91:1,
p. 335-341, March.

Di 1ella, R., MacCulloch, R.J., & Oswald, A.J. ,2003,. 1he macroeconomics o
happiness`, Rerier of covovic. ava tati.tic. 85, p. 809-82.

Diener, L. ,1984,, Subjectie well-being`, P.,cbotogicat vttetiv 95:3, p. 542-55.

Diener, L., Lmmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J. & Griin, S. 1985. '1he satisaction with lie
scale', ]ovrvat of Per.ovatit, ...e..evevt 49 ,1,: 1-5.

Lasterlin, R A ,2003, Building a Better 1heory o \ellbeing. March 2003. IZA
Discussion Paper No. 42. Bonn: IZA.

lachamps, Marcel and lorhad Shilpi ,2003,, vb;ectire rettbeivg, i.otatiov ava riratr,,
Unprocessed. Aailable at:
http:,,www.economics.ox.ac.uk,members,marcel.achamps,homepage,nepwel.pd.

lrank, Robert l. ,2004,, low not to buy happiness`, Daeaatv., Spring.

lrankl, V.L. ,1963,, Man`s Search or Meaning: An Introduction to Logo-therapy, New
\ork: \ashington Square Press.

lrey, B. S. & Stutzer, A. ,200,, bovta vatiovat baive.. be vaiviea. \orking Paper No.
306, Zurich: ILLR.

Graham, C. ,200,, Mea.vrivg qvatit, of tife iv ativ .verica: !bat baive.. re.earcb cav ava
cavvot covtribvte. Drat, Input or the IPLS,IADB.

Graham, C. & lelton, A. ,2006,, Doe. iveqvatit, vatter to ivairiavat retfare: .v etoratiov
ba.ea ov baive.. .vrre,. iv ativ .verica, Journal o Lconomic Inequality, January.

Graham, C. & Pettinato, S. ,2000,, rv.tratea acbierer.: !ivver., to.er. ava .vb;ectire rettbeivg iv
ver var/et ecovovie., Center on Social and Lconomic Dynamics \orking Paper Series No.
20, \ashington, D.C.: 1he Brookings Institution, December.

lagerty M. R., Cummins, R.A., lerriss, A.L., Land, K., Michalos, A.C., Peterson, M.,
Sharpe, A., Sirgy, J. & Vogel, J. ,2001,, Quality o lie indexes or national policy:
Reiew and agenda or research`, ociat ivaicator. re.earcb 55:1, p. 1-96, July.

lelliwell, J.l. ,2002,, or`. tife. Covbivivg ivairiavat ava vatiovat rariabte. to etaiv .vb;ectire
rettbeivg, NBLR \orking Paper no. 9065, July.

lerrera, Jaier, Mireille Razaindrakoto and lrancois Roubaud ,2003,, De ta obrea
vovetaria a to. vvero. evfoqve. ae ta obrea: vv avati.i. covaratiro ae ta areciaciv .vb;etira aet

bieve.tar PervMaaaga.car. Presentation prepared or IRD conerence in Lima, October
2003. Aailable at:
http:,,www.dial.prd.r,dial_eenements,pd,Raza16octppt.pd.

luppert, l.A. and \hittington, J.L. ,2003,, Lidence or the independence o positie
and negatie well-being: implications or quality o lie assessment`, riti.b ]ovrvat of
eattb P.,cbotog, 8:1, p. 10-122.
Inglehart, R. & Baker, \.L. ,2000,, Modernization, cultural change and the persistence
o traditional alues`, .vericav ociotogicat Reirer 65:1, p. 19-51.
Inglehart R. et al. ,eds., ,2004, vvav betief. ava ratve.: . cro..cvttvrat .ovrceboo/ ba.ea ov tbe
12002 ratve. .vrre,., Mexico City: Siglo XXI.
International \ellbeing Group ,2006,. Personal \ellbeing Index. Melbourne: Australian
Centre on Quality o Lie, Deakin Uniersity
,http:,,www.deakin.edu.au,research,acqol,instruments,wellbeing_index.htm.,

Kahneman, D. ,1999,, Objectie lappiness`, in: D. Kahneman, L. Diener & N.
Schwarz ,Lds.,, !ettbeivg: 1be fovvaatiov. of beaovic .,cbotog,, New \ork: Russell Sage
loundation.

Kalugina, L. and B. Najman ,2002,, Labour and poerty in Russia: Sel-rated
perceptions and monetary ealuations`, Aailable at
http:,,ecsocman.edu.ru,images,pubs,2004,02,10,0000148505,0_01_03.pd

Kenny, A. & Kenny, C. ,2006,, ife, tibert, ava tbe vr.vit of vtitit,, Lxeter: Imprint
Academic.

Keyes, C. ,2006,, Subjectie \ell-Being in Mental lealth and luman Deelopment
Research \orldwide: An Introduction`, ociat vaicator. Re.earcb , May.
Kingdon, Geeta and John Knight ,2003,, \ell-being poerty ersus income poerty and
capabilities poerty CSAL \PS,2003-16, Uniersity o Oxord: Center or the Study o
Arican Lconomies. Aailable at:
http:,,www.economics.ox.ac.uk,Members,geeta.kingdon,DiscussionPapers,jdshappin
essdec03.pd.

Kingdon, Geeta and John Knight ,2004,, Covvvvit,, Covari.ov. ava vb;ectire !ettbeivg iv
a Diriaea ociet,. Paper or presentation at CSAL conerence, St. Catherine`s College, 21-
22 March.

Lau, A., Cummins, R.A. & McPherson, \. ,2005,, An inestigation into the cross-
cultural equialence o the personal wellbeing index`, ociat vaicator Re.earcb 2, p. 403-
430.

Layard, R. ,2005,, aive..: e..ov. frov a ver .cievce, London: Penguin Books.

Leer, J.P. ,2004,, Poerty and subjectie wellbeing in Mexico. ociat vaicator. Re.earcb
68:1, p. 1-33, August. Aailable at:
www.kluweronline.com,article.aspPIPS~5139350&PDl~1.


Lokshin, Michael and Martin Raallion ,2002,, etfratea ecovovic retfare iv Rv..ia, vroeav
covovic Rerier, Vol. 46, pp. 1453-146. Aailable at:
http:,,www.uni-tlse1.r,ARQADL,ressources,Cahiers,2000,BPtemp2694.pd.

Lucas, R. L., Clark, A.L., Georgellis, \. & Diener, L. ,2004,, Unemployment alters the
set point or lie satisaction`, P.,cbotogicat cievce 15:1, p. 8-13.

Mangahas, Manhar ,2003,, 1he S\S Surey 1ime Series on Philippine Poerty and
lunger, 1983-2003, 1hematic Paper or the 2004 Regional Conerence on Poerty
Monitoring in Asia, 31 December. Aailable at:
http:,,www.rcpm.net,iles,pd,PlI_S\S_Surey_on_Poerty_and_lunger.pd.

McGregor I. and Little B.R. ,1998, Personal projects, happiness, and meaning: On
doing well and being yoursel`, ]ovrvat of Per.ovatit, ava ociat P.,cbotog, 4, p. 494-512.

Milanoic, Branko and Branko Joanoic ,1999,, Cbavge iv tbe ercetiov of tbe orert, tive
avrivg tbe tive. of aere..iov: Rv..ia 11. \orld Bank Policy Research \orking Paper
20. \ashington, D.C.: \orld Bank. Aailable at:
www.worldbank.org,html,dec,Publications,\orkpapers,wps2000series,wps20,wps
20.pd.

Patel, V. ,2001,, Cultural actors and international epidemiology`, riti.b Meaicat vttetiv
5, p. 33-45.

Patten, S.B. ,2003, International dierences in major depression prealence: \hat do
they mean`, ]ovrvat of ctivicat eiaeviotog, 56, p. 11-16.

Rahe, R. l., & 1olles, R. L. ,2002,. "1he Brie Stress and Coping Inentory: A useul
stress management instrument", vtervatiovat ]ovrvat of tre.. Mavagevevt, ,2,, 61-0.

Rahe, R. l., Veach, 1. L., 1olles, R. L., & Murakami, K. ,2000,. 1he stress and coping
inentory: An educational and research instrument. tre.. Meaicive, 1, 199-208.

Ranis, G., Stewart, l. & Samman, L. ,2006,, luman Deelopment: Beyond the luman
Deelopment Index`, ]ovrvat of vvav Deretovevt :3, Noember.

Razaindrakoto, Mireille and lrancois Roubaud ,2000,, 1be vvttite facet. of orert, iv a
aeretoivg covvtr,: tbe ca.e of Maaaga.car`. caitat cit,. Paris: DIAL. Aailable at:
http:,,www.dial.prd.r,dial_eenements,pd,csae,Chap3_MadagLng.pd.

Razaindrakoto, Mireille and lrancois Roubaud ,2004,, vb;ectire ercetiov of orert, iv
vrbav .vbabarav .frica, Presentation prepared or the CSAL conerence, Oxord, 22
March 2004, Aailable at:
http:,,www.dial.prd.r,dial_eenements,pd,csae,razain_roubaud.pd.

Reker, G. 1., Peacock, L. J., & \ong, P. 1. P. ,198,, Meaning and purpose in lie and
well-being: A lie-span perspectie`, ]ovrvat of Cerovtotog, 42, 44-49.

Rojas, M. ,2006,, Lie satisaction and satisaction in domains o lie: Is it a simple
relationship`, ]ovrvat of aive.. tvaie. , p. 46-49.


Russell, L.B. & lubley, A.M. ,2005,, Importance ratings and weighting: Old concerns
and new perspecties`, vtervatiovat ]ovrvat of 1e.tivg 5:2, p. 105-130.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, L. L. ,2000,, Sel-determination theory and the acilitation o
intrinsic motiation, social deelopment, and well-being`, .vericav P.,cbotogi.t 55, p. 68-
8.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, L. L. ,2001,, On happiness and human potentials: A reiew o
research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being`, .vvvat Rerier of P.,cbotog, 52, p. 141-
166.

Ry C.D. & Singer B.l. ,1998,, 1he contours o positie human health`, P.,cbotogicat
vqvir, 9,1,: 1-28.

Ry, C.D. & Singer, B.l. ,2006,, Know thysel and become what you are: a eudaimonic
approach to psychological wellbeing`, ]ovrvat of aive.. tvaie.

Sen, A.K. ,199,. "Utilitarianism and \elarism." 1he Journal o Philosophy 76,9,: 463-
489.

Sen, A.K. ,1985,. "\ell-being, Agency and lreedom." 1he Journal o Philosophy
LXXXII,4,: 169-221.

Sen, A.K. ,198,. 1he Standard o Liing. G. lawthorn. Cambridge, Cambridge
Uniersity Press: 1-38.

Sen, A.K. ,1993,. "Positional Objectiity." Philosophy and Public Aairs 22,2,: 126-145.

Sen, A.K. ,1996,. "Rationality, joy and reedom", Criticat rerier 10:4, p. 481-494.

Sen, A.K. ,2002,. "lealth: Perception ersus Obseration." British Medical Journal
324,342,: 860-861.

Shek, D.1. ,1992,, "Meaning in lie and psychological well-being: An empirical study
using the Chinese ersion o the Purpose in Lie questionnaire," ]ovrvat of Cevetic
P.,cbotog,, 153, 185-200.

Steger, M., lrazier, P., Oishi, S. & Kaler, M. ,2006,, 1he Meaning in lie questionnaire:
Assessing the presence o and search or meaning in lie`, ]ovrvat of Covv.etivg P.,cbotog, 53,
p. 80-93.

Steger, M. l., Kashdan, 1.B., Sullian, B.A. & Lorentz, D. ,in press,, Understanding the
search or meaning in lie: Personality, cognitie style, and the dynamic between seeking
and experiencing meaning`, ]ovrvat of Per.ovatit,.

Suh, L., Diener, L., Oishi, S. & 1riandis, l.C. 1998. 1he shiting basis o lie
satisaction judgements across cultures: emotions ersus norms`, ]ovrvat of Per.ovatit, ava
ociat P.,cbotog, 4: 482-493

1iliouine, l., Cummins, R.A. & Daern, M. ,2006,, Measuring wellbeing in deeloping
countries: 1he case o Algeria`, ociat ivaicator. re.earcb 5, p. 1-30.


1rauer, 1. & Mackinnon, A. ,2001,, \hy are we weighting 1he role o importance
ratings in quality o lie measurement`, Qvatit, of ife Re.earcb 10, p. 59-585.

Veerhoen, R. ,200,, Subjectie measures o wellbeing`, Mark McGilliray ,Ld.,,
vvav rettbeivg: Covcet ava vea.vrevevt, Basingstoke: MacMillan.

Vijayakumar, L., John, S., Pirkis, J. & \hiteord, l. ,2005,, Suicide in deeloping
countries ,2,: Risk actors`, Cri.i. 26:3, p. 112-119.

\aterman, A.S. ,1993,, 1wo conceptions o happiness: Contrasts o personal
expressieness ,eudaimonia, and hedonic enjoyment`, ]ovrvat of Per.ovatit, ava ociat
P.,cbotog, 64, p. 68-91.

Zika, S. & Chamberlain, K. ,198,, Relation o hassles and personality to subjectie
wellbeing`, ]ovrvat of Per.ovatit, ava ociat P.,cbotog, 53, p. 155-162.

Zika, S. & Chamberlain, K. ,1992,, On the relationship between meaning in lie and
psychological wellbeing`, riti.b ]ovrvat of P.,cbotog, 83:1, p. 133-145.

Appendix J: Complete shortlist

PSYCHOLOGICAL WLLLBLING

MLANING IN LIlL

Please take a moment to think about what makes your lie eel important to you. Please
respond to the ollowing statements as truthully and accurately as you can, and also
please remember that these are ery subjectie questions and that there are no right or
wrong answers. Please answer according to the scale below.
1 2 3 4

S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
My lie has a clear sense o purpose
I hae a good sense o what makes my lie meaningul
I hae discoered a satisying lie purpose
SOURCL: Short-orm o Steger questionnaire or presence o Meaning in Lie ,Steger et
at. 2006,. le combines sub-scales to measure the presence o meaning and search or
meaning. A short-orm o the presence` subscale only is used here.

I the answer to this question is 3 or 4 ~ What makes your life meaningful?

BASIC PS\ClOLOGICAL NLLDS

1 2 3 4

A, AU1ONOM\
S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
I eel like I am ree to decide or mysel how to lie my lie.
I generally eel ree to express my ideas and opinions
I eel like I can pretty much be mysel in daily situations
40

B, COMPL1LNCL
S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
People I know tell me I am competent at what I do.
Most days I eel a sense o accomplishment rom what I do.
I oten eel ery capable.

C, RLLA1LDNLSS
S1A1LMLN1 SCORL
I get along well with people I come into contact with.
I consider the people I regularly interact with to be my riends.
People in my lie care about me.
Source: Short-orm o Ryan and Deci Basic Psychological Needs scales. ,Ryan and Deci
2000, 2001,

40
1he meaning o this question ,or translation, is to act in harmony with who one is.

SUBJLC1IVL WLLLBLING

LIlL SA1ISlAC1ION

Oerall, how satisied are you with your lie oerall,,domain, Are you.

1 Very satisied
2 lairly satisied
3 Not ery satisied
4 Not at all satisied

Domain Specific item(s) Satisfaction
level
Life Satisfaction overall
41

Material wellbeing lood
lousing
Income
lealth lealth
Productiity \ork
Intimacy lriends & amily
Community Lducation
Neighborhood
Ability to help others
Religion,spiritual wellbeing \ellbeing rom spiritual, religious or
philosophical belies

1he domains used are adapted rom 1he International \ellbeing Group ,2006, Personal
\ellbeing Index. 1he 4-scale measure is easible or enumerator-administered
questionnaires in deeloping countries.

Key reerence: International \ellbeing Group ,2006,.

lAPPINLSS
1aking all things together, would you say you are:
1 Very happy
2 Rather happy
3 Not ery happy
4 Not at all happy

Key reerence:
\orld database o happiness,
http:,,worlddatabaseohappiness.eur.nl,hap_quer,hqs_p.htm.

41
low satisied are you with your lie as a whole`

Appendix 2: Domains and items coered in arious household sureys on perceied satisaction,happiness
Domain Item US
General
Social
survey
German
socio-
economic
panel
British panel
survey
Luropean social
survey
Luropean quality
of life survey
World
Values
survey
Material wellbeing Standard o liing X X
linancial situation X X
lousing X X X
Personal income X X
Health lealth X X X
Productivity \ork ,housework, X X X X X X
Security Social security X
Intimacy lamily lie X X X X X
lriends X
lusband,wie,partner X
Community Social lie X X
Lducation X
Voluntary work X X
Spirituality/Religion Religion X
Other lree time X
Lie so ar X
Politics X
\ork-lie balance X
Leisure time X X
Child care X


Appendix 3: Long orm o questionnaires included in paper in modiied
orm

J. S1LGLR's MLANING IN LIIL SCALL

Source: Steger et at. ,2006,.

2. DLCI AND RYAN'S BASIC NLLD SA1ISIAC1ION (GLNLRAL)
SCALL


1 2 3 4 5 6
not at all somewhat ery
true true true

1. I eel like I am ree to decide or mysel how to lie my lie.

2. I really like the people I interact with.

3. Oten, I do not eel ery competent.

4. I eel pressured in my lie.

5. People I know tell me I am good at what I do.


6. I get along with people I come into contact with.

. I pretty much keep to mysel and don't hae a lot o social contacts.

8. I generally eel ree to express my ideas and opinions.

9. I consider the people I regularly interact with to be my riends.

10. I hae been able to learn interesting new skills recently.

11. In my daily lie, I requently hae to do what I am told.

12. People in my lie care about me.

13. Most days I eel a sense o accomplishment rom what I do.

14. People I interact with on a daily basis tend to take my eelings into consideration.

15. In my lie I do not get much o a chance to show how capable I am.

16. 1here are not many people that I am close to.

1. I eel like I can pretty much be mysel in my daily situations.

18. 1he people I interact with regularly do not seem to like me much.

19. I oten do not eel ery capable.

20. 1here is not much opportunity or me to decide or mysel how to do things in
my daily lie.

21. People are generally pretty riendly towards me.

Scoring information. lorm three subscale scores, one or the degree to which the
person experiences satisaction o each o the three needs. 1o do that, you must irst
reerse score all items that are worded in a negatie way ,i.e., the items shown below with
,R, ollowing the items number,. 1o reerse score an item, simply subtract the item
response rom 8. 1hus, or example, a 2 would be conerted to a 6. Once you hae
reerse scored the items, simply aerage the items on the releant subscale. 1hey are:
Autonomy: 1, 4,R,, 8, 11,R,, 14, 1, 20,R,

Competence: 3,R,, 5, 10, 13, 15,R,, 19,R,

Relatedness: 2, 6, ,R,, 9, 12, 16,R,, 18,R,, 21

Source: Ryan and Deci ,http:,,www.psych.rochester.edu,SD1,measures,index.html,.

3. CUMMINS: SA1ISIAC1ION WI1H LIIL AS A WHOLL
AND PWI SCALL ,written orm,

1he ollowing questions ask how satisied you eel, on a scale rom zero to 10. Zero
means you eel completely dissatisied. J0 means you eel completely satisied. And the
middle of the scale is S, which means you eel neutral, neither satisied nor
dissatisied.`

Part 1 |Optional Item|

1. 1hinking about your own lie and personal circumstances, how satisied are you with
your life as a whole ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

Part 2

1. low satisied are you with your standard of living ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

2. low satisied are you with your health ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

3. low satisied are you with what you are achieving in life ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10


4. low satisied are you with your personal relationships ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

5. low satisied are you with how safe you feel?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

6. low satisied are you with feeling part of your community ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

. low satisied are you with your future security ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

8. low satisied are you with your spirituality or religion ?

Completely
Dissatisied Neutral
Completely
Satisied
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10

Source: International \ellbeing Group ,2006,

Appendix 4: Questionnaires not used in paper

1. Diener: Satisaction with Lie Scale
1he S\LS is a short, 5-item instrument designed to measure global cognitie judgments
o one's lies. 1he scale usually requires only about one minute o respondent time. 1he
scale is not copyrighted, and can be used without charge and without permission by all
proessionals ,researchers and practitioners,. 1he scale takes about one minute to
complete, and is in the public domain. A description o psychometric properties o the
scale can be ound in Paot and Diener, 1993 Psychological Assessment.
Survey Iorm
Below are ie statements that you may agree or disgree with. Using the 1 - scale below
indicate your agreement with each item by placing the appropriate number on the line
preceding that item. Please be open and honest in your responding.
- Strongly agree
6 - Agree
5 - Slightly agree
4 - Neither agree nor disgree
3 - Slightly disagree
2 - Disgree
1 - Strongly disgree
____ In most ways my lie is close to my ideal.
____ 1he conditions o my lie are excellent.
____ I am satisied with my lie.
____ So ar I hae gotten the important things I want in lie.
____ I I could lie my lie oer, I would change almost nothing.
35 - 31 Lxtremely satisied
26 - 30 Satisied
21 - 25 Slightly satisied
20 Neutral
15 - 19 Slightly dissatisied
10 - 14 Dissatisied
5 - 9 Lxtremely dissatisied

Source: Diener ,1985,.

2. Lie Meaning rom Rahe`s Brie Stress and Coping Inentory

Answers: 0 ~ no, 1 ~ sometimes, 2 ~ requently

I eel my lie is part o a larger plan
My lie has no direction and meaning ,reerse coded,
Many things in lie gie me great joy
I am able to orgie mysel and others
I doubt that my lie makes a dierence ,reerse coded,
My alues and belies guide me daily
I eel in tune with people around me
I am at peace with my place in lie

Source: Rahe & 1olles, 2002, Rahe et al., 2000.

Samman Psych Subj Wellbeing Final

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Samman Psych Subj Wellbeing Final

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

OPHI Working Paper Series

Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI)

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi