Measurement of Subjective Wellbeing: Recent Developments and Remaining Challenges

Arthur A. Stone, Ph.D.Professor of PsychologyDirector, USC Dornsife Center for Self-Report ScienceUniversity of Southern California

Overview

Focus on Subjective Wellbeing

Progress over the last five years Interplay among the professionsCommissions and panelsNational and commercial surveyThis is a selective review

Remaining challenges

My Perspective

NIA Roybal Center at Princeton University

NAS Subjective Wellbeing Panel

OECD, WHO meetings

Professional Contributions

EconomistsCausal pathwaysMathematical modelingUse of large-scale,

observational dataPolicy relevanceGovernmental influence

PsychologistsAssessment techniques

PsychometricsReal-time assessment

Construct validityCognitive models of self-

reportsUse of experimental dataHealth expertise

What is Subjective Wellbeing?

Wikipedia: “…refers to how people experience the quality of their lives and includes both emotional reactions and cognitive judgments.”

World Health Organizations’ definition of Health“Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social

well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.”

Three aspectsEudemonicLife satisfaction or evaluativeHedonic or affective (subdivisions: + and - )

“Happiness” is confusingEither life satisfaction or hedonic WB

Wellbeingvs. Subjective Wellbeing

PROGRESS

The Commission onthe Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress

The Commission onthe Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress

The Commission onthe Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress

Sarkozy, Executive Summary

In effect, statistical indicators are important for designing and assessing policies aiming at advancing the progress of society, as well as for assessing and influencing the functioning of economic markets.

….. there often seems to be a marked distance between standard measures of important socio economic variables like economic growth, inflation, unemployment, etc. and widespread perceptions. In some countries, this gap has undermined confidence in official statistics….

Another key message, and unifying theme of the report, is that the time is ripe for our measurement system to shift emphasis from measuring economic production to measuring people’s well-being.

Stiglitz, Part 2 – OECD

“High-Level Expert Group on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Well-Being”

Theme 1: Income and Wealth Inequality (coordinator: T. Piketty)

Theme 2: Multidimensional and Global Inequalities (coordinators J. Stiglitz and F. Bourguignon)

Theme 3: Multidimensional Subjective Well-Being (coordinators A. Stone and A. Krueger)

Theme 4: Sustainability (coordinators J-P. Fitoussi and M. Durand)

Gallup Organization’s polls

Corporate leader in SWB research

Two major polls include SWBWorld PollDaily Poll, January 2008

Structure of Gallup SWB assessmentLife evaluation: Cantril LadderHedonic Wellbeing

“Global Yesterday” approachDid you experience a lot of _____ yesterday?Happiness; Stress; Sadness; Tiredness; Anger

Gallup-Healthways Wellbeing Index

OECD’s Guidelines

Part of OECD’s “Better Life” Initiative

Published in 2013

Prepared by Conal Smith and Carrie Exton

Used expert consultation

OECD’s Guidelines

OECD’s Guidelines

OECD’s Guidelines Highlights

Standardizing WB measurementCommonalities among surveys

Advancement due to large-scaleONS split-sample – on advice of academics

and OECD

Push for methodologic studiesAnd publication of findings

Cultural response biasLatin American paradox

US National Academy of Sciences “Panel of measuring Subjective Wellbeing in a policy-relevant, national accounting framework”

US National Academy of Sciences “Panel of measuring Subjective Wellbeing in a policy-relevant, national accounting framework”

US National Academy of Sciences “Panel of measuring Subjective Wellbeing in a policy-relevant, national accounting framework”

CONCLUSION 2.3: Both positive and negative emotions must be accounted for in experienced well-being measurement, as research shows that they do not simply move in an inverse way. For example, an activity may produce both negative and positive feelings in a person,or certain individuals may be predisposed to experience both positives and negatives more strongly. Therefore, assessments of ExWB should include both positive and negative dimensions in order for meaningful inferences to be drawn.

Experienced Wellbeing: addition of related Suffering states such as pain.

US National Academy of Sciences “Panel of measuring Subjective Wellbeing in a policy-relevant, national accounting framework”

CONCLUSION 3.6: Capturing the time-use and activity details of survey respondents enhances the policy relevance of ExWB measures by embedding information about relationships between emotional states and specific activities of daily life.

And strongly advocated for continuation of ATUSWellbeing Module.

US National Academy of Sciences “Panel of measuring Subjective Wellbeing in a policy-relevant, national accounting framework”

RECOMMENDATION 4.3: Given the potential magnitude of survey mode and contextual effects (as shown in findings related to work bythe UK Office for National Statistics and elsewhere), research on the magnitude of these effects and methods for mitigating them should be a priority for statistical agencies during the process of experimentation and testing of new SWB modules.

US National Academy of Sciences “Panel of measuring Subjective Wellbeing in a policy-relevant, national accounting framework”

CONCLUSION 5.1: ExWB data are most relevant and valuable for informing specific, targeted policy questions, as opposed to general monitoring purposes. At this time, the panel is skeptical about the usefulness of an aggregate measure intended to track some average of an entire population.

US National Academy of Sciences “Panel of measuring Subjective Wellbeing in a policy-relevant, national accounting framework”

CONCLUSION 5.2: To make well-informed policy decisions, data are needed on both ExWB and evaluative well-being. Considering only one or the other could lead to a distorted conception of the relationship between SWB and the issues it is capable of informing, a truncated basis for predicting peoples’ behavior and choices, and ultimately compromised policy prescriptions.

Legatum InstituteCommission on Wellbeing and Policy

Lord Gus O’Donnell, Chair Angus Deaton, Princeton Martine Durand, OECD David Halpern, Behavioral Insights Unit,

UK Richard Layard, LSE

“…we should measure wellbeing more often and do so comprehensively…. This would help governments improve policies, companies raise productivity, and people live more satisfying lives.”

Other important developmentsUK’s Office of National Statistics (ONS) recent surveys

December 2011; 4,000 Adults Annual Population Survey: 80,000 Adults

World Happiness Report

Research-supported surveys including Wellbeing assessments, for example the family Health Retirement Surveys (HRS), SHARE

Many additional within-country surveys

CHALLENGES

Challenge I: Adaptation

Our ability to become adjust and become accustomed to negative or novel situations

Apparent evidence of SWB changes in even extreme circumstances, eg, paraplegia

Scale recalibration vs. True change

But adaptation may be different according to the type of wellbeing

And trade-offs even in the face of apparent adaptation

Implications for policy: Sen’s concern about “Happy peasants”

Challenge I: Adaptation

CONCLUSION 4.1: The evidence with regard to adaptation suggests that it cannot be characterized as a process that occurs uniformly; people adapt differently to different events and life changes, in some part due to norms and expectations. Ideally, question structures should be designed to allow researchers to decompose changes in response scores into scale recalibration (or other measurement errors) and true quality-of-life change components.

From the NAS Report:

Challenge I: Adaptation

Some progress

“Side by side” comparisonsLoewenstein & Ubel Isolate “shifts” in wellbeing in particular domains

If all domains move, then scale recalibration If targeted domain only moves, then true adaptationMixed scenarios

Challenge II: Assessing Pre-existing Group Differences

For investigating differences upon countries, naturally-formed demographic groups (age, sex, race)

Non-randomized groups

Concept of Scale Elasticity from taste research, based either on physiology (number of taste buds) or prior experience (prior extreme pain)

If groups use scales differently, group comparisons will be biased

Challenge II: Assessing Pre-existing Group Differences

Some evidence: Americans use scale extremes relative to the French

New approaches to the solve the problemVignettes to standardize reporting involving detailed

descriptions of scale pointsAdjustments

Solomon; KapteynTrade-off approaches involving hypothetical choices

among wellbeing alternativesBenjamin; Dolan

New metrics – U-index from time use/WB data

Summary

There are very good reasons to assess and track wellbeing and subjective wellbeing

Much progress has been made and the notion of including wellbeing is certainly more approachable than it was five years ago

Nevertheless, concerns remain and serious attention must be paid to them