Richard Easterlin first noted that economic growth did not always go hand in hand with the increase in life satisfaction in the 1970s. Since then, there has been much discussion about the so-called “Easterlin paradox.” Several scientific studies have examined this “happiness gap” in Germany based on data from more detailed surveys such as the Socioeconomic Panel (e.g., Petrunyk and Pfeifer 2016).4 These studies provide two main conclusions: The relationship illustrated in the graph reflects much more than the relationship between health and happiness, Because countries with high life expectancy also tend to include countries with many other characteristics are. However, the positive correlation between life expectancy and life satisfaction persists after monitoring observable country characteristics such as income and social protection. You can read more about this in the World Happiness Report 2017, especially in the discussion in Chapter 2. These graphs show that in sub-Saharan Africa – the region with the lowest averages – distributions are consistently to the left of those in Europe. In economic jargon, it is observed that the distribution of scores in European countries dominates stochastically the distribution in sub-Saharan Africa. To show the correlation between income and happiness within countries, each arrow has a slope that corresponds to the correlation between household income and self-reported life satisfaction in that country. In other words, the tilt of the arrow shows how strong the correlation between income and life satisfaction is in this country. (This diagram gives you a visual example of how the arrows were built for each country.) 9 Satisfaction is different from hedonism.
A hedonist seeks pleasure or pleasure above all else. [16] Satisfaction is not about doing things just to feel joy. Satisfaction is not complacent. What does this visualization tell us? We find that the lines go down upwards in all cases: people in the top income quintiles tend to have higher average life satisfaction. But in some countries, the boundaries are steep and linear (for example, in Costa Rica, the richest people are happier than the poorest people in income distribution); while in some countries the lines are less steep and non-linear (for example, the richest population group in the Dominican Republic is just as happy as the second richest group). One influence on life satisfaction is that of family life and family situation. Satisfaction with family life is a relevant issue because each other`s family affects them in some way and most strive to have a high level of satisfaction both in life and in their own families. Studies have shown that satisfaction with family life is improved by the ability of family members to collectively realize their family-related values in behaviour. [38] It is important to examine the satisfaction of all family members with family life from both a “perceived” and an “ideal” perspective.
Greater satisfaction with life within a family increases through communication and understanding of each member`s attitudes and perceptions. Family can make a significant contribution to life satisfaction. If you are interested in data on the distribution of scores at the national level, the Pew Global Attitudes Survey provides such figures for more than 40 countries. In the graphs above, we show that there is strong evidence of a strong correlation between income and happiness between and within countries at fixed times. Here, we want to show that, although less strong, there is also a correlation between income and happiness over time. In other words, as countries get richer, populations tend to report higher average life satisfaction. The fulfillment of social narratives is considered an important influence on happiness, defined by Paul Dolan as “a flow of pleasure and purpose over time.” [66] This implies that instead of allowing our natural tendency for “self-remembrance” to make most of the happiness decision by recognizing and accepting social narrative pitfalls that are relevant to ourselves, we are better able to regulate our attention and thus enhance the satisfaction of “experiencing ourselves.” [71] Three major narrative pitfalls are identified: 1) success (more happiness is achieved with higher income, a marker of success and intellectual validation), 2) related (people should have monogamous marriages and have children), and 3) responsible (acting altruistically with a purely selfless motive; prioritizing good health and acting with free will to be held accountable). When validating the effect of narrative pitfalls on life satisfaction, factors such as income and education were found to explain satisfaction relatively. For example, it was found that even though people were better educated in absolute numbers, they were less satisfied when others around them improved education more. [72] This implies that the contribution of traditionally studied life satisfaction factors (i.e., income, employment, education, relationships) may be influenced by the extent to which the social narrative flourishes. But, as with any other aggregate indicator of social progress, averages should be interpreted with caution, even if they make sense from a computer perspective.
For example, if we look at happiness by age in a particular country, we can see that older people don`t seem to be happier than younger people. However, this may be because the average age number in the snapshot confuses two factors: the age effect (people in the same cohort become happier as they age, in all cohorts) and the cohort effect (in all age groups, previous generations are less happy than younger generations). If the cohort effect is very strong, the snapshot may even give a picture suggesting that people become less happy as they age, even though the exact opposite is true in all generations. To show the correlation between income and happiness across countries, the graph plots the relationship between self-reported life satisfaction on the vertical axis and GDP per capita on the horizontal axis. Each country is an arrow on the grid, and the position of the arrow tells us the appropriate combination of average income and average happiness. According to Martin Seligman, the happier people are, the less focused they are on the negative aspects of their lives. Happier people also have a greater tendency to love others, which promotes a happier environment. This correlates with a person`s greater satisfaction with their life, due to the idea that being constructive with others can positively influence life satisfaction. [18] However, others have found that life satisfaction is consistent with deeply negative emotional states such as depression. [19] KoivumaaâHonkanen, H., Honkanen, R., Antikainen, R., Hintikka, J., Laukkanen, E., Honkalampi, K., & ViinamÄki, H. (2001).
Self-reported life satisfaction and recovery from depression in a 1-year prospective study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 103(1), 38-44. Available at: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2001.00046.x. The differences in responses to the questions about life satisfaction and happiness are consistent with the idea that subjective well-being has two sides: an experiential or emotional side and an evaluative or cognitive side. Of course, the boundaries between the emotional and cognitive aspects of well-being are blurred in our minds; Thus, in practice, both types of questions measure both aspects to some extent. In fact, social scientists often construct “subjective well-being indices” in which they simply apply the results of different types of questions. These results have been examined in more detail in a number of recent academic studies. Importantly, the oft-cited article by Stevenson and Wolfers (2008)10 shows that these correlations apply even after controlling for various country characteristics, such as the demographic composition of the population, and are robust to different data sources and types of subjective measures of well-being. The research revealed clear discrepancies between lived utility (i.e., hedonic experience versus an outcome) and decision-making utility (i.e., desirability arising from decisions), the former being subject to the systematic influence of peak effect and persistent neglect, and most often used to guide our actual decision. [60] To confirm this view, the cold hand experiment shows that people overwhelmingly prefer to have their hands in ice water for 90 seconds with a slight increase in temperature (i.e., an improved experience at the end) than to have their hands for 60 seconds without an increase in temperature at the end, [61] This implies that a decision is not consistent with experience.
[62] Questions on measuring life satisfaction are primarily answered by “self-recollection” (i.e., What was it like overall?) [63] reflected on the benefits felt in terms of subjective assessment of what constitutes a good life. Therefore, despite a strong preference for longer periods of happiness, there are systematic mistakes that prevent us from behaving consistently and consistently and thinking about our level of life satisfaction. [62] This is fundamental to a narrative trap in which the effect of neglect undermines experience in its contribution to well-being, while socially important narratives guide our decision and behaviour.