Samenvatting
Summary The science of subjective well-being
- Instelling
- Universiteit Utrecht (UU)
This is a summary with all the chapters that are material for the exam.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 41 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 41 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
3 beoordelingen
Door: lotteroosbrouwer • 2 jaar geleden
lijkt niet samengevat, stukken gewoon overgenomen uit het boek (?)
Door: wbabtist • 1 jaar geleden
Door: wouterdenhaan • 2 jaar geleden
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Summary Eid & Larsen1. Ed Diener and the Science of Subjective Well-Being
We show how the field of subjective well-being has been shaped and influenced by the efforts
of Ed Diener. (The first part of tis chapter talks about all the work Ed Diener has done. I
don’t think this is relevant for the test. That is why I don’t write about it in this summary, but
I still think it is interesting to read!)
The Structure of Subjective Well-Being
In the mid-1980s there was an active debate about the nature of, and relationship between,
positive and negative affect. Diener and Emmons (1984) wrote an influential paper
demonstrating that trait measures of positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) were
essentially uncorrelated, meaning that how much of one affect a person tended to experience
had no bearing on how much of the other he or she experienced. Diener and colleagues also
investigated other dimensions of affective experience in relation to subjective well-being,
including the characteristic intensity and frequency of affective experience. It turns out that
the typical intensity with which people experience their affective states, although an
interesting dimension in its own right, has no impact on overall subjective well-being.
Subjective well-being has another component in addition to the hedonic component; it
includes a cognitive judgment about one’s life, as a whole, as satisfying.
The Measurement of Subjective Well-Being
Can happiness be measured—and, if yes, in which way? An answer to this question is
fundamental for an empirical science of subjective well-being. Because subjective well-being
refers to affective experiences and cognitive judgments, self-report measures of subjective
well-being are indispensable. With his collaborators Ed Diener developed the Satisfaction
with Life Scale which became the standard measure of life satisfaction in the field and has
been translated into many languages. Moreover, he developed measurement procedures for
the affective components of subjective well-being such as the intensity and frequency of
emotion and was one of the early proponents of experience sampling methods using beepers
and hand-held computers to assess affective states in people’s natural lives. His main
messages concerning the measurement of subjective well-being are (1) that subjective well-
being can be assessed by self-report with substantial reliability and validity, (2) that each
measurement method has advantages and pitfalls, and (3) that the more complete assessment
of subjective well-being requires a multimethod assessment tool.
The Determinants of Subjective Well-Being
Diener’s research indicates that there is no sole determinant of subjective wellbeing. Some
conditions seem to be necessary for high subjective well-being (e.g., mental health, positive
social relationships), but they are not, in themselves, sufficient to cause happiness. Research
out of the Diener lab supports the idea of Costa and McCrae (1980) that personality factors,
especially extraversion and neuroticism, are important contributors to subjective well-being.
Diener and Seligman (2002) examined the characteristics of the happiest 10% of a college
student sample. They compared the upper 10% of consistently very happy people to average
and very unhappy people. The very happy people were highly social, with strong romantic
and other close social relationships, compared to less happy groups. Some researchers have
implicated genetic determinants of subjective wellbeing based on data from twin studies.
Some of these studies, conducted at the University of Minnesota and reviewed by Lykken
(1999), found that monozygotic twins reared apart are more similar in happiness levels than
are dyzygotic twins who were reared together. Some researchers, and many popular writers,
,have interpreted the genetic evidence to mean that happiness is determined by DNA
endowment. This is not true for several reasons, as Diener has argued in several places. First,
in most genetic studies, there is a fair amount of variability in happiness over time. s. A
second piece of evidence supporting environmental effects on subjective well-being also
comes from the twin studies. Diener’s lab has also provided evidence for environmental
effects on subjective well-being in terms of the large differences between nations in life
satisfaction and other subjective well-being variables.
The Consequences of Subjective Well-Being
The pursuit of happiness is a right that every American possesses, according to the
Declaration of Independence. The term happiness even appears in several drafts of the
European Union constitution. To be happy is one of the major goals, if not the ultimate goal,
of human beings. To be happy is a quality itself, and a lot of research has been devoted to
identifying the conditions for, and the causes of, happiness.
Cross-Cultural Research on Subjective Well-Being
Although the pursuit of happiness seems to be a general drive of life, there are strong inter-
and intracultural differences in the way people appreciate happiness and in the routes to
happiness. Ed Diener’s lab has contributed to our understanding of cultural differences in
subjective well-being in many important ways. Ed Diener’s work has formed the cornerstones
of a cross-cultural psychology of subjective well-being that helps us to understand how to live
a happy life all over the world.
National Indicators of Subjective Well-Being
People pursue happiness, and the happiness of citizens has many benefits for society. How
can policy use the insights that research on subjective well-being has uncovered? Diener and
Seligman (2004) argue that national indicators are needed to inform policy makers about the
well-being of their citizens. Although the development of national indicators is in its initial
stage, it is likely that Ed Diener will promote this topic in his future research and that this idea
will gain the attention from policy makers that it deserves.
Summary
Interest in subjective well-being and happiness has been an undercurrent in scholarly thinking
for a long time. The scientific method applied to questions of subjective well-being is yielding
tremendous gains in our knowledge. We reviewed several areas of knowledge gain above that
were mainly due to the work of Ed Diener, who is a relentless proponent of the scientific
method. Another way Ed Diener’s work is significant is his emphasis on how happiness is
important, in and of itself. Another way subjective well-being is important is that it appears to
lead to many good outcomes in life. Given findings such as these, Diener has recently moved
beyond science into the realm of social policy.
14. Two New Questions about Happiness
Historically three broad questions have dominated subjective well-being research: “What is
happiness?” “Who is happy?” and “What makes people happy?” Since breaking the ground,
Ed Diener has successfully built one of the most extensive nomological nets of any research
programs in psychology (which must have made his intellectual hero, Paul Meehl, proud). In
so doing, he created the foundation for the scientific inquiry into this complex phenomenon
and answered the first major question, “What is happiness?” (answer: Happiness is a latent
construct best indicated by a general sense of life satisfaction). Second, he documented the
cross-situational consistency of subjective well-being (and the contribution of personality to
,subjective well-being, contrary to the then-fashionable social constructionism movement. In
this process, he also provided the answer to the second major question, “Who is happy?”
(answer: extraverts, optimists, and persons with great social relationships). Third, he
investigated the effect of external factors, such as resources and life events, on happiness,
thereby answering the third question, “What makes people happy?” (answer: not so much
positive life events per se, but rather goal attainment made possible by the match between
individuals’ talents, resources, and their goals). Finally, while recognizing the significance of
temperament and personality traits, he called attention to the importance of culture to the
meaning and construal of well-being. Now that the first three questions are properly answered
by Ed Diener, we can delve into other important research questions, including this chapter’s
main topic: What are the consequences of happiness (e.g., Do happy people make more
money than unhappy people? Are they healthier than unhappy people?)? We will summarize
the current state of knowledge on the consequences of happiness first, followed by the
discussion of the optimal levels of happiness. Finally, we will explore cultural similarities and
differences in the consequences of happiness.
The Consequences of Happiness
When Ruut Veenhoven published the article entitled “The Utility of Happiness” in 1988, he
stated that “no empirical investigations have yet focused on consequences of happiness”.
Many researchers must have felt that if happiness is the ultimate goal, why should we care
about the consequences of this ultimate goal? We argue that even though normative analyses
by moral philosophers often placed happiness as the ultimate goal, the consequences of
happiness should be of great interest to well-being researchers, for several reasons. First, as
Veenhoven eloquently maintained, if happiness harms us in some ways, the normative
analysis on happiness becomes irrelevant in real life as the ultimate goal. Thus, the empirical
evaluation of this issue is essential. Second, philosophical discussions about happiness often
lack any consideration of individual and cultural differences. The consequences of happiness
might vary systematically across individuals and cultures that differ in the eagerness with
which they pursuit happiness.
Veenhoven’s Findings
The purpose of Veenhoven’s review was to evaluate some of the negative views of happiness.
Veenhoven asked a number of intriguing questions about the consequences of happiness. The
first question was “Does happiness reduce sensitivity to others?” Empirical evidence indicates
otherwise. The second question was “Does happiness lead into idleness?” Earlier daily diary
studies all found that people were more active on the day when they felt happy. The third
question was “Does happiness breed voting dummies?” The answer was again “no,” because
political participation was not associated with life satisfaction. The next question was “Does
happiness loosen intimate ties?” Again, the answer was “no,” because participants in a happy
mood behaved more generously toward others and felt more positively toward others. The
final question was “Is happiness healthy?” Here, the answer is “yes,” because happy people
had slightly better health as assessed by physicians.
Lyubomirsky, King, and Diener (2005) and Pressman and Cohen (2005) Meta-Analyses
The landscape of subjective well-being research has changed dramatically in the 17 years
since Veenhoven’s (1988, 1989) first reviews on this topic.
Work and Love
Most people list success in work and love as their major life goals. Thus, success in these two
domains indicates that a person is leading a flourishing life. The key question, then, is “Do
, happy people have more success at work and love?” According to Lyubomirsky et al., the
answer is again yes. Experimental studies converge nicely with the aforementioned
longitudinal findings.
Health and Mortality
Although people do not list health as a major life goal, health is essential for individuals to be
successful at work and love. Thus, health is another important life outcome. Mortality is
widely considered the ultimate health outcome, because illness often leads to death. Pressman
and Cohen (2005) conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis on the link between PA and
health outcomes, some of which overlap with Lyubomirsky et al. (2005). As Pressman and
Cohen (2005) caution, the literature on PA and health is still limited in scope and
methodology. In addition, the effect of PA on health is not unequivocal. However, these two
meta-analyses present an overall picture that happiness is generally associated with healthier
life styles, health behaviors, and outcomes.
Optimal Levels of Happiness: Is Happier Always Better?
As summarized above, happiness has more beneficial
than harmful outcomes. Happiness does not lead to
laziness but to industriousness. Happiness does not lead
to insensitivity but to greater concern for others.
Happiness does
not lead to
indulgence but
rather to health.
It should be
emphasized
again, however,
that the effect
size is modest at
best. Our
speculation that
the effect of
happiness on important life outcomes is nonlinear comes
from Diener et al. (2002), in which they analyzed a large
set of longitudinal data on Americans who entered one
of 25 elite colleges in 1976. Because Marks and Fleming
(1999) reported the longitudinal correlation between life
satisfaction and income, we contacted these authors and
obtained data for the 1961 birth cohorts and analyzed the
data in a way analogous to Diener et al. (2002).
Consistent with Diener et al., Australians who were satisfied with their lives when they were
18 years old earned, on average, more money than those who were dissatisfied with their lives
when they were 18 (see Figure 14.1).
Culture and Consequences of Happiness
Most of the longitudinal studies reviewed above were conducted in the United States and
other Western developed nations. Thus, the question remains whether the findings on the
consequences and optimal levels of happiness will hold across cultures. The desirability of
happiness is important in the present context because happiness might not be associated with
positive outcomes in a society where happiness is not as cherished as it is in the United States
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper studenteasw. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €4,89. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 67474 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen