Childhood and demographic predictors of life evaluation, life satisfaction, and happiness:
A cross-national analysis of the Global Flourishing Study
Author:
Lomas Tim1ORCID, Koga Hayami1, Padgett R.1, Pawelski James2ORCID, Kim Eric3, Makridis Christos4, Gundersen Craig5, Bradshaw Matt5, Pertel Noémie Le1, Shiba Koichiro6ORCID, Johnson Byron5, VanderWeele Tyler1
Affiliation:
1. Harvard University 2. University of Pennsylvania 3. University of British Columbia 4. Stanford University; University of Nicosia 5. Baylor University 6. Boston University
Abstract
Abstract
Subjective wellbeing has increasingly attracted attention across academia and beyond (e.g., policy making). However, the research literature has various shortcomings, including (1) conceptual confusion around key constructs, (2) limited and fragmented understanding of contextual dynamics, and (3) a lack of cross-cultural consideration. This paper reports on data from an ambitious research endeavour capable of redressing these three issues: the Global Flourishing Study (GFS), an intended five-year (minimum) panel study investigating the predictors of human flourishing. In addressing the aforementioned issues, first, the GFS has separate items for three constructs at the heart of subjective wellbeing that are often used interchangeably but are actually distinct: life evaluation; life satisfaction, and happiness. Second, the GFS enables an analysis of the association with these constructs of 15 contextual factors (eight relating to childhood, four demographic, and three pertaining to both). Third, the GFS includes (in this first year) 202,898 participants from 22 geographically and culturally diverse countries. Regarding contextual factors, all 15 had a significant association with all three outcome variables, with the largest variation observed being for self-reported health among the childhood predictors and employment status among the demographic factors. Significantly though, the overall patterns were not uniform across countries, suggesting the trends observed are not inevitable or universal, but are contingent on socio-cultural factors. The findings provide a better understanding of, and the foundation for future work on, the conceptual, contextual, and cross-cultural dynamics of this important topic.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference108 articles.
1. Stiglitz, J. E. Measuring What Counts: The Global Movement for Well-Being. (The New Press, 2019). 2. Stiglitz, J. E., Fitoussi, J. P. & Durand, M. Beyond GDP: Measuring What Counts for Economic and Social Performance. (OECD Publishing, Paris, France, 2018). 3. World Health Organization. Joint Meeting of Experts on Targets and Indicators for Health and Well-Being in Health 2020. (World Health Organization Regional Office of Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2013). 4. The Global Council for Happiness and Wellbeing. Global Happiness and Wellbeing Policy Report. (Sustainable Development Solutions Network, New York, 2019). 5. Durand, M. & Exton, C. Adopting a Well-Being Approach in Central Government: Policy Mechanisms and Practical Tools. (Global Happiness and Wellbeing Policy Report, 2019).
|
|