Panel Conditioning and Subjective Well-being

被引:35
|
作者
Wooden, Mark [1 ]
Li, Ning [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne Inst Appl Econ & Social Res, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
HILDA Survey; Life satisfaction; Longitudinal data; Mental health; Panel conditioning; MENTAL-HEALTH; BIAS; SATISFACTION; HAPPINESS; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.1007/s11205-013-0348-1
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
The importance of panel, or longitudinal, survey data for analyzing subjective wellbeing, and especially its dynamics, is increasingly recognized. Analyses of such data, however, have to deal with two potential problems: (1) non-random attrition; and (2) panel conditioning. The former is a much researched topic. In contrast, panel conditioning has received much less attention from the research community. In this analysis, longitudinal survey data collected from members of a large national probability sample of households are used to examine whether self-reported measures of psychological well-being exhibit any tendency to change over time in a way that might reflect panel conditioning. Regression models are estimated that control for all time invariant influences as well as a set of time-varying influences. We find very little evidence that mean life satisfaction scores vary with length of time in the panel, especially once non-random attrition is controlled for. In contrast, scores on a measure of mental health do vary with time, and surprisingly men and women exhibit opposing patterns. For men, scores decline over time (though the estimates are not statistically robust), whereas for women the effects are both large and rise with time. Further, for both outcome measures there is a clear narrowing in the dispersion of reported scores over the first few waves of participation. The findings have implications for empirical research employing longitudinal data.
引用
收藏
页码:235 / 255
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Panel Conditioning and Subjective Well-being
    Mark Wooden
    Ning Li
    [J]. Social Indicators Research, 2014, 117 : 235 - 255
  • [2] SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING - COMPONENTS OF WELL-BEING
    GLATZER, W
    [J]. SOCIAL INDICATORS RESEARCH, 1987, 19 (01) : 25 - 31
  • [3] Subjective well-being is essential to well-being
    Diener, E
    Sapyta, JJ
    Suh, E
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL INQUIRY, 1998, 9 (01) : 33 - 37
  • [4] DEPRIVATION AND SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING: EVIDENCE FROM PANEL DATA
    Blazquez Cuesta, Maite
    Budria, Santiago
    [J]. REVIEW OF INCOME AND WEALTH, 2014, 60 (04) : 655 - 682
  • [5] Subjective well-being
    Diener, E
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 1996, 31 (3-4) : 2320 - 2320
  • [6] SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING
    DIENER, E
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1984, 95 (03) : 542 - 575
  • [7] Measuring well-being: A comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA
    Goodman, Fallon R.
    Disabato, David J.
    Kashdan, Todd B.
    Kauffman, Scott Barry
    [J]. JOURNAL OF POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 13 (04): : 321 - 332
  • [8] Culture and subjective well-being (well-being and quality of life)
    Boski, P
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CROSS-CULTURAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2004, 35 (02) : 242 - 246
  • [9] How Does More Attention to Subjective Well-Being Affect Subjective Well-Being?
    Ludwigs, Kai
    Lucas, Richard
    Burger, Martijn
    Veenhoven, Ruut
    Arends, Lidia
    [J]. APPLIED RESEARCH IN QUALITY OF LIFE, 2018, 13 (04) : 1055 - 1080
  • [10] How Does More Attention to Subjective Well-Being Affect Subjective Well-Being?
    Kai Ludwigs
    Richard Lucas
    Martijn Burger
    Ruut Veenhoven
    Lidia Arends
    [J]. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 2018, 13 : 1055 - 1080