Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing Multiple Discrepancies Theory to Affective Models of Subjective Wellbeing

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Subjective Wellbeing (SWB) literature is replete with competing theories detailing the mechanisms underlying the construction and maintenance of SWB. The current study aimed to compare and contrast two of these approaches: multiple discrepancies theory (MDT) and an affective-cognitive theory of SWB. MDT posits SWB to be the result of perceived discrepancies between multiple standards of comparison. By contrast, affective-cognitive theory asserts that SWB is primarily influenced by trait affect, and indirectly influenced by personality and cognition through trait affect. Participants comprised 387 individuals who responded to the 5th longitudinal survey of the Australian Unity Wellbeing Index. Results of Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) indicated the poorest fit to the data for the MDT model. The affective-cognitive model also did not provide a good fit to the data. A purely affective model provided the best fit to the data, was the most parsimonious, and explained 66% of variance in SWB.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrews, F. M., & Robinson, J. P. (1991). Measures of subjective wellbeing. In J. P. Robinson, P. Shaver, & L. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of social psychological attitudes (pp. 61–114). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: American’s perceptions of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brebner, J., Donaldson, J., Kirby, N., & Ward, L. (1995). Relationships between personality and happiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 251–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations and satisfactions. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cha, K.-H. (2003). Subjective wellbeing among college students. Social Indicators Research, 62–63, 455–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A., Eckersley, R., Lo, S. K., Okerstrom, E., Hunter, B., & Davern, M. (2004). Australian unity wellbeing index: Cumulative psychometric record. Retrieved April 15, 2006, from Deakin University, Australian Centre on Quality of Life Website: http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/index_wellbeing/index.htm.

  • Cummins, R. A., Gullone, E., & Lau, A. (2002). A model of subjective wellbeing homeostasis: The role of personality. In E. Gullone & R. A. Cummins (Eds.), The universality of subjective wellbeing indicators: A multi-disciplinary and multi-national perspective (pp. 7–46). London: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, R. A., Woerner, J., Gibson, A., Lai, L., Weinberg, M., & Collard, J. (2008). Australian unity wellbeing index, survey 20. Retrieved December 3, 2008, from Deakin University, Australian Centre on Quality of Life Website: http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/index_wellbeing/index.htm.

  • Davern, M. T. (2004). Subjective wellbeing as an affective construct. Dissertation, Deakin University, Australia.

  • Davern, M. T., Cummins, R. A., & Stokes, M. (2007). Subjective wellbeing as an affective-cognitive construct. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8(4), 429–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective wellbeing. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31(2), 103–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (1996). Traits are powerful, but are not enough: Lessons from subjective wellbeing. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 389–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Diener, C. (1996). Most people are happy. Psychological Science, 7(3), 181–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective wellbeing. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–229). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2004). Subjective emotional well-being. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 325–337). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective wellbeing: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 403–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective wellbeing: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forgas, J. P., & Moylan, S. (1987). After the movies: Transient mood and social judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13(4), 467–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurin, G., Veroff, J., & Feld, S. (1960). Americans view their mental health. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Headey, B., & Wearing, A. (1989). Personality, life-events and subjective wellbeing: Towards a dynamic equilibrium model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 731–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Headey, B., & Wearing, A. (1992). Understanding happiness. A theory of subjective wellbeing. Melbourne, Australia: Longman Cheshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2001). Happiness, introversion–extroversion and happy introverts. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 595–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, L. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Wellbeing Group. (2005). Personal wellbeing index. Melbourne: Australian Centre on Quality of Life, Deakin University. Retrieved May 15, 2005, from: http://www.deakin.edu.au/research/acqol/instruments/wellbeing_index.htm.

  • John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of wellbeing measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 616–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1980). Satisfaction and happiness. Social Indicators Research, 8(4), 385–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1982). The satisfaction and happiness of some senior citizens in rural Ontario. Social Indicators Research, 11(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1983). Satisfaction and happiness in a rural northern resource community. Social Indicators Research, 13(3), 225–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1985). Multiple discrepancies theory (MDT). Social Indicators Research, 16, 347–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 10–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavot, W. G., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the satisfaction with life scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of wellbeing measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 149–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110(1), 145–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. A., & Feldman Barrett, L. (1999). Core affect, prototypical emotional episodes, and other things called emotion: Dissecting the elephant. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 805–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1999). Reports of subjective wellbeing: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 61–84). New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Kommer, D., & Wagner, D. (1987). Soccer, rooms and the quality of your life: Mood effects on judgments of satisfaction with life in general and with specific life-domains. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 69–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). New York: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vitterso, J. (2001). Personality traits and subjective well-being: Emotional stability, not extraversion, is probably the important predictor. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 903–914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yik, M., Russell, J. A., & Feldman Barrett, L. (1999). Structure of self-reported current affect: Integration and beyond. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 600–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award (Industry) from the Australian Research Council to the first author, as part of an Australian Research Council Industry Partnership Grant with Australian Unity. Chief investigators on this grant were Robert Cummins, David Mellor, Lucy Firth, and Mark Stokes. The research was completed whilst the first author was a PhD candidate in the School of Psychology at Deakin University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Deakin University, School of Psychology, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia

    Jed D. Blore, Mark A. Stokes, David Mellor, Lucy Firth & Robert A. Cummins

  2. The University of Queensland, School of Population Health, Herston, QLD, 4006, Australia

    Jed D. Blore

Authors
  1. Jed D. Blore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark A. Stokes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Mellor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lucy Firth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert A. Cummins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jed D. Blore.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blore, J.D., Stokes, M.A., Mellor, D. et al. Comparing Multiple Discrepancies Theory to Affective Models of Subjective Wellbeing. Soc Indic Res 100, 1–16 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9599-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9599-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation