Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring factors related to agreement between importance and satisfaction of subjective well-being indicators: evidence from Taiwan

  • Published:
Quality & Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 02 November 2022

This article has been updated

Abstract

This research conducts a meaningful comparison of self-reported importance and satisfaction in various life domains to promote the understanding of subjective well-being (SWB). Results from a nationwide telephone survey with regard to 12 indicators of well-being in Taiwan suggest that satisfaction attitude rating does incorporate the judgment of importance among SWB indicators. We further reveal different patterns of association, similarity, and discrepancy between importance and satisfaction across SWB indicators by performing both explanatory and confirmatory analyses. All the various analytical results lead to crucial meanings for interpreting the general level of SWB, especially under a cultural context such as Taiwan society. The adapted Importance-Performance analysis classifies the SWB measurements into four meaningful quadrants according to the importance and satisfaction scores. Applying a regression modelling strategy, we explore how importance judgment together with other demographic factors influences the satisfaction attitude and further verify what potential factors relate to their discrepancy. Graphical analyses enhance the presentation.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

Notes

  1. Related discussions about the results of the first survey of SWB are offered by Lin, Cheng, and Wang (2014). The hierarchical structure of the 12 items of SWB measurement here is guided by Maslow’s theory of needs.

  2. The classification of occupation includes (1) military and public service; (2) professional; (3) agriculture, animal husbandry, forestry, and fishing; (4) mining and quarrying; (5) service; (6) business; (7) homemaking; (8) self-employed; (9) student; (10) electronics; (11) manufacturing; (12) unemployed or retired; and (13) others.

  3. If the education dummies of Lin et al. (2014) are used in the current paper, then the regression analyses yield similar conclusions to those in Table 4.

References

  • Abaloa, J., Varela, J., Manzano, V.: Importance values for importance-performance analysis: a formula for spreading out values derived from preference rankings. J. Bus. Res. 60(2), 115–121 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Alesina, A., Di Tella, R., MacCulloch, R.: Inequality and happiness: are Europeans and Americans different? J. Public Econ. 88, 2009–2042 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Asadullah, M.N., Chaudhury, N.: Subjective well-being and relative poverty in rural Bangladesh. J. Econ. Psychol. 33(5), 940–950 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchflower, D.G., Oswald, A.J.: Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle? Soc. Sci. Med. 66, 1733–1749 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M. (1995). Asian management systems: Chinese, Japanese and Korean styles of business. Cengage Learning EMEA

  • Decancq, K., Lugo, M.A.: Weights in multidimensional indices of wellbeing: an overview. Economet. Rev. 32(1), 7–34 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Tella, R., MacCulloch, R.J., Oswald, A.J.: Preferences over inflation and unemployment: evidence from surveys of happiness. Am. Econ. Rev. 91(1), 335–341 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E.: Culture and well-being: the collected works of Ed Diener. Social Indicators Research Series, Springer, Amsterdam (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E.M.: Culture and subjective well-being. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E.M., Lucas, R., Smith, H.L.: SWB: three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 125, 276–302 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Lucas, R.E., Oishi, S.: Advances and open questions in the science of subjective wellbeing. Collabra Psychol. 4(1), 15 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, P., White, M.P.: How can measures of subjective well-being be used to inform public policy? Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2(1), 71–85 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., White, M.: Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with SWB. J. Econ. Psychol. 29, 94–122 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Farmer, R.F., Jarvis, L.L., Berent, M.K.: Contributions to self-esteem: the importance attached to self-concepts associated with the five-factor model. J. Res. Pers. 35, 483–499 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F.: Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. The Free Press, New York (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosz, M.P., Schwartz, S.H., Lechner, C.M.: The longitudinal interplay between personal values and subjective well-being: a registered report. Eur. J. Pers. 35(6), 881–897 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, J., Mauss, I.B., Tamir, M.: A dark side of happiness? How, when, and why happiness is not always good. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 6(3), 222–233 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammell, K.W.: Dimensions of meaning in the occupations of daily life. Can. J. Occup. Ther. 71(5), 296–305 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, J.F.: How’s life? Combining individual and national variables to explain SWB. Econ. Model. 20, 331–360 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, J.F., Putnam, R.D.: The social context of well-being. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Londn. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 359, 1435–1446 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, C.M.: Counting importance: The case of life satisfaction and relative domain importance. Soc. Indic. Res. 61, 227–240 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, C.M.: To weight or not to weight: the role of domain importance in quality of life measurement. Soc. Indic. Res. 68, 163–174 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, C.M.: Should we give up domain importance weighting on QoL measures? Soc. Indic. Res. 108, 99–109 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, W.C., Lee, J.S., Song, B.K.: Envy and pride: How economic inequality deepens happiness inequality in South Korea. Soc. Indic. Res. 150(2), 617–637 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, G.G., Knight, J.: Community, comparisons and SWB in a divided society. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 64, 69–90 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitayama, S., Markus, H.R.: The pursuit of happiness and the realization of sympathy: cultural patterns of self, social relations, and well-being. In: Diener, E., Suh, E.M. (eds.) Culture and Subjective Well-being, pp. 113–161. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  • Layard, R.: Happiness: Lessons from a New Science. Penguin Press, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C.-P., Hung, M.-J., Chen, D.-Y.: Factors affecting citizen satisfaction: examining from the perspective of the expectancy disconfirmation theory and individual differences. Asian J. Polit. Sci. 30, 35–60 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C.-C., Cheng, T.-C., Wang, S.-C.: Measuring subjective well-being in Taiwan. Soc. Indic. Res. 116(1), 17–45 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E.A.: What is job satisfaction? Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 4, 309–336 (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E.A.: The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In: Dunnette, M.D. (ed.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, pp. 1297–1343. Rand McNally, Chicago (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ludwigs, K., Lucas, R., Burger, M., Veenhoven, R., Arends, L.: How does more attention to subjective well-being affect subjective well-being? Appl. Res. Qual. Life 13(4), 1055–1080 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  • Martilla, J.A., James, J.C.: Importance-performance analysis. J. Mark. 41(1), 77–79 (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  • Matzler, K., Sauerwein, E., Heischmidt, K.: Importance-performance analysis revisited: the role of the factor structure of customer satisfaction. Serv. Ind. J. 23(2), 112–129 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Matzler, K., Bailom, F., Hinterhuber, H.H., Renzl, B., Pichler, J.: The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satisfaction: A reconsideration of the importance-performance analysis. Ind. Market Manag. 33(4), 271–277 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauss, I.B., Tamir, M., Anderson, C.L., Savino, N.S.: Can seeking happiness make people unhappy? Paradoxical effects of valuing happiness. Emotion 11(4), 807–815 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mobley, W.H., Locke, E.A.: The relationship of value importance to satisfaction. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 5(5), 463–483 (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, D.G., Diener, E.: Who is happy? Psychol. Sci. 6, 10–19 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, R. M. C. (1998). The influence of collectivism-individualism on persuasion in Chinese and American cultures. Communication and Culture: China and the World Entering the 21st Century, 12, 71

  • Oh, H.: Revisiting importance-performance analysis. Tour. Manage. 22, 617–627 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Oishi, S., Gilbert, E.A.: Current and future directions in culture and happiness research. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 8, 54–58 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  • Oishi, S., Diener, E., Suh, E., Lucas, R.E.: Value as a moderator in subjective well-being. J. Pers. 67(1), 157–184 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  • Oswald, A.J.: Happiness and economic performance. Econ. J. 107, 1815–1831 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2001). Social capital: measurement and consequences. In: Helliwell, JF (Ed), The Contribution of Human and Social Capital to Sustained Economic Growth and Well-Being.

  • Raphael, D., Waalen, J., Karabanow, A.: Factor analytic properties of the quality of life profile: Examination of the nine subdomain quality of life model. Psychol. Rep. 88(1), 265–276 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, L.B., Hubley, A.M., Palepu, A., Zumbo, B.D.: Does weighting capture what’s important? Revisiting subjective importance weighting with a quality of life measure. Soc. Indic. Res. 75(1), 141–167 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Stutzer, A.: The role of income aspirations in individual happiness. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 54, 89–109 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonge, J., Moor, S.A.: Importance-satisfaction analysis for marine-park hinterlands: a Western Australian case study. Tour. Manage. 28(3), 768–776 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Trauer, T., Mackinnon, A.: Why are we weighting? The role of importance ratings in quality of life measurement. Qual. Life Res. 10, 579–585 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Uchida, Y., Kitayama, S.: Happiness and unhappiness in East and West: themes and variations. Emotion 9, 441–456 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K.G., Sandoz, E.K., Kitchens, J., Roberts, M.: The valued living questionnaire: defining and measuring valued action within a behavioral framework. The Psychological Record 60(2), 249–272 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C.-H.: Can we weight satisfaction score with importance ranks across life domains? Soc. Indic. Res. 86, 468–480 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C.-H.: Enhancing quality of life by shifting importance perception among life domains. J. Happiness Stud. 10, 37–47 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C.-H., Yao, G.: Do we need to weight satisfaction scores with importance ratings in measuring quality of life? Soc. Indic. Res. 78, 305–326 (2006a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C.-H., Yao, G.: Do we need to weight item satisfaction by item importance? A perspective from Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Soc. Indic. Res. 79, 485–502 (2006b)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

TCC’s research was partially supported by grant MOST 103-2118-M-004 -003 of the Ministry of Science and Technology in Taiwan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics, National Chengchi University, 64, Section 2, ZhihNan Road, Taipei, 11605, Taiwan

    Tsung-Chi Cheng

  2. Department of Social Work, National Taipei University, New Taipei City, Taiwan

    Chao-Yin Lin

  3. Research Center for Education Systems and Policy, National Academy for Educational Research, New Taipei City, Taiwan

    Shu-Chen Wang

Authors
  1. Tsung-Chi Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chao-Yin Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shu-Chen Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tsung-Chi Cheng.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cheng, TC., Lin, CY. & Wang, SC. Exploring factors related to agreement between importance and satisfaction of subjective well-being indicators: evidence from Taiwan. Qual Quant 57, 2811–2839 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01499-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01499-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation