Social Indicators Research

, Volume 87, Issue 1, pp 127–137 | Cite as

The Relative Importance of Health

  • Chang-Ming HsiehEmail author


This article seeks to extend Michalos’ [Social indicators research and health-related quality of life (QoL) research. Social Indicators Research, 65, 27–72, 2004] discussion on bridging social indicators research and health-related QoL (HRQoL) research through an examination of (1) the relative importance of satisfaction with one’s own health to another common measure of QoL—Life satisfaction, and (2) the relative importance of health in relation to other major life domains. Using data from two surveys, this article found that individuals may perceive health as most important in relation to other major life domains but satisfaction with one’s own health may not necessarily be the most important determining factor (in relation to satisfaction with other major life domains) of QoL as measured by life satisfaction. These findings support Michalos’ (Social indicators research and HRQoL research. Social Indicators Research, 65, 27–72, 2004) call for caution regarding the interpretation of research results on HRQoL since many HRQoL measures are measures of satisfaction with one’s own health and should not be considered as measures of QoL.


Quality of life Health-related quality of life Life satisfaction Domain importance Importance rating  Importance ranking 


  1. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rogers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New York: Russel Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In: R. H. Hole (Ed.), Statistical strategies for small sample research (pp. 307–341). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, P., Cohen, J., Teresi, J., Marchi, M., & Velez, C. N. (1990). Problems in the measurement of latent variables in structural equations casual models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cummins, R. A. (1995). On the tale of gold standard for life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 35, 179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cummins, R. A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos. Social Indicators Research, 38, 303–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cummins, R. A., McCabe, M. P., Romeo, Y., & Gullone, E. (1994). The comprehensive quality of life scale: Instrument development and psychometric evaluation on tertiary staff and students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 372–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fayers, P. M., & Hand, D. J. (1997). Factor analysis, causal indicators and quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 6, 139–150.Google Scholar
  11. Fayers P. M., & Machin D. (Eds.), (2000). Quality of life: Design, analysis and interpretation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Feist, G. J., Bodner, T. E., Jacobs, J. F., Miles, M., & Tan, V. (1995). Integrating top-down and bottom-up structural models of subjective well-being: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 138–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. George, L. K., & Bearon, L. B. (1980). Quality of life in older persons: Meaning and measurements. New York: Human Sciences Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ferrans, C. E., & Powers, M. J. (1985). Quality of life index: Development and psychometric properties. Advances in Nursing Science, 8, 15–24.Google Scholar
  15. Headey, B., Veenhoven, R., & Wearing, A. (1991). Top-down versus bottom-up theories of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 24, 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hsieh, C. M. (2003). Counting importance: The case of life satisfaction and relative domain importance. Social Indicators Research, 61, 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hsieh, C. M. (2004). To weight or not to weight: The role of domain importance in quality of life measurement. Social Indicators Research, 68, 163–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hsieh, C. M. (2006). Using client satisfaction to improve case management services for the elderly. Research on Social Work Practice, 16, 605–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liang, J. (1984). Dimensions of the life satisfaction index A: A structural formulation. Journal of Gerontology, 39, 613–622.Google Scholar
  20. Liang, J. (1985). A structural integration of the affect balance scale and the life satisfaction index A. Journal of Gerontology, 40, 552–561.Google Scholar
  21. Mastekaasa, A. (1984). Multiplicative and additive models of job and life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 14, 141–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Michalos, A. C. (2004). Social indicators research and health-related quality of life research. Social Indicators Research, 65, 27–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neugarten, B. L., Havighurst, R. J., & Tobin, S. S. (1961). Measurement of life satisfaction. Journal of Gerontology, 16, 134–143.Google Scholar
  24. Scherpenzeel, A., & Saris, W. (1996). Causal direction in a model of life satisfaction: The top-down/bottom-up controversy. Social Indicators Research, 38, 161–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Veenhoven, R. (2000). The four qualities of life: Ordering concepts and measures of the good life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wu, C. H. (in press). Examining the appropriateness of importance weighting on satisfaction from range-of-affect hypothesis: Hierarchical linear modeling for within-subject data. Social Indicators Research. doi: 10.1007/s 11205-007-9103-9Google Scholar
  27. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006a). Do we need to weight satisfaction scores with importance ratings in measuring qualify of life? Social Indicators Research, 78, 305–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2006b). Do we need to weight item satisfaction by item importance? A perspective from Locke’s range-of –affect hypothesis. Social Indicators Research, 79, 485–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wu, C. H., & Yao, G. (2007). Importance has been considered in satisfaction evaluation: An experimental examination of Locke’s range-of-affect hypothesis. Social Indicators Research, 81, 521–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Jane Addams College of Social Work (M/C 309)University of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations