Can Well-Being be Measured Using Facebook Status Updates? Validation of Facebook’s Gross National Happiness Index
- 2.4k Downloads
Facebook’s Gross National Happiness (FGNH) indexes the positive and negative words used in the millions of status updates submitted daily by Facebook users. FGNH has face validity: it shows a weekly cycle and increases on national holidays. Also, happier individuals use more positive words and fewer negative words in their status updates (Kramer 2010). We examined the validity of FGNH in measuring mood and well-being by comparing it with scores on Diener’s Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), administered to an average of 34 Facebook users every day for a year, then aggregated by day, week, month, quarter and half year. FGNH and SWLS were not significantly correlated, with a negative correlation coefficient. Also, aggregated SWLS scores showed a positive relationship with numbers of negative words in status updates. We conclude that FGNH is a valid measure for neither mood nor well-being; however, it may play a role in mood regulation. This challenges the assumption that linguistic analysis of internet messages is related to underlying psychological states.
KeywordsFacebook Gross National Happiness Satisfaction with Life Well-being Linguistic Inquiry Word Count
- Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2004). Handbook of self-regulation: Research theory, and applications. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 71–75.Google Scholar
- Facebook Data Team. (2010). Continuing our study of happiness, from http://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-data-team/continuing-our-study-of-happiness/375901788858.
- Facebook Data Team. (2011). Gross National Happiness, from http://apps.facebook.com/gnh_index/.
- Gamon, M. (2004). Sentiment classification on customer feedback data: Noisy data, large feature vectors, and the role of linguistic analysis. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 841 at the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM.Google Scholar
- Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, L. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., et al. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.Google Scholar
- Jordan, A. H., Monin, B., Dweck, C. S., Lovett, B. J., John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2010). Misery has more company than people think: Underestimating the prevalence of others’ negative emotions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(1), 120–135.Google Scholar
- Kramer, A. (2010). An unobtrusive behavioral model of “Gross National Happiness”. Paper presented at the 28th international conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM.Google Scholar
- McAllister, F. (2005). Well-being concepts and challenges, Sustainable Development Research Network Discussion paper, December, London. Available at: http://www.sd-research.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/finalwellbeingpolicybriefing.pdf.
- Mishne, G. & de Rijke, M. (2006). Capturing global mood levels using blog posts. In AAAI 2006 spring symposium on computational approaches to analysing weblogs (AAAICAAW 2006).Google Scholar
- Mullen, T., & Malouf, R. (2006) A preliminary investigation into sentiment analysis of informal political discourse. In Proceedings of the AAAI symposium on computational approaches to analyzing weblogs, 159–162.Google Scholar
- Nasukawa, T., & Yi, J. (2003). Sentiment analysis: Capturing favorability using natural language processing. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on knowledge capture. Florida, USA, 70–77.Google Scholar
- Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2004). A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting on association for computational linguistics (ACL), 271–278.Google Scholar
- Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2009). Review of the satisfaction with life scale assessing well-being: The collected works of Ed Diener. 101–117.Google Scholar
- Pennebaker, J. W., Chung, C. K., Ireland, M., Gonzales, A., & Booth, R. J. (2007). The development and psychological properties of LIWC 2007. 1–22. Retrieved from Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count website http://www.liwc.net/LIWC2007LanguageManual.pdf.
- Pennock, M. (2009). Measuring the progress of communities: Applying the Gross National Happiness Framework. Measuring the Progress of Societies, 2009, 9–10.Google Scholar
- Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (2003). Reports of subjective well-being: 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 Foundation.Google Scholar
- Stillwell, D. J. & Kosinski, M. (2011). myPersonality Research Wiki. myPersonality Project. Retrieved June, 2011, from http://mypersonality.org/wiki.
- Tausczik, Y. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24–54.Google Scholar
- Testing LIWC Online. (2011). from http://liwc.net/liwcresearch07.php.
- Ura, K. (2008). The GNH Index, from http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/gnhIndex/gnhIndexVariables.aspx.