Advertisement

Is it possible to measure happiness?

The argument from measurability
  • Erik Angner
Original paper in the Philosophy of the Cognitive Sciences

Abstract

A ubiquitous argument against mental-state accounts of well-being is based on the notion that mental states like happiness and satisfaction simply cannot be measured. The purpose of this paper is to articulate and to assess this “argument from measurability.” My main thesis is that the argument fails: on the most charitable interpretation, it relies on the false proposition that measurement requires the existence of an observable ordering satisfying conditions like transitivity. The failure of the argument from measurability, however, does not translate into a defense of mental-state accounts as accounts of well-being or of measures of happiness and satisfaction as measures of well-being. Indeed, I argue, the ubiquity of the argument from measurability may have obscured other, very real problems associated with mental-state accounts of well-being – above all, that happiness and satisfaction fail to track well-being – and with measures of happiness and satisfaction – above all, the tendency toward reification. I conclude that the central problem associated with the measurement of, e.g., happiness as a subjectively experienced mental state is not that it is too hard to measure, but rather that it is too easy to measure.

Keywords

Well-being Welfare Happiness Measurement Reification 

Notes

Acknowledgment

I am grateful to Zvi Biener, Robyn Dawes, Greg Frost-Arnold, Daniel Hausman, Brian Hepburn, Harold Kincaid, Peter Machamer, Gualtiero Piccinini, Nicholas Rescher, Don Ross, Sam Wren-Lewis, and anonymous referees for constructive comments on earlier drafts. Errors remain my own.

References

  1. Alexandrova, A. (2008). First-person reports and the measurement of happiness. Philosophical Psychology, 21(5), 571–583. doi: 10.1080/09515080802412552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social indicators of well-being: Americans’ perceptions of life quality. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angner, E. (2009a). The politics of happiness: Subjective vs. economic measures as measures of social well-being. In L. Bortolotti (Ed.), Philosophy and happiness (pp. 149–166). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Angner, E. (2009b). Subjective measures of well-being: Philosophical perspectives. In H. Kincaid & D. Ross (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of economics (pp. 560–579). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195189254.003.0021.Google Scholar
  5. Angner, E. (2010). Subjective well-being. Journal of Socio-Economics, 39(3), 361–368. doi: 10.1016/j.socec.2009.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Angner, E. (2011a). The evolution of eupathics: The historical roots of subjective measures of wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 1(1), 4–41. doi: 10.5502/ijw.v1i1.14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Angner, E. (2011b). Are subjective measures of well-being “direct”? Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 89(1), 115–130. doi: 10.1080/00048400903401665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Angner, E. (2012). Current trends in welfare measurement. In J. B. Davis & D. W. Hands (Eds.), The Elgar companion to recent economic methodology (pp. 121–154). Northampton: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  9. Angner, E., & Loewenstein, G. (2012). Behavioral economics. In U. Mäki (Ed.), Handbook of the philosophy of science: Philosophy of economics (pp. 641–690). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  10. Aristotle (1962). Nicomachean ethics. (M. Oswald, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill Co.Google Scholar
  11. Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4(6), 561–571. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Beckerman, W. (1975). Two cheers for the affluent society: A spirited defense of economic growth. New York: Saint Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ben-Shahar, T. (2007). Happier: Learn the secrets to daily joy and lasting fulfillment. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  14. Binmore, K. (1999). Why experiment in economics? The Economic Journal, 109(453), F16–F24. doi: 10.1111/1468-0297.00399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brooks, A. C. (2008). Gross National Happiness: Why happiness matters for America—and how we can get more of it. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  16. Camerer, C. F., & Loewenstein, G. (2004). Behavioral economics: Past, present, future. In C. F. Camerer, G. Loewenstein, & M. Rabin (Eds.), Advances in behavioral economics (pp. 3–51). New York and Princeton: Russell Sage Foundation and Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Campbell, D. T. (1960). Recommendations for APA test standards regarding construct, trait, or discriminant validity. American Psychologist, 15(8), 546–553. doi: 10.1037/h0048255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Campbell, A. (1976). Subjective measures of well-being. American Psychologist, 31(2), 117–124. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.31.2.117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cantril, H. (1965). The pattern of human concerns. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Chappell, T., & Crisp, R. (1998). Utilitarianism. In E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy (Vol. 9, pp. 551–557). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Cliff, N. (1992). Abstract measurement theory and the revolution that never happened. Psychological Science, 3(3), 186–190. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00024.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. doi: 10.1037/h0040957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dawes, R., & Smith, T. L. (1985). Attitude and opinion measurement. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 509–566). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  24. Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being. The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Diener, E. (2006). Guidelines for national indicators of subjective well-being and ill-being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 1(2), 151–157. doi: 10.1007/s11482-006-9007-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Diener, E., & Diener, C. (1996). Most people are happy. Psychological Science, 7(3), 181–185. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00354.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(1), 1–31. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00501001.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Diener, E., & Suh, E. M. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social, and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1–2), 189–216. doi: 10.1023/A:1006859511756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. (2009). Well-being for public policy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fehige, C., & Wessels, U. (1998). Preferences: An introduction. In C. Fehige & U. Wessels (Eds.), Preferences (pp. xx–xliii). Berlin: W. de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  32. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2000). Maximising happiness? German Economic Review, 1(2), 145–167. doi: 10.1111/1468-0475.00009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Frijters, P., Johnston, D. W., & Shields, M. A. (2011). Life satisfaction dynamics with quarterly life event data. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 113(1), 190–211. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9442.2010.01638.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gilbert, D. T. (2006). Stumbling on happiness. New York: A.A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  35. Green, J., & Hojman, D. (2007). Choice, rationality and welfare measurement. Harvard Institute of Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 2144; KSG Working Paper No. RWP07-054. Version of November 2007. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1030342
  36. Griffin, J. (1986). Well-being: Its meaning, measurement, and moral importance. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  37. Gurin, G., Veroff, J., & Feld, S. (1960). Americans view their mental health: A nationwide interview survey. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  38. Harsanyi, J. C. (1977). Morality and the theory of rational behavior. Social Research, 44(4), 623–656.Google Scholar
  39. Hart, H. (1940). Chart for happiness. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  40. Haybron, D. M. (2000). Two philosophical problems in the study of happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1(2), 207–225. doi: 10.1023/A:1010075527517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Haybron, D. M. (2008). The pursuit of unhappiness: The elusive psychology of well-being. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. John, O. P., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2000). Measurement: Reliability, construct validation, and scale construction. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 339–369). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Johnson, J. A. (2001). Personality psychology: Methods. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 16, pp. 11313–11317). Oxford: Pergamon. doi: 10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/01671-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jones, L. V., & Thissen, D. (2006). A history and overview of psychometrics. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of statistics (Vol. 26, pp. 1–27). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  45. Judd, C. M., & McClelland, G. H. (1998). Measurement. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 180–232). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective happiness. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 3–25). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Kahneman, D. (2003). A psychological perspective on economics. American Economic Review, 93(2), 162–168. doi: 10.1257/000282803321946985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 3–24. doi: 10.1257/089533006776526030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004a). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The Day Reconstruction Method. Science, 306(5702), 1776–1780. doi: 10.1126/science.1103572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. (2004b). Toward national well-being accounts. American Economic Review, 94(2), 429–434. doi: 10.1257/0002828041301713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Krantz, D. H. (1991). From indices to mappings: The representational approach to measurement. In D. R. Brown & J. E. K. Smith (Eds.), Frontiers of mathematical psychology: Essays in honor of Clyde Coombs (pp. 1–52). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Krantz, D. H., Luce, R. D., Suppes, P., & Tversky, A. (1971). Additive and polynomial representations (Vol. 1). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  53. Krueger, A. B. (Ed.). (2009). Measuring the subjective well-being of nations: National accounts of time use and well-being. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  54. Layard, P. R. G. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  55. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155. doi: 10.1023/A:1006824100041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mandler, M. (1999). Dilemmas in economic theory: Persisting foundational problems of microeconomics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D., & Green, J. R. (1995). Microeconomic theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Mongin, P., & D’ Aspremont, C. (1998). Utility theory and ethics. In S. Barberà, P. J. Hammond, & C. Seidl (Eds.), Handbook of utility theory (Vol. 1, pp. 371–481). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  59. Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  60. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  61. Nussbaum, M. C. (2008). Who is the happy warrior? Philosophy poses questions to psychology. The Journal of Legal Studies, 37(S2), S81–S113. doi: 10.1086/587438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Piccinini, G. (2009). First person data, publicity and self-measurement. Philosophers’ Imprint, 9(9), 1–16.Google Scholar
  63. Pigou, A. C. (1952). The economics of welfare (4th ed.). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  64. Rabin, M. (2002). A perspective on psychology and economics. European Economic Review, 46(4–5), 657–685. doi: 10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00207-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rabinowicz, W., & Österberg, J. (1996). Value based on preferences. Economics and Philosophy, 12(1), 1–27. doi: 10.1017/S0266267100003692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ross, D. (2005). Economic theory and cognitive science: Microexplanation. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  67. Rubinstein, A., & Salant, Y. (2008). Some thoughts on the principle of revealed preference. In A. Caplin & A. Schotter (Eds.), The foundations of positive and normative economics: A handbook (pp. 115–124). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Rust, J., & Golombok, S. (2009). Modern psychometrics: The science of psychological assessment (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Scanlon, T. (2000). What we owe to each other. Cambridge: Belknap.Google Scholar
  70. Schwartz, N., & Strack, F. (1999). 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.Google Scholar
  71. Scott, D., & Suppes, P. (1958). Foundational aspects of theories of measurement. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 23(2), 113–128. doi: 10.2307/2964389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  73. Sen, A. (2002). Rationality and freedom. Cambridge: Belknap.Google Scholar
  74. Sumner, L. W. (1996). Welfare, happiness, and ethics. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  75. Sutherland, N. S. (1995). The Macmillan dictionary of psychology (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  76. Tiberius, V., & Plakias, A. (2010). Well-being. In J. M. Doris & The Moral Psychology Research Group (Eds.), The moral psychology handbook (pp. 402–431). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Trout, J. D. (1998). Measuring the intentional world: Realism, naturalism, and quantitative methods in the behavioral sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tversky, A. (1996). Rational theory and constructive choice. In K. J. Arrow, E. Colombatto, M. Perlman, & C. Schmidt (Eds.), The rational foundations of economic behaviour: Proceedings of the IEA conference held in Turin, Italy (pp. 185–197). Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
  79. Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Watson, G. (1930). Happiness among adult students of education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 21(2), 79–109. doi: 10.1037/h0070539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Williams, J. S., Brown, S. M., & Conlin, P. R. (2009). Blood-pressure measurement. The New England Journal of Medicine, 360(5), e6–e9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMvcm0800157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wilson, W. (1967). Correlates of avowed happiness. Psychological Bulletin, 67(4), 294–306. doi: 10.1037/h0024431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyGeorge Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA

Personalised recommendations