Skip to main content

Stability and Sensitivity in Perceived Quality of Life Measures: Some Panel Results

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test a fundamental assumption concerning 27 of the most frequently used measures to assess aspects of the quality of people’s lives, e.g., measures concerning happiness, satisfaction with life as a whole, with the quality of one’s life, with domains of life (job, marriage, friendships), and with perceived gaps between what one has compared to what one wants, what one’s neighbor has and so on. The assumption is that such measures are sensitive to changes in the circumstances of one’s life measured by self-perceptions of change and by self-assessments of the net balance of salient positive and negative events one has experienced in some specified period of time. A total of 462 residents of British Columbia distributed across 3 different panels completed mailed-out questionnaires at 3 points in time in 2005, 06 and 07. Among other things, we found that measuring year-by-year changes in respondents’ life circumstances by reports of their own perception and experienced life events, on average the values of the 27 variables changed in ways that were consistent with respondents’ reported changes in 49.7% of the cases examined. The success rate of the assumption using self-perceptions of change (61.7%) was much higher than the success rate using a net balance of experienced events (37.3%).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Atkinson, T. (1982). The stability and validity of quality of life measures. Social Indicators Research, 10(2), 113–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H. Appley (Ed.), Adaptation-level theory (pp. 287–305). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantril, H. (1965). The patterns of human concerns. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. F. (2009). Well-being for public policy. Onxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill. American Psychologist, 61(4), 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eels, L. W. (1985). The effect of role change on physical health, mental health and general life-satisfaction: A panel analysis [dissertation]. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrhardt, J. J., Saris, W. E., & Veenhoven, R. (2000). Stability of life-satisfaction over time: Analysis of change in ranks in a national population. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1(2), 177–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Headey, B., & Wearing, A. J. (1989). Personality, life events and subjective well-being: Towards a dynamic equilibrium model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 731–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Headey, B., & Wearing, A. J. (1992). Understanding happiness: A theory of subjective well-being. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landua, D. (1992). Satisfaction changes. Social Indicators Research, 26(3), 221–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavallee, L. F., Hatch, P. M., Michalos, A. C., & McKinley, T. (2007). Development of the contentment with life assessment scale (CLAS): Using daily life experiences to verify levels of self-reported life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 83(2), 201–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E. (2005). Time does not heal all wounds: A longitudinal study of reaction and adaptation to divorce. Psychological Science, 16(12), 945–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2003). Reexamining adaptation and the set point model of happiness: Reactions to changes in marital status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 527–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2004). Unemployment alters the set point for life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 15(1), 8–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1985). Multiple discrepancies theory (MDT). Social Indicators Research, 13, 347–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1991a). Global report on student well-being, vol. 1: Life satisfaction and happiness. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1991b). Global report on student well-being, vol. 2: Family, friends, living partner and self-esteem. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1993a). Global report on student well-being, vol. 3: Employment, finances, housing and transportation. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (1993b). Global report on student well-being, vol. 4: Religion, education, recreation and health. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (Ed.). (2005). Citation classics from social indicators research: The most cited articles edited and introduced by Alex C. Michalos. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C. (2008). Education, happiness and wellbeing. Social Indicators Research, 87(3), 347–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalos, A. C., & Kahlke, P. M. (2008). Impact of arts-related activities on the perceived quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 89(2), 193–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenhoven, R. (1994). Is happiness a trait? Social Indicators Research, 32(2), 101–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex C. Michalos.

Additional information

We would like to express our thanks to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for funding this research through the Gold Medal for Achievement in Research 2004. As well, we would like to thank John Helliwell and Richard Lucas for suggestions that improved the paper, and Joyce Henley, Office Manager of ISRE and all the anonymous respondents who shared their time and thoughts with us to make this report possible.

Appendix: List of Life Events

Appendix: List of Life Events

  1. 1.

    Did you get married? p*

  2. 2.

    Become separated or divorced? n

  3. 3.

    Did you (your wife) have a child? p

  4. 4.

    Did you start a close romantic relationship? p

  5. 5.

    Did you have a romantic relationship break up? n

  6. 6.

    Did you lose a close family member through death? n

  7. 7.

    Did you have a close friend die? n

  8. 8.

    Did you suffer a serious injury or illness? n

  9. 9.

    Did you form a new very close friendship? p

  10. 10.

    Did you lose touch with a very close friend? n

  11. 11.

    Did you get a new job? p

  12. 12.

    Did you get a job promotion? p

  13. 13.

    Did you have an outstanding honour or achievement? p

  14. 14.

    Did you change your place of residence? p

  15. 15.

    Did you have a large increase in your or your family’s income? p

  16. 16.

    Did you have a large decrease in your or your family’s income? n

* p = positive event, n = negative event

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Michalos, A.C., Maurine Kahlke, P. Stability and Sensitivity in Perceived Quality of Life Measures: Some Panel Results. Soc Indic Res 98, 403–434 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9554-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9554-2

Keywords

  • Quality of life
  • Happiness
  • Life satisfaction
  • Stability of measures
  • Sensitivity of measures
  • Job satisfaction
  • Marital satisfaction
  • Multiple discrepancies theory