Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perceptions of Links Between Quality of Life Areas: Implications for Measurement and Practice

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Quality of life (QoL) measures frequently conceptualise QoL as having distinct life domains. However, research suggests that there may be overlap. In this study, perceptions of links between life areas are explored. At time one, 143 participants in Khon Kaen, Thailand completed the “Global Person Generated Index” (GPGI), nominating up to five areas important to QoL. Participants then described why they perceived areas as important. Frequencies of links mentioned between areas were recorded. At time two, 42 participants completed the GPGI and were then asked to visually represent the areas of life with circles, overlapping, containing other circles or unconnected to show the interrelationships. Descriptions of the life areas often spontaneously included links with other life areas. “Money” was the most commonly linked area, followed by “job or work” and family. Diagrams representing the relationships between life areas showed diversity. All participants linked at least one area. About 26% presented at least one area as independent. Participants in this sample generally viewed their QoL as composed of some inter-related areas. This has implications for QoL measurement, suggesting data to capture inter-relating domains should be collected. The use of a mixed methods approach to understanding QoL is recommended. Implications for practice are also highlighted, as interventions aimed at one area of QoL will likely impact on others, in ways we currently do not measure.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This paper describes research that formed part of a larger project (author’s PhD thesis).

References

  • Birnbacher, D. (1999). Quality of life - evaluation or description? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 2, 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, A. (1995). What things are important in people’s lives? A survey of the public’s judgments to inform scales of health related quality of life. Social Science and Medicine, 41(10), 1447–1462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, M. B., Fredell, K. A., et al. (1997). Basic minimum needs, quality of life and selected correlates: explorations in villages in Northern India. Social Indicators Research, 42, 245–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calman, K. C. (1984). Quality of life in cancer patients - a hypothesis. Journal of Medical Ethics, 10, 124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camfield, L., Crivello, G., et al. (2009). Wellbeing research in developing countries: Reviewing the role of qualitative methods. Social Indicators Research, 90, 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantor, N., & Sanderson, A. (1999). Life task participation and well-being: The importance of taking part in daily life. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundation of hedonic psychology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L. (2000). A facet theory approach to examining overall and life facet satisfaction relationships. Social Indicators Research, 51(2), 223–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2010). Mapping the developing landscape of mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 45–68). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Biwas-Diener, R. (2001). Will money increase subjective well-being? Social Indicators Research, 57, 119–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkers, M. (2003). Individualization in quality of life measurement: Instruments and approaches. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84(S2), S3–S14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doyal, L., & Gough, I. (1991). A theory of human need. Guildford: Guildford Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hays, R. D., Sherbourne, C. D., et al. (1993). The RAND 36-item health survey 1.0. Health Economics, 2, 217–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Diener, E., et al. (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psyhcology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Diener, E., et al. (2003). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley-Gillespie, N. (2009). An integrated conceptual model of quality of life for older adults based on a synthesis of the literature. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 4, 259–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosack, S. (2003). Effective aid: How democracy allows development aid to improve quality of life. World Development, 31(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinelli, R. D., & Plummer, O. K. (1999). “Healthy aging: Beyond exercise”. Activities. Adaptation & Aging, 23(4), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, F., Rodham, K., et al. (2010). Reliability and validity of the Thai “Global person generated index”, an individualised measure of quality of life. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 5(3), 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, J. A. (2004). Researching well-being: Communicating between the needs of policy makers and the needs of people. Global Social Policy, 4, 337–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikkelsen, B. (1995). Methods for development work and research: A guide for practitioners. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB). (2002). “National Policy: The Ninth Plan Development Vision Framework 2002–2006”.

  • Neff, D. and W. Olsen. (2007). Measuring subjective well-being from a realist viewpoint. Methodological Innovations Online, 2. Accessed 21st August 2010 at http://erdt.plymouth.ac.uk/mionline/public_html/viewarticle.php?id=61.

  • Nussbaum, M., & Sen, A. (Eds.). (1993). The Quality of life. Oxford: Claredon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, M., Harper, A., et al. (1999). The world health organization WHOQOL-100: Tests of the universality of quality of life in 15 Different cultural groups worldwide. Health Psychology, 18(5), 495–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman, T., Mittelhammer, R. C., et al. (2003). Measuring the quality of life across countries: A sensitivity analysis of well-being indices. wider international conference on inequality, poverty and human well-being. Helsinki, Finland: WIDER International Conference on Inequality, Poverty and Human Well-Being.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruggeri, M., Bisoffi, G., et al. (2001). Subjective and objective dimensions of quality of life in psychiatric patients: A factor analytical approach: The South Verona outcome project 4. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 178(3), 268–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schkade, D. A., & Kahneman, D. (1998). Does living in california make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 9(5), 340–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahriar, J., T. Delate, et al. (2003). “Commentary on using the SF-36 or MOS-HIV in Studies of Persons with HIV Disease.” Health and quality of life outcomes 1: 25, doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1181-1125 available online at http://www.hqlo.com/content/1181/1181/1125.

  • Sirgy, M. J. (2002). The Psychology of quality of life. Drodrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., et al. (2001). A new measure of quality of work life (QWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Social Indicators Research, 55, 241–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprangers, M. A. G., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: A theoretical model. Social Science and Medicine, 48, 1507–1515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strack, F., Argyle, M., et al. (Eds.). (1991). Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ubel, P. A., Loewenstein, G., et al. (2003). Whose quality of life? A commentary exploring discrepancies between health state evaluations of patients and the general public. Quality of Life Research, 12(6), 599–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenhoven, R. (2000). The four qualities of life: Ordering concepts and measures of the good life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1, 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). This research was carried out when the author was a PhD student at the University of Bath, within the Department of Psychology and with support from the ESRC funded “Wellbeing in Developing Countries” Research Group. The author wishes to thank Drs Karen Rodham and Laura Camfield for their comments on the sections of the PhD thesis from which this paper is drawn.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Applied Research Centre in Health and Lifestyle Interventions, Coventry University, Coventry, CV1 5FB, UK

    Faith Martin

Authors
  1. Faith Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Faith Martin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Martin, F. Perceptions of Links Between Quality of Life Areas: Implications for Measurement and Practice. Soc Indic Res 106, 95–107 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9795-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9795-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation