Advertisement

Applied Research in Quality of Life

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 139–156 | Cite as

Subjective Well-Being Analysis of Income Inequality: Evidence for the Industrialized and Emerging Economies

  • Edsel L. BejaJr.Email author
Article

Abstract

Subjective well-being analysis of income inequality finds that very high levels of objective inequality are considered “bad” in both the industrialized and emerging economies covered in the study. People from the industrialized economies appear to be more sensitive to mild levels of objective inequality compared to those from the emerging economies. Subjective inequality, on the other hand, is not considered “bad” in the same industrialized and emerging economies covered in the study. People from both areas appear to tolerate subjective inequality provided it is the outcome of an impartial environment founded upon rules observed by the majority. There, however, remains the need to help people recognize the importance of addressing inequalities in order for them to demand a more equitable distribution of income in society.

Keywords

Subjective well-being Inequality Industrialized economies Emerging economies 

References

  1. Alesina, A., Di Tella, R., & MacCulloch, R. (2004). Inequality and happiness: are Europeans and Americans different? Journal of Public Economics, 88(9–10), 2009–2042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, F., & Robinson, J. (1991). Measures of subjective well-being. In J. Robinson, P. Shaver, & L. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 61–114). San Diego: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrews, F., & Withey, S. (1976). Social indicators of well-being. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchflower, D., & Oswald, A. (2008). Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle? Social Science and Medicine, 66(8), 1733–1749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, A., Converse, P., & Rogers, W. (1976). The quality of American life, New York: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, A., & Oswald, A. (1994). Unhappiness and unemployment. The Economic Journal, 104(424), 648–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark, A., Diener, E., Georgellis, Y., & Lucas, R. (2008). Lags and leads in life satisfaction: a test of the baseline hypothesis. The Economic Journal, 118(529), F222–F243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Corneo, G., & Gruner, H. (2002). Individual preferences for political redistribution. Journal of Public Economics, 83(1), 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: a six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 853–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  11. Davidson, R. (2003). Affective neuroscience and psychophysiology: toward a synthesis. Psychophysiology, 40(5), 655–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Di Tella, R., & MacCulloch, R. (2006). Some uses of happiness data in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Di Tella, R., MacCulloch, R., & Oswald, A. (2001). Preferences of inflation and unemployment: evidence from surveys of happiness. American Economic Review, 91(1), 335–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Di Tella, R., MacCulloch, R., & Oswald, A. (2003). Macroeconomics of happiness. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 809–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Diener, E., & Emmons, R. (1985). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(5), 71–75.Google Scholar
  16. Diener, E., & Larsen, R. (1984). Temporal stability and cross-situational consistency of affective, behavioral, and cognitive responses. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 47(4), 580–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Diener, E., Gohm, C., Suh, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Similarity of the relationships between marital status and subjective well-being across cultures. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 31(4), 419–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diener, E., Lucas, R., Schimmack, U., & Helliwell, J. (2009). Well-being for public policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dunn, E., Aknin, L., & Norton, M. (2008). Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science, 319(5870), 1687–1688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Easterlin, R. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In P. David & M. Reder (Eds.), Nations and households in economic growth: Essays in honor of Moses Abramovitz (pp. 89–125). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  21. Easterlin, R. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27(1), 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Easterlin, R. (2010). Happiness, growth and the life cycle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Ehrhardt, J., Saris, W., & 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eid, M., & Larsen, R. (2008). The science of subjective well-being. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  25. Ekman, P., Davidson, R., & Friesen, W. (1990). The Duchenne smile: emotional expression and brain physiology II. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(2), 342–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., & Frijters, P. (2004). How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness. The Economic Journal, 114(479), 641–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fowler, J., & Christakis, N. (2008). Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham heart study. British Medical Journal, 337(42), 23–27.Google Scholar
  28. Frey, B., & Stutzer, A. (2002). Happiness and economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Frey, B., Stutzer, A., & Luechinger, S. (2010). Life satisfaction approach to environmental valuation. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 2(1), 139–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Graham, C., & Felton, A. (2006). Inequality and happiness: insights from Latin America. Journal of Economic Inequality, 4(1), 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Helliwell, J., Barrington-Leigh, C., Harris, A., & Huang, H. (2010). International evidence on the social context of well-being. In E. Diener, J. Helliwell, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), International differences in well-being (pp. 291–327). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hooghe, M. (2012). I am happy, hope you’re happy too: examining the different dynamics of individual subjective well-being and view on society. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13(1), 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hsee, C., & Zhang, J. (2004). Distinction bias: misprediction and mischoice due to joint evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 680–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Inglehart, R., Foa, R., Peterson, C., & Welzel, C. (2008). Development, freedom, and rising happiness. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(4), 264–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kahneman, D., & Sugden, R. (2005). Experienced utility as a standard of policy evaluation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 32(1), 161–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Krueger, A., & Schkade, D. (2008). The reliability of subjective well-being measures. Journal of Public Economics, 92(8–9), 1833–1845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Larsen, R., & Prizmic, Z. (2008). Regulation of emotional well-being: Overcoming the hedonic treadmill. In M. Eid & R. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 258–289). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  39. Lucas, R., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3), 616–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Marks, N., & Lambert, J. (1998). Marital status continuity and change among young and midlife adults: longitudinal effects on psychological well-being. Journal of Family Issues, 19(6), 652–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Michalos, A. (1985). Multiple discrepancies theory (MDT). Social Indicators Research, 16(4), 347–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ng, Y.-K. (1996). Happiness surveys: some comparability issues and an exploratory survey based on just perceivable increments. Social Indicators Research, 38(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ng, Y.-K. (1997). A case for happiness, cardinalism, and interpersonal comparability. The Economic Journal, 107(445), 1848–1858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. O’Connell, M. (2004). Fairly satisfied: economic equality, wealth, and satisfaction. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25(3), 297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the satisfaction with life scale: evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(1), 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sandvik, E., Diener, E., & Seidlitz, L. (1993). Subjective well-being: the convergence and stability of self-report and non-self-report measures. Journal of Personality, 61(3), 317–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schimmack, U., & Oishi, S. (2005). The influence of chronically and temporarily accessible information on life satisfaction judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 395–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schwartz, B., & Ward, A. (2004). Doing better but feeling worse: The paradox of choice. In P. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 86–104). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  49. Schwarz, N., Knauper, B., Hippler, H., Noelle-Neumann, E., & Clark, L. (1991). Rating scales: numeric values may change the meaning of scale labels. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55(4), 570–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Schwarz, N., Grayson, C., & Knauper, B. (1998). Formal features of rating scales and the interpretation of question meaning. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 10(2), 177–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Senik, C. (2005). Income distribution and well-being: what can we learn from subjective data? Journal of Economic Survey, 19(1), 43–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sheldon, K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). Dynamic well-being: connecting indicators of what people anticipate with indicators of what they experience. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7(1), 55–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2008). Economic growth and subjective well-being: reassessing the Easterlin paradox. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2008(1), 1–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Stutzer, A., & Frey, B. (2006). Does marriage make people happy, or do happy people get married? Journal of Socio-Economics, 35(2), 326–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Urry, H., Nitschke, J., Dolski, I., Jackson, D., Dalton, K., Mueller, C., et al. (2004). Making a life worth living: neural correlates of well-being. Psychological Science, 15(6), 367–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. van Praag, B., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2004). Happiness quantified: A satisfaction calculus approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Watson, D., Clark, L., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Winkelmann, L., & Winkelmann, R. (1998). Why are the unemployed so unhappy? Evidence from panel data. Economica, 65(257), 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht and The International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsAteneo de Manila UniversityQuezon CityPhilippines

Personalised recommendations