Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 61, Issue 2, pp 227–240 | Cite as

Counting Importance: The Case of Life Satisfaction and Relative Domain Importance

  • Chang-ming Hsieh
Article

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore whether the use of relative domain importance as a weighting mechanism at the individual level improved the correlation between the global life satisfaction and domain satisfaction measures. Results from telephone interviews with adults 50 years old or above in Chicago suggest that compared to simple average of domain satisfactions, using discrete domain importance rating as a weighting factor did not improve the correlation between global life satisfaction measure and domain satisfactions. However, the correlation was improved by using domain ranking. The findings suggest that the weighted average of domain satisfactions using domain ranking is a better indicator of global life satisfaction than the simple sum or average of domain satisfactions.

Keywords

Weighted Average Life Satisfaction Weighting Factor Telephone Interview Simple Average 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Andrews, F.M. and S.B. Withey: 1976, Social Indicators of Well-being: Americans' Perception of Life Quality (Plenum Press, New York).Google Scholar
  2. Beatty, P. and S.A. Tuch: 1997, 'Race and life satisfaction in the middle class', Sociological Spectrum 17, pp. 71-90.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, A., P.E. Converse and W.L. Rogers: 1976, The Quality of American Life: Perceptions, Evaluations, and Satisfactions (Russel Sage, New York).Google Scholar
  4. Cummins, R.A.: 1995, 'On the tale of gold standard for life satisfaction', Social Indicators Research 35, pp. 179-200.Google Scholar
  5. Cummins, R.A.: 1996, 'The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos', Social Indicators Research 38, pp. 303-328.Google Scholar
  6. Cummins, R.A., M.P. McCabe, Y. Romeo and E. Gullone: 1994, 'The comprehensive quality of life scale: Instrument development and psychometric evaluation on tertiary staff and students', Educational and Psychological Measurement 54, pp. 372-382.Google Scholar
  7. Diener, E.: 1984, 'Subjective well-being', Psychological Bulletin 95, pp. 542-575.Google Scholar
  8. Diener, E., R.A. Emmons, R.J. Larsen and S. Griffin: 1985, 'The satisfaction with life sacle', Journal of Personality Assessment 49, pp. 71-75.Google Scholar
  9. Feist, G.J., T.E. Bodner, J.F. Jacobs, M. Miles and V. Tan: 1995, 'Integrating topdown and bottom-up structural models of subjective well-being: A longitudinal investigation', Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68, pp. 138-150.Google Scholar
  10. George, L.K.: 1981, 'Subjective well-being: Conceptual and methodological issues', Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics 2, pp. 345-382.Google Scholar
  11. George, L.K.: 1996, 'Missing links: The case for a social psychology of the life course', The Gerontologists 36, pp. 248-255.Google Scholar
  12. George, L.K. and L.B. Bearon: 1980, Quality of Life in Older Persons: Meaning and Measurements (Human Sciences Press, New York).Google Scholar
  13. George, L.K., M.A. Okun and R. Landerman: 1985, 'Age as a moderator of the determinants of life satisfaction', Research on Aging 7, pp. 209-233.Google Scholar
  14. Headey, B., V. Veenhoven and A. Wearing: 1991, 'Top-down versus bottom-up theories of subjective well-being', Social Indicators Research 24, pp. 81-100.Google Scholar
  15. Inglehart, R.: 1978, 'Value priorities, life satisfaction, and political dissatisfaction among western publics', Comparative Studies in Sociology 1, pp. 173-202.Google Scholar
  16. Lance, C.E., G.J. Lautenschlager, C.E. Sloan and P.E. Varca: 1989, 'A comparison between bottom-up, top-down, and bi-directional models of relationships between global and life facet satisfaction', Journal of Personality 57, pp. 601-624.Google Scholar
  17. Larson, R.: 1978, 'Thirty years of research on the subjective well-being of older Americans', Journal of Gerontology 33, pp. 109-125.Google Scholar
  18. Liang, J.: 1984, 'Dimensions of the Life Satisfaction Index A: A structural formulation', Journal of Gerontology 39, pp. 613-622.Google Scholar
  19. Liang, J.: 1985, 'A structural integration of the Affect Balance Scale and the Life Satisfaction Index A', Journal of Gerontology 40, pp. 552-561.Google Scholar
  20. Liang, J., R.H. Lawrence and K. Bollen: 1987, 'Race differences in the factorial structure of two measures of subjective well-being', Journal of Gerontology 42, pp. 426-428.Google Scholar
  21. Maddox, G.L. and J. Wiley: 1976, 'Scope, concepts, and methods in the study of aging', in R.H. Binstock and E. Shanas (eds.), Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, pp. 3-34).Google Scholar
  22. Mookherjee, H.N.: 1992, 'Perceptions of well-being by metropolitan and nonmetropolitan populations in the United States', Journal of Social Psychology 132, pp. 513-524.Google Scholar
  23. Myers, D.G. and E. Diener: 1995, 'Who is happy?', Psychological Science 6, pp. 11-19.Google Scholar
  24. Neugarten, B.L., R.J. Havinghurst and S.S. Tobin: 1961, 'Measurement of life satisfaction', Journal of Gerontology 16, pp. 134-143.Google Scholar
  25. Ryff, C.D. and M.J. Essex: 1992, 'The interpretation of life experience and wellbeing: The sample case of relocation', Psychology and Aging 7, pp. 507-517.Google Scholar
  26. Scherpenzeel, A. and W. Saris: 1996, 'Causal direction in a model of life satisfaction: The top-down/bottom-up controversy', Social Indicators Research 38, pp. 161-180.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chang-ming Hsieh
    • 1
  1. 1.Jane Addams College of Social Work (M/C 309)University of Illinois at ChicagoChicago

Personalised recommendations