‘Very Happy’ Is Not Always Equally Happy

  • Tineke de Jonge
  • Ruut Veenhoven
  • Wim Kalmijn
Part of the Social Indicators Research Series book series (SINS, volume 68)


The main aim of the Happiness Scale Interval Study (HSIS) was to improve the comparison of happiness across nations. To do this it is necessary to understand the difference in interpretation of the response options of the same item in different languages and to determine whether differences in leading questions affect the interpretation of the response options, given in different languages, to identical response scales.


Life Satisfaction Response Option Response Scale American Student Anchor Point 
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.


  1. Braunsberger, B., & Gates, R. (2009). Developing inventories for satisfaction and Likert scales in a service environment. Journal of Services Marketing, 23(4), 219–225. doi: 10.1108/08876040910965557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. DeJonge, T., Veenhoven, R., & Arends, L. R. (2015). ‘Very Happy’ is not always equally happy on the meaning of verbal response options in survey questions. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(1), 77–101. DOI: 10.1007-s10902-013-9497-9.Google Scholar
  3. Eurofound. (2010). 5th European working conditions survey: Translation process for the questionnaire. Google Scholar
  4. Gallup. (2007). Gallup world poll research design. Retrieved March 25, 2016,
  5. Harkness, J. A., Villar, A., & Edwards, B. (2010). Translation, adaptation and design. In J. A. Harkness, M. Braun, B. Edwards, T. P. Johnson, L. Lyberg, P. P. Mohler, B. E. Pennell, & T. W. Smith (Eds.), Survey methods in multinational, multiregional, and multicultural contexts. Hoboken: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jones, L. V., & Thurstone, L. L. (1955). The psychophysics of semantics. An experimental investigation. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 39(1), 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kalmijn, W. M. (2010). Quantification of happiness inequality. Dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Enschede: Ipskamp Drukkers. Available at
  8. Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 537–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. McDowell, I. (2006). Measuring health. A guide to rating scales and questionnaires (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. Saris, W. E. (1997). Comparability across mode and country. In: W. E. Saris & M. Kaase. (Eds), Eurobarometer: Measurement instruments for opinions in Europe. GESIS Nachrichten, ZUMA, Spezial Band 2, Mannheim.Google Scholar
  11. Saris, W. E., & Gallhofer, I. N. (2007). Estimation of the effects of measurement characteristics on the quality of survey questions. Survey Research Methods, 1(1), 29–43.Google Scholar
  12. Saris, W. E., Revilla, M., Krosnick, J. A., & Shaeffer, E. M. (2010). Comparing questions with agree/disagree response options to questions with item-specific response options. Survey Research Methods, 4(1), 67–69, ISSN 1864-3361.Google Scholar
  13. Schwarz, N., Knauper, B., Hippler, H. J., Noelle-Neumann, E., & Clark, W. (1991). Rating scales: Numeric values may change the meaning of scale labels. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 570–582.
  14. Veenhoven, R. (1993). Happiness in nations, subjective appreciation of life in 56 nations, 1946–1992 (Studies in social-cultural transformation, Vol. 2). Risbo: Erasmus University Rotterdam, Netherlands. Available at:
  15. 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
  16. Willis, G. B. (2004). Cognitive interviewing revisited: A useful technique, in theory? In S. Presser, J. M. Rothgeb, M. P. Couper, J. T. Lessler, E. Martin, J. Martin, & E. Singer (Eds.), Methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires (pp. 23–44). Hoboken: Wiley-Interscience.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tineke de Jonge
    • 1
  • Ruut Veenhoven
    • 1
  • Wim Kalmijn
    • 1
  1. 1.Erasmus Happiness Economics Research OrganisationErasmus University RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations