Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Explaining the Decline in Subjective Well-Being Over Time in Panel Data

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Metrics of Subjective Well-Being: Limits and Improvements

Part of the book series: Happiness Studies Book Series ((HAPS))

Abstract

Switzerland reached the top five countries which have the highest rate of subjective well-being (SWB), which converges with the economic prosperity and high quality of life in this country. Based on transversal data (European Social Survey), SWB measured through a global question remained globally constant over the last decades. However, SWB declined between 2000 and 2015 when measured with longitudinal data (Swiss Household Panel, SHP). In this context, the aim of this contribution is to examine to what extent the decline in SWB in longitudinal data is a robust result showing an actual decrease or reflect some specific methodological artifacts of these data. We identified more precisely four possible methodological issues: non-random attrition (NRA ), panel conditioning (PC) , refreshment sample , and aging of participants. Because of its structure, SHP data are particularly appropriate to challenge these issues, with a special attention to panel conditioning on several measures of SWB (i.e., global question vs. questions by life domains). SHP has been administered annually since 1999. A first sample was randomly selected in 1999, a second sample in 2004, and a third sample in 2013. First, we found that attrition was selective in the predictors of SWB all along the waves and that the respondents leaving the panel were more frequently represented in modalities of predictors associated with lower SWB. Second, panel conditioning was found to affect SWB measure in the first five waves for the global question and no specific patterns for questions by life domains were found. Third, we found higher SWB mean score in new samples than in old ones. And fourth, we found that aging modified the characteristics of the sample—for example, an increase of inactive persons or a decrease of persons with a low education affected the levels of SWB. Thus, SWB and its determinants were affected by NRA, PC , refreshment, and aging. Moreover, it has to be noted that it was difficult or impossible to distinguish these methodological issues from one another—aging from PC or refreshment from PC for example—as well as to propose methodological “remedies” to them. Finally, it resulted from our research that once these methodological issues have been neutralized, SWB did not decline anymore over the last fifteen years in Switzerland.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    By attrition , we refer to all the people who drop out of a panel survey after having participated in the first survey wave.

  2. 2.

    This study has been realized using the data collected by the Swiss Household Panel (SHP), which is based at the Swiss Centre of Expertise in the Social Sciences FORS. The project is financed by the Swiss National Science Foundation.

  3. 3.

    In 2013, SHPIII went only through specific questionnaires. Usual individual questionnaires were introduced in 2014.

  4. 4.

    Not available in 2015.

  5. 5.

    Number of goods or activities a household cannot afford.

  6. 6.

    Relative monetary poverty (<50% of median equivalized gross household income), at risk of relative monetary poverty (50–70%), the middle class (70–150%), and the upper class (>150%).

  7. 7.

    No financial precariousness (household can save money and has no arrears in payments), low financial precariousness [household eats into its assets and savings or experienced sometimes arrears in payments (only one of both situations)], and high financial precariousness (both situations).

  8. 8.

    Only available until 2010.

  9. 9.

    For the attrition analyses, we excluded the participants who were younger than 14 during the first wave and entered the panel later.

  10. 10.

    In the literature, Van Landeghem (2012) found an effect of PC on the first three waves in SHP and on the first five waves in the SOEP. Therefore, we selected 6 consecutive waves in order to optimize the size of the sample and be sure to catch a potential PC effect. Four and eight consecutive waves were also tested but without major effects.

  11. 11.

    These results are in line with previous attrition analysis in panel surveys.

  12. 12.

    Results on the impact of refreshment on attrition are not presented nor discussed, as it was not possible to link attrition with predictors of SWB and SWB due to PC effects.

  13. 13.

    These results are not contradictory, but probably due to different referential mobilized when answering the questions: Compared to pairs, perceived health does not highly change, but when comparing in a more objective way the ability to cope with daily tasks, impediments are more meaningful.

  14. 14.

    Out of the problem of non-participation affecting both panel data and cross-sectional samples.

References

  • Axinn, W. G., Jennings, E. A., & Couper, M. P. (2015). Response of sensitive behaviors to frequent measurement. Social Science Research, 49, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behr, A., Bellgardt, E., & Rendtel, U. (2005). Extent and determinants of panel attrition in the European Community Household Panel. European Sociological Review, 21(5), 489–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binswanger, J., Schunk, D., & Toepoel, V. (2013). Panel conditioning in difficult attitudinal questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 77(3), 783–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Oxford, England: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. H. (1990). Protecting against non-randomly missing data in longitudinal studies. Biometrics, 143–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chadi, A. (2016). Identification of attrition bias using different types of panel refreshments. Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU), Discussion Paper Series in Economics No. 02/2016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das, M., Toepoel, V., & van Soest, A. (2011). Nonparametric tests of panel conditioning and attrition bias in panel surveys. Sociological Methods & Research, 40(1), 32–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deaton, A. (2008). Income, health, and well-being around the world: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(2), 53–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, Y., Hillygus, D. S., Reiter, J. P., Si, Y., Zheng, S., et al. (2013). Handling attrition in longitudinal studies: The case for refreshment samples. Statistical Science, 28(2), 238–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., & Seligman, M. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diggle, P., & Kenward, M. G. (1994). Informative drop-out in longitudinal data analysis. Applied Statistics, 49–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(1), 94–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fazio, R. H., Sanbonmatusu, D., Powell, M., & Kardes, F. (1986). On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 229–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, J. M., & Lynch, J. G. (1988). Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(3), 421–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J., Gottschalk, P., & Moffitt, R. A. (1998). An analysis of sample attrition in panel data: The Michigan Panel Study of Income Dynamics. Journal of Human Resources, 33, 251–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, F. J. Jr. (1995). Applied social research methods series. In Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation (Vol. 38). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasper, D. (2010). Understanding the diversity of conceptions of well-being and quality of life. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 39(3), 351–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gazareth, P., & Iglesias, K. (2017). Material deprivation from 1999 to 2013 in Switzerland: How index construction impacts on measured patterns of evolution. SHP Working Paper XXX. FORS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, A. (2007). Struggles with survey weighting and regression modeling. Statistical Science, 153–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groves, R. M. (2006). Nonresponse rates and nonresponse bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70(5), 646–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern-Manners, A., & Warren, J. R. (2012). Panel conditioning in longitudinal studies: Evidence from labor force items in the current population survey. Demography, 49(4), 1499–1519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern-Manners, A., Warren, J. R., & Torche, F. (2014). Panel conditioning in a longitudinal study of illicit behaviors. Public Opinion Quarterly, 78(3), 565–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes, D., & Plewis, I. (2006). Modelling non-response in the national child development study. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 169(3), 479–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, J. F., & Barrington-Leigh, C. P. (2010). Viewpoint: Measuring and understanding subjective well-being. Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne D’économique, 43(3), 729–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., & Sachs, J. (2015). World happiness report 2015. Sustainable Development Solutions Network New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillygus, D. S., & Snell, S. A. (2015). Longitudinal surveys: Issues and opportunities. In L. R. Atkeson & R. M. Alvarez (Eds.), Oxford handbook on polling and polling methods. San Francisco, CA, US: New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirano, K., Imbens, G. W., Ridder, G., & Rubin, D. B. (2001). Combining panel data sets with attrition and refreshment samples. Econometrica, 69(6), 1645–1659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, C. (2007). Panel data analysis: Advantages and challenges. Test, 16(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iglesias, K., Simona Moussa, J., & Suter, C. (2015). Le bien-être subjectif en Suisse au début du 21e siècle: évolution et déterminants. Working paper 4-2015/F, MAPS. Neuchâtel: MAPS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagodzinski, W., Kühnel, S. M., & Schmidt, P. (1987). Is there a “socratic effect” in nonexperimental panel studies? Consistency of an attitude toward guestworkers. Sociological Methods & Research, 15(3), 259–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalton, G., & Citro, C. F. (1995). Panel surveys: Adding the fourth dimension. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 8(1), 25–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasprzyk, D., Duncan, G., Kalton, G., & Singh, M. P. (Eds.). (1989). Panel surveys. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassenboehmer, S. C., & Haisken-DeNew, J. P. (2012). Heresy or enlightenment? The well-being age U-shape effect is flat. Economics Letters, 117(1), 235–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesebir, P., & Diener, E. (2008). In pursuit of happiness: Empirical answers to philosophical questions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 117–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroh, M., Pischner, R., Spiess, M., & Wagner, G. G. (2008). On the treatment of non-original sample members in the German Household Panel Study (SOEP). Methoden-Daten-Analysen, 2(2), 179–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krosnick, J. A., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2005). The measurement of attitudes. In D. Albarracon, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 21–76). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, A. B., & Schkade, D. A. (2008). The reliability of subjective well-being measures. Journal of Public Economics, 92(8), 1833–1845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, U. (2009). Attrition analysis of income data. SHP Working Paper 2-09. FORS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landau, D. (1993). Die Auswirkungen von Panelstudien auf die Antwortmuster von Zufriedenheitsangaben. (Panel effects in Satisfaction Measurement). Discussion Paper 67. German Institute for Economic Research. Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lillard, L. A., & Panis, C. W. (1998). Panel attrition from the panel study of income dynamics: Household income, marital status, and mortality. Journal of Human Resources, 437–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipps, O. (2007). Attrition in the Swiss household panel. Methoden–Daten–Analysen, 1(1), 45–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2012). Estimating the reliability of single-item life satisfaction measures: Results from four national panel studies. Social Indicators Research, 105(3), 323–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, P. (2009). Methodology of longitudinal surveys. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks, N., Abdallah, S., Simms, A., Thompson, S., et al. (2006). The happy planet index. London: New Economics Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2011). How’s life? 2015: Measuring well-being. Paris: OECD Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro, J. C., & Bates, D. M. (2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-Plus. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, D. (2000). Researching social change: Household panel studies: Methods and substance. London: UCL Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothenbühler, M., & Voorpostel, M. (2016). Attrition in the Swiss Household Panel: Are vulnerable groups more affected than others? In Surveying human vulnerabilities across the life course (pp. 221–242). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruspini, E. (2002). Introduction to longitudinal research. Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Richesse des nations et bien-être des individus.: Performances économiques et progrès social. Odile Jacob.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoop, I. A. (2005). The hunt for the last respondent: Nonresponse in sample surveys. The Hague: SCP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturgis, P., Allum, N., & Brunton-Smith, I. (2009). Attitudes over time: The psychology of panel conditioning. Methodology of longitudinal surveys (pp. 113–126). New York: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Toepoel, V., Das, M., & van Soest, A. (2009). Relating question type to panel conditioning: Comparing trained and fresh respondents. Survey Research Methods, 3(2), 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torche, F., Warren, J. R., Halpern-Manners, A., & Valenzuela, E. (2012). Panel conditioning in a longitudinal study of adolescents’ substance use: Evidence from an experiment. Social Forces, 90(3), 891–918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Landeghem, B. (2012). Panel conditioning and self-reported satisfaction: Evidence from International panel data and repeated cross-sections. SOEP Papers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research, 484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Landeghem, B. (2014). A test based on panel refreshments for panel conditioning in stated utility measures. Economics Letters, 124(2), 236–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandecasteele, L., & Debels, A. (2007). Attrition in panel data: The effectiveness of weighting. European Sociological Review, 23(1), 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenhoven, R. (2016). Happiness in nations. Distributional findings on happiness in Switzerland (CH). World Database of Happiness, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Assessed on (December 2016) at: http://worlddatabaseofhappiness.eur.nl/hap_nat/desc_na_genpublic.php?cntry=28

  • Voorpostel, M. (2009). Attrition in the Swiss Household Panel by demographic characteristics and levels of social involvement. SHP Working Paper 1-09. FORS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, J. R., & Halpern-Manners, A. (2012). Panel conditioning in longitudinal social science surveys. Sociological Methods & Research, 41(4), 491–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waterton, J., & Lievesley, D. (1989). Evidence of conditioning effects in the British Social Attitudes Panel. In D. Kasprzyk, G. Duncan, G. Kalton, & M. P. Singh (Eds.), Panel surveys (pp. 319–39). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, N., & Wooden, M. (2009). Identifying factors affecting longitudinal survey response. In Methodology of longitudinal surveys (pp. 157–182). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, N., Wooden, M., et al. (2004). Sample attrition in the HILDA survey. Australian Journal of Labour Economics, 7(2), 293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooden, M., & Li, N. (2014). Panel conditioning and subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 117(1), 235–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, T., & Eckman, S. (2012). Panel conditioning: Change in true value versus change in self-report. In Proceedings of the Survey Methods Research Section, American Statistical Association, Alexandria, pp. 4726–4736.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

The authors wish to thank Oliver Lipps, Ursina Kuhn and Erika Antal for their valuable methodological support on the use of the data, Gaël Curty for the English proofreading, and the financial support of Faculty of Arts and Humanities of University of Neuchâtel for the English revision.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland

    Katia Iglesias, Pascale Gazareth & Christian Suter

Authors
  1. Katia Iglesias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pascale Gazareth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christian Suter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katia Iglesias .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Happiness Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam Happiness Studies, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Gaël Brulé

  2. Dipartimento di Scienze Statistiche, Università di Roma "La Sapienza" , Roma, Italy

    Filomena Maggino

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Iglesias, K., Gazareth, P., Suter, C. (2017). Explaining the Decline in Subjective Well-Being Over Time in Panel Data. In: Brulé, G., Maggino, F. (eds) Metrics of Subjective Well-Being: Limits and Improvements. Happiness Studies Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61810-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61810-4_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-61809-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-61810-4

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation