IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0061534.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Country Evaluation of Affective Experience: Validation of an Abbreviated Version of the Day Reconstruction Method in Seven Countries

Author

Listed:
  • José Luis Ayuso-Mateos
  • Marta Miret
  • Francisco Félix Caballero
  • Beatriz Olaya
  • Josep Maria Haro
  • Paul Kowal
  • Somnath Chatterji

Abstract

Background: The Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) was developed to assess affective states as measures of experienced well-being. The present study aimed to validate an abbreviated version of the DRM in a representative sample of the population in seven countries (China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, and Spain), and to examine whether there are country differences in affect and in the relationships among the activities based on the similarity of the affect associated with each of them. Methods: Interviews were conducted with 47,222 non-institutionalized adults from seven countries, using an abbreviated version of the DRM. A cluster analysis was carried out to classify activities on the basis of the similarity of the associated affect. In each country, the factorial structure of the affect adjectives was tested through Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Internal consistency and construct validity were also assessed. Moreover, the differences in affect across countries and the diurnal cycles of affect were evaluated. Results: The DRM showed adequate psychometric properties regarding reliability and construct validity in all countries. Respondents from Ghana and South Africa reported more positive net affect whereas Indian respondents reported less positive net affect. Most of the countries showed a similar diurnal variation of affect, which tended to improve throughout the day. Conclusions: The results show that this abbreviated version of the DRM is a useful tool for multi-country evaluation of experienced well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • José Luis Ayuso-Mateos & Marta Miret & Francisco Félix Caballero & Beatriz Olaya & Josep Maria Haro & Paul Kowal & Somnath Chatterji, 2013. "Multi-Country Evaluation of Affective Experience: Validation of an Abbreviated Version of the Day Reconstruction Method in Seven Countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-8, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0061534
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061534
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0061534
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0061534&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0061534?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krueger, Alan B. & Schkade, David A., 2008. "The reliability of subjective well-being measures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1833-1845, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sergey Smetanin, 2022. "Pulse of the Nation: Observable Subjective Well-Being in Russia Inferred from Social Network Odnoklassniki," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(16), pages 1-38, August.
    2. Jiyao Sun & Nan Zhang & Bram Vanhoutte & Jian Wang & Tarani Chandola, 2021. "Subjective Wellbeing in Rural China: How Social Environments Influence the Diurnal Rhythms of Affect," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-28, April.
    3. Francisco Caballero & Marta Miret & Beatriz Olaya & Jaime Perales & Ruy López-Ridaura & Josep Haro & Somnath Chatterji & José Ayuso-Mateos, 2014. "Evaluation of Affect in Mexico and Spain: Psychometric Properties and Usefulness of an Abbreviated Version of the Day Reconstruction Method," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 915-935, August.
    4. Blanca Mellor-Marsá & Marta Miret & Francisco J. Abad & Somnath Chatterji & Beatriz Olaya & Beata Tobiasz-Adamczyk & Seppo Koskinen & Matilde Leonardi & Josep Maria Haro & José Luis Ayuso-Mateos & Fra, 2016. "Measurement Invariance of the Day Reconstruction Method: Results from the COURAGE in Europe Project," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 1769-1787, October.
    5. Darío Moreno-Agostino & Alejandro de la Torre-Luque & Javier de la Fuente & Elvira Lara & Natalia Martín-María & Maria Victoria Moneta & Ivet Bayés & Beatriz Olaya & Josep Maria Haro & Marta Miret & J, 2021. "Determinants of Subjective Wellbeing Trajectories in Older Adults: A Growth Mixture Modeling Approach," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 709-726, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fabian T C Schmidt & Clemens M Lechner & Daniel Danner, 2020. "New wine in an old bottle? A facet-level perspective on the added value of Grit over BFI–2 Conscientiousness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-25, February.
    2. van Hoorn, André, 2018. "Is the happiness approach to measuring preferences valid?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 53-65.
    3. Carter, Steven & McBride, Michael, 2013. "Experienced utility versus decision utility: Putting the ‘S’ in satisfaction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 13-23.
    4. Martin Binder, 2016. "Revisiting Cheerful Jane and Miserable John: the impact of income, good health, social contacts and education declines with increasing subjective well-being," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 544-553, May.
    5. Heywood, John S. & Siebert, W. Stanley & Wei, Xiangdong, 2009. "Job Satisfaction and the Labor Market Institutions in Urban China," IZA Discussion Papers 4254, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Robert P. Inman, 2008. "Federalism's Values and the Value of Federalism," NBER Working Papers 13735, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Alpaslan Akay & Olivier Bargain & Klaus F. Zimmermann, 2017. "Home Sweet Home?: Macroeconomic Conditions in Home Countries and the Well-Being of Migrants," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 52(2), pages 351-373.
    8. Tsegay Gebrekidan Tekleselassie, 2017. "Subjective Wellbeing and Institutions: The Case of Rural Ethiopia," Working Papers 016, Policy Studies Institute.
    9. Scott Adams & Benjamin Artz, 2015. "Health Insurance, Familial Responsibilities and Job Satisfaction," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 143-153, March.
    10. Alan B. Krueger & Daniel Kahneman & David Schkade & Norbert Schwarz & Arthur A. Stone, 2009. "National Time Accounting: The Currency of Life," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring the Subjective Well-Being of Nations: National Accounts of Time Use and Well-Being, pages 9-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Andrew E. Clark & Claudia Senik, 2011. "Is Happiness Different From Flourishing? Cross-Country Evidence from the ESS," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 121(1), pages 17-34.
    12. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh, 2016. "How are you? How's it going? What's up? What's happening? Nudging people to tell us how they really are," Working Papers in Economics 649, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    13. Paul Hudson & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Jennifer Poussin & Jeroen C. J. H. Aerts, 2019. "Impacts of Flooding and Flood Preparedness on Subjective Well-Being: A Monetisation of the Tangible and Intangible Impacts," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 665-682, February.
    14. Binder, Martin & Coad, Alex, 2013. "“I'm afraid I have bad news for you…” Estimating the impact of different health impairments on subjective well-being," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 155-167.
    15. Pak, Tae-Young, 2020. "Social protection for happiness? The impact of social pension reform on subjective well-being of the Korean elderly," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 349-366.
    16. Chang-ming Hsieh & Qiguang Li, 2022. "Importance Weighting in the Domain-of-Life Approach to Subjective Well-Being: the Consideration of Age," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 525-540, April.
    17. Romina Boarini & Margherita Comola & Femke Keulenaer & Robert Manchin & Conal Smith, 2013. "Can Governments Boost People’s Sense of Well-Being? The Impact of Selected Labour Market and Health Policies on Life Satisfaction," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(1), pages 105-120, October.
    18. Alejandro Cid & Daniel Ferres & Máximo Rossi, 2008. "Subjective Well-Being in the Southern Cone: Health, Income and Family," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 1308, Department of Economics - dECON.
    19. Whelan, Adele & McGuinness, Seamus, 2017. "Does a satisfied student make a satisfied worker?," Papers WP561, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    20. Christopher Mackie & Conal Smith, 2015. "Conceptualizing Subjective Well-Being And Its Many Dimensions – Implications For Data Collection In Official Statistics And For Policy Relevance," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 16(3), pages 335-372, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0061534. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.