IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rom/rampas/v2021y2021i36p25-48.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital Methods Of Analysis Of Subjective Quality Of Life: Case Of Russian Regions

Author

Listed:
  • Evgeniy SHCHEKOTIN

    (Center of Applied Big Data Analysis, Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia; Department of Sociology, Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management, Novosibirsk, Russia)

  • Mikhail MYAGKOV

    (Center of Applied Big Data Analysis, Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia; Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia; Institute for Cognitive and Decision Sciences and Department of Political Science, Eugene, USA)

  • Viacheslav GOIKO

    (Center of Applied Big Data Analysis, Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia)

  • Vitaliy KASHPUR

    (Center of Applied Big Data Analysis, Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia)

Abstract

The paper presents a method for measuring subjective quality of life in the regions of the Russian Federation on the basis of digital data. Information about online activity of users in the largest social media in Russia - VKontakte was taken as the data source. Quality of Life Index was calculated based on the obtained data. The results show that overall users tend to negatively assess the quality of life in their regions, with the highest estimates of the quality of life observed in the ethnic areas of the Russian Federation – republics, autonomous territories, districts and regions, first of all, in North Caucuses, Siberia and the Russian Far East. The lowest quality-of-life assessments of are noted in some regions in West Siberia. The paper analyses how the results of measuring quality of life with digital methods correlate with objective social-and-economic and demographic indicators of regional development. Several regularities for the ethnic areas are revealed while in other areas (regions, territories, cities of federal status) no significant correlations were established. The paper also gives a comparative analysis of quality of life assessments obtained through traditional questionnaire methods and digital methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Evgeniy SHCHEKOTIN & Mikhail MYAGKOV & Viacheslav GOIKO & Vitaliy KASHPUR, 2021. "Digital Methods Of Analysis Of Subjective Quality Of Life: Case Of Russian Regions," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2021(36), pages 25-48, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:rom:rampas:v:2021:y:2021:i:36:p:25-48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ramp.ase.ro/_data/files/articole/2021/36-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yann Algan & Fabrice Murtin & Elizabeth Beasley & Kazuhito Higa & Claudia Senik, 2019. "Well-being through the lens of the internet," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-23, January.
    2. Fabio Sabatini & Francesco Sarracino, 2017. "Online Networks and Subjective Well-Being," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(3), pages 456-480, August.
    3. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/63csdfkqvu9nfanvuffe3qk8r6 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Fulvio Castellacci & Henrik Schwabe, 2020. "Internet, unmet aspirations and the U-shape of life," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-22, June.
    2. Fabio Sabatini & Francesco Sarracino, 2015. "Keeping up with the e-Joneses: Do online social networks raise social comparisons?," Papers 1507.08863, arXiv.org.
    3. Rossouw, Stephanie & Greyling, Talita & Adhikari, Tamanna & Morrison, Phillip S., 2020. "Markov switching models for happiness during a pandemic: The New-Zealand experience," GLO Discussion Paper Series 573, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    4. Bayu Kharisma, 2022. "Surfing alone? The Internet and social capital: evidence from Indonesia," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Greyling, Talita & Rossouw, Stephanie & Adhikari, Tamanna, 2020. "A tale of three countries: How did Covid-19 lockdown impact happiness?," GLO Discussion Paper Series 584, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    6. Antoci, Angelo & Bonelli, Laura & Paglieri, Fabio & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2019. "Civility and trust in social media," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 83-99.
    7. Dan Zhou & Sibo Yang & Xue Li, 2022. "Internet Use and Job Satisfaction: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-16, September.
    8. Dean Fantazzini & Julia Pushchelenko & Alexey Mironenkov & Alexey Kurbatskii, 2021. "Forecasting Internal Migration in Russia Using Google Trends: Evidence from Moscow and Saint Petersburg," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-30, October.
    9. Francesco Angelini & Luca V. Ballestra & Massimiliano Castellani, 2022. "Digital leisure and the gig economy: a two-sector model of growth," Papers 2212.02119, arXiv.org.
    10. Angelo Antoci & Fabio Sabatini, 2018. "Online networks, social interaction and segregation: an evolutionary approach," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 859-883, September.
    11. Solferino, Nazaria & Solferino, Viviana & Taurino, SerenaFiona, 2018. "Quantum entanglement and the emergence of collaboration in social media," MPRA Paper 86228, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Sarracino, Francesco & Riillo, Cesare Fabio Antonio, 2020. "Facing the challenge of globalization: the role of confidence in institutions," MPRA Paper 103692, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Geraci, Andrea & Nardotto, Mattia & Reggiani, Tommaso & Sabatini, Fabio, 2022. "Broadband Internet and social capital," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    14. Weerakkody, Vishanth & Sivarajah, Uthayasankar & Mahroof, Kamran & Maruyama, Takao & Lu, Shan, 2021. "Influencing subjective well-being for business and sustainable development using big data and predictive regression analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 520-538.
    15. Fachao Liang & Zehua Wang & Sheng-Hau Lin, 2022. "Can Land Policy Promote Farmers’ Subjective Well-Being? A Study on Withdrawal from Rural Homesteads in Jinjiang, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-17, June.
    16. Cazzuffi, Chiara & Díaz, Vivián & Fernández, Juan & Leyton, Cristian, 2020. "Spatial inequality and aspirations for economic inclusion among Latin American youth," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    17. Peng Nie & Alfonso Sousa-Poza & Galit Nimrod, 2017. "Internet Use and Subjective Well-Being in China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 489-516, May.
    18. Bartosz Wilczek, 2018. "Media use and life satisfaction: the moderating role of social events," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 65(2), pages 157-184, June.
    19. Angelo Antoci & Alexia Delfino & Fabio Paglieri & Fabio Sabatini, 2016. "The ecology of social interactions in online and offline environments," Papers 1601.07776, arXiv.org.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    subjective quality of life; digital sociology; digital methods; social network; Russia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • I31 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General Welfare, Well-Being
    • R59 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Other

    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:rom:rampas:v:2021:y:2021:i:36:p:25-48. 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: Androniceanu Armenia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ccasero.html .

    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.