IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v69y2009i4p481-485.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the apparent U-shape of well-being over the life course a result of inappropriate use of control variables? A commentary on Blanchflower and Oswald (66: 8, 2008, 1733-1749)

Author

Listed:
  • Glenn, Norval

Abstract

In their article in this journal "Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle?" Blanchflower and Oswald (Blanchflower, D.G., & Oswald, A.J. (2008). Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle? Social Science & Medicine, 66, 1733-1749) report the results of an ambitious cross-national study of age and well-being and conclude that in most societies studied the well-being of adults tends to be high in young adulthood and old age and lowest around age 40. I argue that the appearance of this U-shaped curve of well-being is the result of the use of inappropriate and questionable control variables. The most clearly inappropriate control variable is marital status, the control of which to a large extent accounts for the U-shaped curve. Most researchers who have studied the relationship between being married and being happy believe that happiness affects marital status (happier people are more likely to marry and stay married), and of course a variable that is affected by the dependent variable should not be included as a control variable in a simple recursive model. Such control variables as income and education are suspect because the relationship between them and well-being is likely to be partially spurious, and such variables as race and whether or not persons lived with both parents at age 16 should not be controlled, because they cannot affect or be affected by age. Finally, year of survey should not be controlled because of the age-period-cohort conundrum, which makes including age, period, and cohort all as predictor variables in a regression inappropriate (and impossible if the three variables are measured precisely and comparably). The only clearly appropriate control variable is birth cohort, and when only it is controlled, the regression data become estimates of how the well-being of persons has actually changed as they have gone through the life course. I argue that such estimates are much more useful than the counterfactual abstractions provided by Blanchflower and Oswald (Blanchflower, D.G., & Oswald, A.J. (2008). Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle? Social Science & Medicine, 66, 1733-1749), and I conclude that those authors (or someone else) could make a very important contribution by redoing their analyses with birth cohort as the only control variable. I do that with the American happiness data and find that the results do not come close to the U-shaped pattern.

Suggested Citation

  • Glenn, Norval, 2009. "Is the apparent U-shape of well-being over the life course a result of inappropriate use of control variables? A commentary on Blanchflower and Oswald (66: 8, 2008, 1733-1749)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 481-485, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:69:y:2009:i:4:p:481-485
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(09)00306-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Terence C. Cheng & Nattavudh Powdthavee & Andrew J. Oswald, 2017. "Longitudinal Evidence for a Midlife Nadir in Human Well‐being: Results from Four Data Sets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(599), pages 126-142, February.
    2. Blanchflower, David G. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2017. "Unhappiness and Pain in Modern America: A Review Essay, and Further Evidence, on Carol Graham's Happiness for All?," IZA Discussion Papers 11184, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    3. Piper, Alan T., 2015. "Sliding down the U-shape? A dynamic panel investigation of the age-well-being relationship, focusing on young adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 54-61.
    4. Blanchflower, David G. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2011. "Antidepressants and Age," IZA Discussion Papers 5785, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    5. Piper, Alan T., 2014. "Sliding down the U-shape? An investigation of the age-well-being relationship, with a focus on young adults," MPRA Paper 55819, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Blanchflower, David G. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2017. "Do Humans Suffer a Psychological Low in Midlife? Two Approaches (With and Without Controls) in Seven Data Sets," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 337, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    7. de Ree, Joppe & Alessie, Rob, 2011. "Life satisfaction and age: Dealing with underidentification in age-period-cohort models," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 177-182, July.
    8. Blanchflower, David G. & Oswald, Andrew J, 2018. "Unhappiness and Pain in Modern America: A Review Essay, and Further Evidence, on Carol Graham’s Happiness for All?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1153, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    9. Teresa García-Muñoz & Shoshana Neuman & Tzahi Neuman, 2014. "Subjective Health Status of the Older Population: Is It Related to Country-Specific Economic Development Measures?," Working Papers 2014-02, Bar-Ilan University, Department of Economics.
    10. Van Landeghem, Bert, 2012. "A test for the convexity of human well-being over the life cycle: Longitudinal evidence from a 20-year panel," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 571-582.
    11. Blanchflower, David G. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2016. "Antidepressants and age: A new form of evidence for U-shaped well-being through life," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 46-58.
    12. Adrian Chadi, 2012. "I would really love to participate in your survey! Bias problems in the measurement of well-being," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(4), pages 3111-3119.

    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:eee:socmed:v:69:y:2009:i:4:p:481-485. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.