IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p594-d1019143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Associations between the Importance of Well-Being Domains and the Subsequent Experience of Well-Being

Author

Listed:
  • Dorota Weziak-Bialowolska

    (Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
    Polish Institute of Advanced Studies, Polish Academy of Sciences, 00-378 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Matthew T. Lee

    (Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
    Institute for Studies of Religion, Baylor University, Waco, TX 76798, USA)

  • Piotr Bialowolski

    (Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
    Department of Economics, Kozminski University, 03-301 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Eileen McNeely

    (Sustainability and Health Initiative (SHINE), Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

  • Ying Chen

    (Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
    Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

  • Richard G. Cowden

    (Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA)

  • Tyler J. VanderWeele

    (Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
    Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

Abstract

Prior cross-sectional research suggests that the importance assigned to well-being domains may be associated with actual self-reported well-being in these same domains. However, cross-sectional data cannot discern directionality, leaving an open question as to whether valuing well-being leads to higher actual well-being or the other way around—higher levels of well-being lead to valuing well-being more. In the present study, we used longitudinal data from 1209 employees to examine the associations between the perceived importance of six well-being domains (emotional health, physical health, meaning and purpose, social connectedness, character strengths, and financial stability) and subsequent well-being in these domains reported approximately 1 year later. Lagged linear regression models demonstrated that valuing character strengths and valuing social relationships were most strongly associated with subsequent well-being. None of the valuations were associated with higher subsequent emotional well-being and only one (importance of physical health) predicted physical health. We also found that higher valuations of character strengths and physical health were associated with lower ratings of subsequent financial stability. A stronger sense of the importance of each well-being domain was predictive of subsequent character strengths. Our findings suggest that living well appears to be achieved by valuing immaterial goods, especially social connectedness and character strengths, as opposed to domains such as financial stability or physical health.

Suggested Citation

  • Dorota Weziak-Bialowolska & Matthew T. Lee & Piotr Bialowolski & Eileen McNeely & Ying Chen & Richard G. Cowden & Tyler J. VanderWeele, 2022. "Associations between the Importance of Well-Being Domains and the Subsequent Experience of Well-Being," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:594-:d:1019143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/594/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/594/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlotta Balestra & Romina Boarini & Elena Tosetto, 2018. "What matters the most to people?: Evidence from the OECD Better Life Index users’ responses," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2018/3, OECD Publishing.
    2. Adler, Matthew D. & Dolan, Paul & Kavetsos, Georgios, 2017. "Would you choose to be happy? Tradeoffs between happiness and the other dimensions of life in a large population survey," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 60-73.
    3. Carlotta Balestra & Romina Boarini & Elena Tosetto, 2018. "What Matters Most to People? Evidence from the OECD Better Life Index Users’ Responses," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 907-930, April.
    4. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Nichole Szembrot, 2014. "Beyond Happiness and Satisfaction: Toward Well-Being Indices Based on Stated Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2698-2735, September.
    5. Santini, Ziggi Ivan & Jose, Paul E. & Koyanagi, Ai & Meilstrup, Charlotte & Nielsen, Line & Madsen, Katrine R. & Koushede, Vibeke, 2020. "Formal social participation protects physical health through enhanced mental health: A longitudinal mediation analysis using three consecutive waves of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in E," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    6. Robert Cummins, 1996. "The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 303-328, January.
    7. Claudia Trudel-Fitzgerald & Emily S Zevon & Ichiro Kawachi & Reginald D Tucker-Seeley & Francine Grodstein & Laura D Kubzansky & Lynn Martire, 2020. "The Prospective Association of Social Integration With Life Span and Exceptional Longevity in Women," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 75(10), pages 2132-2141.
    8. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2003. "Counting Importance: The Case of Life Satisfaction and Relative Domain Importance," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 227-240, February.
    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. Akinori Kitsuki & Shunsuke Managi, 2023. "Importance Weighting in Subjective Well-Being Measures: Using Marginal Utilities as Weights for Domain Satisfaction," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1101-1120, March.
    2. Mark McGillivray & Simon Feeny & Paul Hansen & Stephen Knowles & Franz Ombler, 2023. "What are Valid Weights for the Human Development Index? A Discrete Choice Experiment for the United Kingdom," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 165(2), pages 679-694, January.
    3. Clemens Hetschko & Louisa von Reumont & Ronnie Schöb, 2019. "Die Schwierigkeit, soziale Wohlfahrt zu messen: Einbettungseffekte im OECD Better Life Index," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 72(18), pages 24-26, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Zafar Nazarov & Anastassia Obydenkova, 2022. "Public Health, Democracy, and Transition: Global Evidence and Post-Communism," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 261-285, February.
    6. Tobias Wolf & Maria Metzing & Richard E. Lucas, 2022. "Experienced Well-Being and Labor Market Status: The Role of Pleasure and Meaning," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 691-721, September.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:102-112 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Daniel J Benjamin & Jakina Debnam Guzman & Marc Fleurbaey & Ori Heffetz & Miles Kimball, 2023. "What do Happiness Data Mean? Theory and Survey Evidence," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(6), pages 2377-2412.
    9. Tae‐Hyoung T. Gim, 2021. "Partial least squares regression and importance–satisfaction analyses of the strategic drivers of happiness: A quality of life survey in Seoul, Korea," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 567-599, March.
    10. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2016. "Domain Importance in Subjective Well-Being Measures," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 777-792, June.
    11. Jorge Guardiola & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2013. "Weighting life domains with Data Envelopment Analysis," Working Papers 1311, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    12. Dolan, Paul & Kavetsos, Georgios & Krekel, Christian & Mavridis, Dimitris & Metcalfe, Robert & Senik, Claudia & Szymanski, Stefan & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2019. "Quantifying the intangible impact of the Olympics using subjective well-being data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Kristen Cooper & Mark Fabian & Christian Krekel, 2023. "New approaches to measuring welfare," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(2), pages 123-135, June.
    14. Johan Graafland, 2020. "When Does Economic Freedom Promote Well Being? On the Moderating Role of Long-Term Orientation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 127-153, May.
    15. Valerie Møller & Benjamin J. Roberts, 2019. "The Best and Worst Times of Life for South Africans: Evidence of Universal Reference Standards in Evaluations of Personal Well-Being Using Bernheim’s ACSA," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 1319-1347, June.
    16. Paul Dolan & Georgios Kavetsos & Christian Krekel & Dimitris Mavridis & Robert Metcalfe & Claudia Senik & Stefan Szymanski & Nicolas R. Ziebarth, 2016. "The Host with the Most? The Effects of the Olympic Games on Happiness," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1599, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    17. Lordan, Grace & Stringer, Eliza-Jane, 2022. "People versus machines: The impact of being in an automatable job on Australian worker’s mental health and life satisfaction," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    18. Adler, Matthew D. & Dolan, Paul & Henwood, Amanda & Kavetsos, Georgios, 2022. "“Better the devil you know”: Are stated preferences over health and happiness determined by how healthy and happy people are?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    19. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2013. "Issues in Evaluating Importance Weighting in Quality of Life Measures," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(2), pages 681-693, January.
    20. Daniel J. Benjamin & Kristen Cooper & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball, 2023. "From Happiness Data to Economic Conclusions," NBER Working Papers 31727, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2019. "Importance of Health and Relative Importance of Satisfaction with One’s Own Health: A Case of Frail Immigrant Older Adults," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 81-93, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:594-:d:1019143. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.