Author
Abstract
Understanding the determinants of subjective well-being (SWB) is crucial for advancing social sciences, particularly in relation to environmental and social factors. Machine learning (ML) techniques have gained popularity in SWB research, yet there is limited synthesis of their current implementation. This systematic review examines the application of ML techniques in assessing determinants of SWB, providing a comprehensive synthesis of 25 studies published up to March 2024. The review highlights the growing use of ML methods, such as random forests, artificial neural networks, and gradient boosting, in understanding the complex, non-linear relationships between environmental factors and SWB. Key environmental determinants identified include service accessibility such as parks, supermarkets, and hospitals, safety feelings, and exposure to air pollution. Additionally, significant social factors, including sociodemographics, emotional predictors, family predictors, and social capital, also influence SWB. The review underscores the value of ML in revealing non-linear relationships and threshold effects, which are particularly useful for policymakers aiming to optimize interventions to enhance public well-being. Analysis of the importance of variables within these models enables policymakers to prioritize interventions that target the most influential factors. However, the review also identifies challenges in the application of ML, particularly in model reporting, improved interpretability techniques, and methodological rigor. These insights provide a foundation for future research aiming to leverage ML to generate more robust and actionable knowledge in well-being studies. To fully harness the potential of ML in SWB research and prevent its misuse, future studies should prioritize model interpretability and focus on translating these insights into actionable policy recommendations.
Suggested Citation
Min Yang & Yuxuan Zou, 2025.
"Assessing environmental determinants of subjective well-being via machine learning approaches: a systematic review,"
Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.
Handle:
RePEc:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-05234-8
DOI: 10.1057/s41599-025-05234-8
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:pal:palcom:v:12:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-025-05234-8. 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.
We have no bibliographic 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.