Is Subjective Wellbeing Too Subjective? The (large) Impact of Randomized Placement of Happiness and Worry Questions in a National Survey of Crisis-Affected Myanmar

Though initially pioneered in high income countries, subjective wellbeing (SWB) measures are now collected throughout low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and widely used in development research. Despite their popularity, research from high income countries has often found that SWB measurement can be confounded by modest differences in context, including survey design. However, evidence on SWB measurement problems in LMICs is scarce, despite potentially more room for artefactual confounding, especially in stressful LMICs environments, such as those undergoing civil war. In this study, we use a large, nationally representative and gender-stratified panel phone survey from conflict-affected Myanmar to explore whether the randomized placement of a SWB module either at the start or at the end of the questionnaire affects respondents’ evaluations of their own happiness or worry. Treatment effects are large but also systematically heterogeneous. Compared to those asked at the beginning, respondents who were asked the SWB module at the end of the questionnaire were 7 percentage points more likely to declare themselves happy but are significantly smaller, or even completely disappear, among respondents who experienced physical insecurity or food insecurity. We offer several possible explanations, including social desirability bias, frame-of-reference effects and catharsis.