IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v81y2007i3p521-541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Importance has been Considered in Satisfaction Evaluation: an Experimental Examination of Locke’s Range-of-affect Hypothesis

Author

Listed:
  • Chia-huei Wu
  • Grace Yao

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Chia-huei Wu & Grace Yao, 2007. "Importance has been Considered in Satisfaction Evaluation: an Experimental Examination of Locke’s Range-of-affect Hypothesis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 521-541, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:81:y:2007:i:3:p:521-541
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-006-0021-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11205-006-0021-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-006-0021-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Chang-Ming Hsieh, 2008. "The Relative Importance of Health," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 127-137, May.
    2. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2018. "Importance Weighting in Client Satisfaction Measures: Lessons from the Life Satisfaction Literature," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 45-60, July.
    3. Ssu-Kuang Chen & Sunny Lin, 2014. "The Latent Profiles of Life Domain Importance and Satisfaction in a Quality of Life Scale," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 429-445, April.
    4. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2012. "Should We Give Up Domain Importance Weighting in QoL Measures?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 99-109, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Chia-Huei Wu, 2009. "Enhancing quality of life by shifting importance perception among life domains," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 37-47, March.
    7. Chia-Huei Wu & Cheng-Ta Yang & Li-Na Huang, 2014. "On the Predictive Effect of Multidimensional Importance-Weighted Quality of Life Scores on Overall Subjective Well-Being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 933-943, February.
    8. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2014. "Throwing the Baby Out with the Bathwater: Evaluation of Domain Importance Weighting in Quality of Life Measurements," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 119(1), pages 483-493, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Chia-Huei Wu, 2008. "The Role of Perceived Discrepancy in Satisfaction Evaluation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 88(3), pages 423-436, September.
    11. Jorge Guardiola & Andrés Picazo-Tadeo, 2014. "Building Weighted-Domain Composite Indices of Life Satisfaction with Data Envelopment Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 257-274, May.
    12. 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.
    13. Chang-Ming Hsieh, 2012. "Importance is Not Unimportant: The Role of Importance Weighting in QOL Measures," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(2), pages 267-278, November.
    14. Chia-Huei Wu, 2008. "Can We Weight Satisfaction Score with Importance Ranks Across Life Domains?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 469-480, May.
    15. Chia-Huei Wu & Lung Chen & Ying-Mei Tsai, 2009. "Investigating Importance Weighting of Satisfaction Scores from a Formative Model with Partial Least Squares Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 351-363, February.
    16. M. Joseph Sirgy & Min Young Kim & Mohsen Joshanloo & Dong-Jin Lee & Michael Bosnjak, 2020. "The Relationship Between Domain Satisfaction and Domain Importance: The Moderating Role of Depression," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 2007-2030, August.

    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. 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.
    3. Chia-Huei Wu & Lung Chen & Ying-Mei Tsai, 2009. "Investigating Importance Weighting of Satisfaction Scores from a Formative Model with Partial Least Squares Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 351-363, February.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:102-112 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. 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.
    6. Kimberly McAdams & Richard Lucas & M. Donnellan, 2012. "The Role of Domain Satisfaction in Explaining the Paradoxical Association Between Life Satisfaction and Age," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(2), pages 295-303, November.
    7. 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.
    8. Dong-Jin Lee & M. Joseph Sirgy, 2018. "What Do People Do to Achieve Work–Life Balance? A Formative Conceptualization to Help Develop a Metric for Large-Scale Quality-of-Life Surveys," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(2), pages 771-791, July.
    9. 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.
    10. Chia-huei Wu, 2008. "Examining the appropriateness of importance weighting on satisfaction score from range-of-affect hypothesis: hierarchical linear modeling for within-subject data," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 101-111, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Karen Hofmann & Dominik Schori & Thomas Abel, 2013. "Self-Reported Capabilities Among Young Male Adults in Switzerland: Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of a German, French and Italian Version of a Closed Survey Instrument," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 723-738, November.
    13. Tsung-Chi Cheng & Chao-Yin Lin & Shu-Chen Wang, 2023. "Exploring factors related to agreement between importance and satisfaction of subjective well-being indicators: evidence from Taiwan," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 2811-2839, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Neena Gopalan & Murugan Pattusamy, 2020. "Role of Work and Family Factors in Predicting Career Satisfaction and Life Success," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Alison Woodcock & Laura Camfield & J. McGregor & Faith Martin, 2009. "Validation of the WeDQoL-Goals-Thailand Measure: Culture-Specific Individualised Quality of Life," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 135-171, October.
    17. M. Joseph Sirgy & Dong-Jin Lee, 2018. "Work-Life Balance: an Integrative Review," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 13(1), pages 229-254, March.
    18. 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.
    19. Speed, David & Barry, Caitlin & Cragun, Ryan, 2020. "With a little help from my (Canadian) friends: Health differences between minimal and maximal religiosity/spirituality are partially mediated by social support," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    20. Chia-Huei Wu & Grace Yao, 2006. "Do We Need to Weight Satisfaction Scores with Importance Ratings in Measuring Quality of Life?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 78(2), pages 305-326, September.
    21. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2018. "Importance Weighting in Client Satisfaction Measures: Lessons from the Life Satisfaction Literature," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 45-60, July.

    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:spr:soinre:v:81:y:2007:i:3:p:521-541. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.