IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hdl/wpaper/2109.html

Using a factorial survey to estimate the relative importance of well-being dimensions according to older people: insights from a repeated survey experiment in Flanders

Author

Listed:
  • Veerle Van Loon;
  • Koen Decancq;

Abstract

In this paper, we investigated the potential of a factorial survey to estimate the relative importance of the well-being dimensions of health, income, social relations, leisure and religion or spirituality, according to the views of older people. For this purpose, a factorial survey was implemented in a longitudinal online survey among 800 older adults in Flanders (the Flemish region of Belgium). The potential of the factorial survey was explored in two ways. First, we performed several within-sample test-retests to investigate the consistency of the estimated relative importance weights over time (i.e., temporal reliability). Second, we tested the feasibility of the factorial survey for the target population by studying two indicators of cognitive load: response time and response consistency. Overall, we found evidence that the factorial survey works well among a sample of older people. Health, income and social relations were the most important well-being dimensions – followed by leisure and engaging activities. Religion or spirituality appeared to be rather unimportant. The results proved to be consistent in most of the test-retest analyses. In addition, we found that respondents were able to cope well with the complexity of the factorial survey and produced a high level of response consistency within an acceptable amount of response time.

Suggested Citation

  • Veerle Van Loon; & Koen Decancq;, 2021. "Using a factorial survey to estimate the relative importance of well-being dimensions according to older people: insights from a repeated survey experiment in Flanders," Working Papers 2109, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    • Handle: RePEc:hdl:wpaper:2109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://medialibrary.uantwerpen.be/files/6663/9f9d65f0-056e-4184-87f0-06f4acfc11bb.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Layard, R. & Mayraz, G. & Nickell, S., 2008. "The marginal utility of income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1846-1857, August.
    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. Chung Choe & SeEun Jung & Ronald L. Oaxaca, 2020. "Identification and decompositions in probit and logit models," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 1479-1492, September.
    2. Proto, Eugenio & Rustichini, Aldo, "undated". "Life Satisfaction, Household Income and Personality Traits," Economic Research Papers 270640, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    3. De Neve, Jan-Emmanuel & Oswald, Andrew J., 2012. "Estimating the influence of life satisfaction and positive affect on later income using sibling fixed-effects," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51523, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Crispin H. V. Cooper, 2020. "Quantitative Models of Well-Being to Inform Policy: Problems and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, April.
    5. Daniel Kuehnle & Christoph Wunder, 2016. "Using the Life Satisfaction Approach to Value Daylight Savings Time Transitions: Evidence from Britain and Germany," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 2293-2323, December.
    6. Wei Chen, 2019. "Income and Effort: An Instrumental Variables Approach," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 47(4), pages 485-497, December.
    7. Savatore Puglisi & Ionuț Virgil Șerban, 2019. "Beyond Gdp: Which Options To Better Represent Modern Socio-Economic Progress?," Sociology and Social Work Review, International Society for projects in Education and Research, vol. 3(1), pages 17-32, June.
    8. Tofallis, Chris, 2020. "Which formula for national happiness?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    9. Carter, Steven & McBride, Michael, 2013. "Experienced utility versus decision utility: Putting the ‘S’ in satisfaction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 13-23.
    10. Ehrmann, Michael & Tzamourani, Panagiota, 2012. "Memories of high inflation," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 174-191.
    11. Zunian Luo, 2022. "Cap or No Cap? What Can Governments Do to Promote EV Sales?," Papers 2212.08137, arXiv.org.
    12. Shaun Costa, 2025. "Global lifespan and welfare inequality over the last five decades from a prioritarian perspective," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 65(2), pages 487-512, September.
    13. Martin Binder, 2016. "Revisiting Cheerful Jane and Miserable John: the impact of income, good health, social contacts and education declines with increasing subjective well-being," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(8), pages 544-553, May.
    14. Richard Layard, 2010. "The Greatest Happiness Principle: Its Time Has Come," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 8(4), pages 26-31, 01.
    15. Antràs, Pol & de Gortari, Alonso & Itskhoki, Oleg, 2017. "Globalization, inequality and welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 387-412.
    16. Hjertstrand, Per, 2025. "The marginal utility of income and homogeneous demand systems," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    17. Fu-Min Tseng & Dennis James Petrie, 2014. "The Implications for Health, Depression, and Life Satisfaction from a Permanent Increase in Income for the Disadvantaged Elderly: Evidence from Taiwan," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(3), pages 311-336, September.
    18. Susanne Elsas, 2021. "Causality in the Link between Income and Satisfaction: IV Estimation with Internal Instruments," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 1143, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    19. Richard Cookson & Ieva Skarda & Owen Cotton‐Barratt & Matthew Adler & Miqdad Asaria & Toby Ord, 2021. "Quality adjusted life years based on health and consumption: A summary wellbeing measure for cross‐sectoral economic evaluation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 70-85, January.
    20. Levinson, Arik, 2012. "Valuing public goods using happiness data: The case of air quality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(9-10), pages 869-880.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hdl:wpaper:2109. 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: Santiago Burone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csbuabe.html .

    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.