IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/8yfzc_v1.html

Life satisfaction is more strongly correlated with flourishing than Cantril’s Ladder

Author

Listed:
  • Padgett, R. Noah
  • Felton, Chris
  • Case, Brendan
  • Lomas, Tim
  • Johnson, Byron R.
  • VanderWeele, Tyler J.

Abstract

Policymakers and scholars alike seek an informative single-item measure of subjective well-being. Two prominently used single-item measures are life satisfaction--as used by the World Values Survey, General Social Survey, and Australia's Measuring What Matters framework, etc.--and Cantril's Ladder--as used in the World Happiness Report. We compare these single-item assessments using data from the Global Flourishing Study, which includes over 200,000 participants in 22 countries. We find that life satisfaction is, on average, more strongly correlated with happiness, health, meaning, character, relationships, and financial security than is Cantril's Ladder. This result held in all 22 countries when all dimensions of flourishing are examined simultaneously. However, Cantril's Ladder had stronger correlations with financial aspects of well-being in several countries. Life satisfaction provides a comprehensive single-item assessment of overall subjective well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Padgett, R. Noah & Felton, Chris & Case, Brendan & Lomas, Tim & Johnson, Byron R. & VanderWeele, Tyler J., 2025. "Life satisfaction is more strongly correlated with flourishing than Cantril’s Ladder," OSF Preprints 8yfzc_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:8yfzc_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/8yfzc_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/68811ac823b8711b6584fa59/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/8yfzc_v1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Allin & David J. Hand, 2017. "New statistics for old?—measuring the wellbeing of the UK," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 180(1), pages 3-43, January.
    2. Christian Bjørnskov, 2010. "How Comparable are the Gallup World Poll Life Satisfaction Data?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 41-60, March.
    3. Gizem Hülür & Jutta Heckhausen & Christiane A. Hoppmann & Frank J. Infurna & Gert G. Wagner & Nilam Ram & Denis Gerstorf, 2017. "Levels of and Changes in Life Satisfaction Predict Mortality Hazards: Disentangling the Role of Physical Health, Perceived Control, and Social Orientation," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 919, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    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. repec:osf:osfxxx:fqmdu_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Shizuki Fukuda & Michio Murakami & Keigo Noda & Taikan Oki, 2016. "How Achieving the Millennium Development Goals Increases Subjective Well-Being in Developing Nations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Alexandra Cristina Sãžrbu & Mircea Asandului, 2021. "Determinants Of Subjective Well-Being Among Romanian Older Adults," Review of Economic and Business Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 28, pages 111-124, December.
    4. Lukas Wellner & Axel Dreher & Andreas Fuchs & Bradley C. Parks & Austin Strange, 2025. "Can Aid Buy Foreign Public Support? Evidence from Chinese Development Finance," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73(2), pages 523-578.
    5. Sarah Atkinson & Anne-Marie Bagnall & Rhiannon Corcoran & Jane South & Sarah Curtis, 2020. "Being Well Together: Individual Subjective and Community Wellbeing," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 1903-1921, June.
    6. Sabatini, Fabio, 2014. "The relationship between happiness and health: Evidence from Italy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 178-187.
    7. David Blanchflower & Alex Bryson, 2024. "The Gender Well-Being Gap," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-45, July.
    8. Xiangdan Piao & Xinxin Ma & Shunsuke Managi, 2021. "Impact of the Intra-household Education Gap on Wives’ and Husbands’ Well-Being: Evidence from Cross-Country Microdata," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 111-136, July.
    9. Mohsen Joshanloo & Veljko Jovanović & Tim Taylor, 2019. "A multidimensional understanding of prosperity and well-being at country level: Data-driven explorations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-31, October.
    10. Gregor Gonza & Anže Burger, 2017. "Subjective Well-Being During the 2008 Economic Crisis: Identification of Mediating and Moderating Factors," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 1763-1797, December.
    11. Indy Wijngaards & Martijn Burger & Job van Exel, 2019. "The promise of open survey questions—The validation of text-based job satisfaction measures," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-22, December.
    12. Pei-shan Liao, 2014. "More Happy or Less Unhappy? Comparison of the Balanced and Unbalanced Designs for the Response Scale of General Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1407-1423, December.
    13. Chen, Chiang-Ming & Yeh, Chia-Yu & Chang, Ching-Hsing, 2014. "Volunteering And Life Satisfaction : An Investigation Of Endogeneity," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 55(1), pages 21-32, June.
    14. John F. Helliwell, 2019. "Measuring and Using Happiness to Support Public Policies," NBER Working Papers 26529, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Donato Pierno, 2024. "Does Life Satisfaction predict Economic Preferences? Evidence from cross-sectional data," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 8(1), pages 39-46, December.
    16. Overbeek, Lucy, 2021. "Rationale and design of the Healthy Brain Study: an accessible resource for understanding the human brain and how it dynamically and individually operates in its bio-social context," OSF Preprints fqmdu, Center for Open Science.
    17. Hideyuki Mizobuchi, 2017. "Measuring Socio-economic Factors and Sensitivity of Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 463-504, April.
    18. Christine Corlet Walker & Angela Druckman & Claudio Cattaneo, 2020. "Understanding the (non-)Use of Societal Wellbeing Indicators in National Policy Development: What Can We Learn from Civil Servants? A UK Case Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 911-953, August.
    19. Anastasia Charalampi & Catherine Michalopoulou & Clive Richardson, 2020. "Validation of the 2012 European Social Survey Measurement of Wellbeing in Seventeen European Countries," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 73-105, March.
    20. Fuchs, Andreas & Gröger, André & Heidland, Tobias & Wellner, Lukas, 2023. "The effect of foreign aid on migration: Global micro evidence from world bank projects," Kiel Working Papers 2257, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    21. Paleologou, Suzanna-Maria, 2022. "Happiness, democracy and socio-economic conditions: Evidence from a difference GMM estimator," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    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:osf:osfxxx:8yfzc_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.