The Economics of Wellbeing and Psychology: An Historical and Methodological Viewpoint

Job satisfaction and life satisfaction research (economics of wellbeing) is an established and booming research field. However, until the late 1970s, the study of the impact of economic variables on subjective wellbeing was considered to be outside the domain of economics. The main reason was the methodological hostility of orthodox economists towards incorporating "subjective" and "psychological" variables. The legacy of economics as a positive social science that dealt with observed or revealed behavior only, was a major obstacle for economists to study subjective wellbeing. The main exception was the pioneering work of Richard Easterlin in 1974, who attempted to account for the discrepancy between income increases and overall life satisfaction. Opening up the communication of economists with psychologists in happiness research, Easterlin relied on references from psychology and especially from social psychology in order to construct his arguments. Influenced by Easterlin, references to theoretical and empirical work in psychology became more apparent when happiness economics attracted more interest by the end of the 20th century. After showing its rich historical past of interaction with psychology, the paper argues that this stance is contrary to the established mainstream tradition and methodology. Further, it demonstrates that leading figures of happiness economics adopt a conscious methodological position towards interacting with psychology, and this puts them at odds with the mainstream economics methodological approach. It is also argued that the economics of happiness attitude towards psychology is linked to other important differences of methodological nature. The paper identifies three major points of diversion: utility cardinality and comparability, empirical methodology, and the specification of agents’ utility function and the ensuing policy implications.