Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

The Utility of Between-Nation Subjective Wellbeing Comparisons Amongst Nations Within the European Social Survey

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Burns, Richard

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Kluwer Academic Publishers

Abstract

Between-nation differences in wellbeing are frequently reported. Such differences are attributed to between-nation differences in social, economic and political factors. However, there is a likelihood that between-nation differences are over-estimated as they fail to account for the extent to which wellbeing varies within-nation owing to within-nation factors. Participant data for 43,000 participants from 23 countries was obtained from wave 3 of the European Social Survey in 2006. Analyses were undertaken in a multi-level framework with citizens nested within-nation in order to derive maximum likelihood estimates and standard error which adjust for the nested data hierarchy. Participant data was adjusted for (1) a design weight which adjusted for a sampling probability reflecting their likelihood of being recruited for the study, and (2) a population weight which adjusts for the extent individuals reflected a nation’s population. Across wellbeing indicators, most variance was accounted for at the within-nation level (> 95%). Within-nation factors were the strongest drivers of wellbeing. Best linear unbiased predictions indicated that raw national aggregated well-being means over-estimate between-nation wellbeing differences. Many prior cross-national wellbeing comparisons likely overestimate between-nation differences as they fail to account for the nested data structure in which individual citizens are nested within countries. Between-nation factors were not substantive drivers of wellbeing outcomes in comparison with within-nation effects and interpretation of any between-nation effects need to be carefully considered since so little wellbeing variance is accounted for at the between-nation level.

Description

Keywords

Citation

Source

Journal of Happiness Studies

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until

2037-12-31
abcd