The name is absent



Figure 1. Early Cross-Country Surveys of Subjective Well-Being

1.5-


Gallup, 1946 (happiness)


Tension Study, 1948 (satisfaction)


Gallup, 1949 (happiness)


1.0-


0.5-


o.o-



•NOR

• AUS.

/4 USA

4≡r


∙AUS


∙≡a*a


-0.5-


X
ω
■о
c


-1.0-


• FRA


∙FRA


• FRA


-1.5-


y = -12.62+1.44*ln(x) [se=0.40]. -


Correlation=O .931


y =-5.05+0.60*ln(x) [se=0.28]. -

Correlation=0.623


y — -11.42+1.30*ln(x) [se=0.73]

Coττelation=0.622


ω

¢5


.5    1    2    4    8    16 32


,5.     1     2     4     8     16    32


.5     1     2     4     8     16    32


1.5- Patterns of Human Concerns, 1960


(satisfaction, ladder)


World Survey IΠ, 1965
(happiness)


.g

■»


1.0-


• CUB.


∙USA


,<⅜SA


0.5-


∙EGY.


0.0-


-0.5-


-LQ-


-1.5-


' ∙B⅛k)L


∙JPW" ∙FRG


•FRA


• IND.


∙ITA


y =-2.85+0.36*ln(x) [se=0.20]. -


• DOM


Correlation=0.482


y = -1.79+0-21*ln(x) [se=0.18].

Correlation=OA 13.


.5    1    2    4    8    16 32 .5


1     2     4     8    16   32


Real GDP per capita (thousands of dollars, log scale)

Notes: Well-being data are aggregated into an index by running an ordered probit regression of happiness or satisfaction on country fixed
effects separately for each survey. Income data were extracted from Maddison (2007) and reflect estimates of real GDP per capita at
purchasing power parity in 1990 U.S. dollars. Dashed lines are fitted from OLS regressions of this well-being index on log GDP. Country
abbreviations in all figures are standard ISO country codes.

Gallup 1946, Happiness: Data were extracted from Cantril (1951), who reports on polls by four Gallup affiliates. Countries included are
Canada, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Respondents were asked, “In general, how happy would you say you are—very
happy, fairly happy, or not very happy?”

Tension Study 1948, Satisfaction: Data were extracted from Buchanan and Cantril (1953), reporting on a UNESCO study of “Tensions
Affecting International Understanding.” Countries included are Australia, France, and Germany. Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Mexico, the
United Kingdom, and the United States. Respondents were asked, “How satisfied are you with the way you are getting on now?—very, all
right, or dissatisfied?”

Gallup 1949, Happiness: Data were drawn from Strunk (1950). Countries included are Australia, Canada, France, the Netherlands, Norway,
the United Kingdom, and the United States. Respondents were asked the same question as the 1946 Gallup surveys.

Patterns of Human Concerns 1960, Satisfaction: Data were extracted from tabulations by Cantril (1965), as reported in Veenhoven (2007).
Countries include Brazil, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, Germany, India, Japan, Nigeria, Panama, Poland, United States, and
Yugoslavia; data from the Philippines are missing. Data for the United States were tabulated from the Interuniversity Consortium for Political
and Social Research. Surveys were run from 1957 to 1963 using Cantril’s “Self-Anchoring Striving Scale,” which probes about the best and
worst possible futures, then shows a picture of a ten-step ladder and asks, “Here is a picture of a ladder. Suppose that we say the top of the
ladder [pointing] represents the best possible life for you and the bottom [pointing] represents the worst possible life for you. Where on the
ladder [moving finger rapidly up and down ladder] do you feel you personally stand at the
present time?”

World Survey III 1965, Happiness: Data were extracted from Easterlin (1974, table 7), who reported cross-tabulations for France, Germany,
Italy, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and the United Kingdom from the World Survey III and added data for the United States from the
October 1966 AIPO poll and for Japan from the 1958 survey of Japanese national character. Respondents were asked the same question as in
note b. Easterlin reports only the proportion “not very happy” for Japan; hence we infer the well-being index based only on the lower cutpoint
of the ordered probit regression run on the eight other countries.

Figures—1



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS
4. Measuring and Testing Advertising-Induced Rotation in the Demand Curve
5. The name is absent
6. Modelling the Effects of Public Support to Small Firms in the UK - Paradise Gained?
7. Co-ordinating European sectoral policies against the background of European Spatial Development
8. Opciones de política económica en el Perú 2011-2015
9. The name is absent
10. Sectoral specialisation in the EU a macroeconomic perspective
11. Initial Public Offerings and Venture Capital in Germany
12. Language discrimination by human newborns and by cotton-top tamarin monkeys
13. LAND-USE EVALUATION OF KOCAELI UNIVERSITY MAIN CAMPUS AREA
14. Testing for One-Factor Models versus Stochastic Volatility Models
15. Land Police in Mozambique: Future Perspectives
16. Modeling industrial location decisions in U.S. counties
17. The name is absent
18. The Employment Impact of Differences in Dmand and Production
19. A multistate demographic model for firms in the province of Gelderland
20. Secondary school teachers’ attitudes towards and beliefs about ability grouping