Confirmation of Subjective Wellbeing Set-Points: Foundational for Subjective Social Indicators

被引:0
作者
Tanja Capic
Ning Li
Robert A. Cummins
机构
[1] Deakin University,Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research
[2] The University of Melbourne,undefined
来源
Social Indicators Research | 2018年 / 137卷
关键词
Subjective social indicators; Subjective wellbeing; Set-points; Homeostasis; Homeostatically protected mood; Global life satisfaction;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The usefulness of subjective wellbeing (SWB) as a social indicator rests on understanding what controls its level when measured through self-report data. While the theory of SWB homeostasis provides a cogent explanatory framework for the control processes, this theory relies on set-points, and direct evidence for their existence rests on a single study. Cummins et al. (J Happiness Stud 15:183–206, 2014. doi:10.1007/s10902-013-9444-9) demonstrated a normal range of set-points between 71 and 90 points on a 0–100 scale, using data on global life satisfaction (GLS). These findings are consistent with homeostasis theory, which proposes that set-points account for the normal positivity of SWB while its stability is accounted for by homeostatic processes. The current paper extends the first report in two ways. First, by replicating the range of set-points using a different data set. Second, by extending the findings to homeostatically protected mood (HPMood), which is proposed to be the basic psychological molecule that homeostasis seeks to protect. Participants completed between 5 and 10 surveys. Data preparation involved the iterative elimination of scores based on significant deviation from their over-time mean score. It is confirmed that GLS and HPMood set-points are both normally distributed between 75 and 90 points. These results offer further support for the usefulness of SWB as a social indicator.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 28
页数:27
相关论文
共 49 条
[1]  
Blore JD(2011)Comparing multiple discrepancies theory to affective models of subjective wellbeing Social Indicators Research 100 1-16
[2]  
Stokes MA(1966)Emotions and values The Objectivist 5 1-9
[3]  
Mellor D(2000)Personal income and subjective well-being: A review Journal of Happiness Studies 1 133-158
[4]  
Firth L(2003)Normative life satisfaction: Measurement issues and a homeostatic model Social Indicators Research 64 225-256
[5]  
Cummins RA(2010)Subjective wellbeing, homeostatically protected mood and depression: A synthesis Journal of Happiness Studies 11 1-17
[6]  
Branden N(2014)A demonstration of set-points for subjective wellbeing Journal of Happiness Studies 15 183-206
[7]  
Cummins RA(2007)Subjective wellbeing as an affective/cognitive construct Journal of Happiness Studies 8 429-449
[8]  
Cummins RA(2015)Why people are in a generally good mood Personality and Social Psychology Review 19 235-256
[9]  
Cummins RA(1934)Personality traits associated with variations in happiness Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 29 202-212
[10]  
Cummins RA(2010)The set point theory of well-being has serious flaws: On the eve of a scientific revolution Social Indicators Research 97 7-21