1 / 44

Well-Being of Planet Earth Ed Diener Smiley Distinguished Professor of Psychology,

Well-Being of Planet Earth Ed Diener Smiley Distinguished Professor of Psychology, University of Illinois Senior Scientist, Gallup 4 th European Conference on Positive Psychology July 1- 4, 2008 Rijeka, Croatia. My Gratitude to:. The Gallup Organization.

vera
Download Presentation

Well-Being of Planet Earth Ed Diener Smiley Distinguished Professor of Psychology,

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Well-Being of Planet Earth Ed Diener Smiley Distinguished Professor of Psychology, University of Illinois Senior Scientist, Gallup 4th European Conference on Positive Psychology July 1- 4, 2008 Rijeka, Croatia

  2. My Gratitude to: • The Gallup Organization

  3. Gallup World PollFirst Survey of Planet Earth • 130+ nations • Representative samples • 130,000+ respondents • Rural areas sampled • The best poll of world ever taken Represents 96% of globe’s population

  4. Objective conditions? Have gone hungry this year 24% Cannot afford housing 21% Smoked yesterday 21% Unemployed 13% Assaulted past year 8% Infant morality 4% Life expectancy 68 years

  5. Modern conveniences: Running water in home 72% Electricity in home 83% T.V. in home 74% Computer in home 26%

  6. Signs for optimism, yet Need for improvement!-- Most evident in juxtaposing nations

  7. Cannot Afford Housing • Finland 3 % • Ireland 4 % • United Kingdom 6 % • Switzerland 8 % • Denmark 9 % • Germany 10 % • France 11 % • Spain 13 % • Belarus 40 % • Sierra Leone 62 %

  8. Striking Disparities! • Longevity Japan 82 years Botswana 36 years • Smoking Nigeria 5% Cuba 39% • Assaulted Past Year Japan .4% Burundi 33% • Gone Hungry Past Year Austria .4% Chad 78%

  9. How are we doing onSubjective Well-being? • Ladder of life • Positive Emotions • Negative Emotions • Satisfaction with Important Domains

  10. 10: Best Possible Life 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0: Worst Possible Life

  11. High on Ladder Denmark 8.0 Switzerland 7.5 Netherlands 7.5 Canada 7.4 New Zealand 7.3 United States 7.2 Venezuela 7.2

  12. Lowest Life Ladder Togo 3.2 Cambodia 3.6 Sierra Leone 3.6 Georgia 3.7 Zimbabwe 3.8 West Bank 4.7

  13. More Europe U.K. 7.0 Italy 6.9 Germany 6.6 Czech. Rep. 6.4 Greece 6.1 Poland 5.6 Croatia 5.4 Portugal 5.4 Serbia 4.6 Albania 4.6

  14. Affect Yesterday • Unpleasant Emotions • Anger • Sad and depressed • Worried and stressed • Pleasant Emotions • Enjoyment • Smiling and laughing

  15. Pleasant Emotions—Enjoyment etc. HighLow New Zealand Armenia Honduras Pakistan Panama Bangladesh Costa Rica Palestine Puerto Rico Tajikistan

  16. Unpleasant Emotions—Sad, Angry, Depressed, etc. HighestLowest Armenia Denmark Palestine Sweden Bolivia Austria Sierra Leone Japan Percent feelings lots yesterday ~ 40 % ~ 13 %

  17. Satisfaction with domains(Health, standard of living, city, job) High Low Denmark Zimbabwe Switzerland Haiti Singapore Tanzania

  18. Dissatisfied with Standard of Living • Ukraine • Georgia • Romania • Russia • Zimbabwe • Most satisfied: Ireland

  19. Planetary SWB Scorecard • Evaluating life • 40 percent dissatisfied • 40 percent doing fine • 20 percent doing very well • Affect Balance (PA – NA) • 20 % negative • 30 % positive • 50 % very positive

  20. What Predicts the Good Society?

  21. Ladder of Life evaluation correlates with: GDP per person (wealth) r = .83 Meeting basic needs (food etc.) r = .77

  22. Does Anything Cause Quality of Life Other than Money?

  23. Beyond Money: Predicting National Levels of Ladder of Life Regression Betas GDP/Capita .43 Optimism .37 Can count on others .25

  24. Beyond Money:Predicting National Positive Emotions(Betas – all but GDP significant) • GDP/capita -.03 • Count on someone for help .18 • Freedom to choose .26 • Learned something yesterday .68

  25. Beyond Money: Nation-level Unpleasant Emotions Betas • Income .15 • Control of corruption -.36 • Assaulted .27

  26. Happiness and Money? • Is it basic needs like food and water? • Or modern conveniences like electricity, telephones, and the internet?

  27. Ladder of Life Beta • Basic needs (food and shelter) .27 • Modern conveniences (telly etc.) .58 • Positive Affect • Basic needs (food and shelter) .37 • Modern conveniences (telly etc.) -.19

  28. Strongest Correlates: • Ladder of life • Modern conveniences (electricity etc.) • Pleasant Emotions • People I can count on • Unpleasant Emotions • Assaulted past year

  29. Cannot Afford Medical Care • Japan 4 % • Canada 8 % • Jordan 15 % • Iran 19 % • USA 20 % • Turkey 45 % • Romania 50 %

  30. Well-Being Accounts for Policy Use These could enormously benefit positive psychology

  31. Examples of Policies • Economic • Satisfying work, unemployment • Health • Mental health • Social • School checkups, sex work, discrimination • Environmental • Airport noise, air pollution, commuting

  32. Existing Societal Measures of Well-Being Organization of Econ. Cooperation & Development Statistics Canada GSOEP (Germany) BHPS (U.K.) Center for Disease Control (U.S.) United Nations?

  33. But what about: Adaptation? Personal, not societal?

  34. Affect Adaptation? Enjoyment, laughing, smiling Pakistan 47% v. New Zealand 88% Anger, sadness, worry, and depression Denmark 12% v. Iran 43%

  35. Conclusions National accounts of well-being can help policy makers create better societies, and Help positive psychologists prove their value

  36. Two Extremely Important Psychological Points • Circumstances and conditions matter a LOT; it is not just individual set-point. We need stronger positive societal science! • Life evaluation and affect have different predictors -- Wanting versus liking

  37. Take-Home for Positive Psychology PP has placed an emphasis on internal determinants But society, neighborhoods, organizations are also important. More development of organizational PP needed. Social psychology emphasizes the “power of the situation” Happiness is within people, but also in their circumstances too

  38. More Take-Home Messages 1. Life evaluation seems like “Wanting,” whereas affect is “Liking” 2. Money should not be dismissed as unimportant. But it does not completely predict the Ladder, and certainly not PA and NA, where social factors are more important. 3. We need accounts of well-being!

  39. Diener, Lucas,Schimmack, & Helliwell Well-being for Public Policy Oxford University Press, 2009

  40. “The most authoritative and informative book about happiness ever ^ written”

  41. Handout overheads in frontThank you, and: • Questions? • Comments? • Discussion?

More Related