1 / 77

Acknowledgments

The Personal Well-Being Index and the Work of the International Well-Being Group (IWBG) Presentation to Japanese General Social Surveys (JGSS) Group, Osaka School of Commerce 8-9 February 2013 Dr Dave Webb University of Western Australia dave.webb@uwa.edu.au. Acknowledgments.

evonne
Download Presentation

Acknowledgments

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. The Personal Well-Being Index and the Work of the International Well-Being Group (IWBG)Presentation to Japanese General Social Surveys (JGSS) Group, Osaka School of Commerce8-9 February 2013DrDave WebbUniversity of Western Australiadave.webb@uwa.edu.au

  2. Acknowledgments • I would like to thank Professor Robert Cummins, Director of Australian Centre on Quality of Life (ACQOL) and members of the International Well-Being Group (IWBG) for use of some of the materials included in this presentation • I would like to especially thank Professor Noriko Iwai and staff of JGSS for inviting me to Osaka

  3. Acronyms seen today • ACQOL = Australian Centre on Quality of Life • COMQOL = Comprehensive measure of QOL • IWBG = International wellbeing group • QOL = Quality of Life • SWB = Subjective wellbeing • PWI = Personal wellbeing index • NWI = National wellbeing index • NEO-PI-R = Neuroticism, Extraversion and Openness to experience personal inventory (revised)

  4. Introduction • Why measure SWB • Introduction to PWI • Development • Current application • Work of the IWBG • Examples of current personal work • Future research • Collaboration opportunities

  5. Subjective Well-Being A positive state of mind that involves the whole life experience Why should we measure it? How do we measure it? Prof Cummins 2012

  6. Why should we measure SWB?Happy citizens....(Lyubomirsky et al 2005) • Positive perceptions of self and others • Stronger creativity and problem solving • Work harder • Create more social capital • Healthier • Live longer • Better social relationships • More self-sufficient

  7. PWI Development - History Cummins 1995 • Many diverse instruments of SWB • Many definitions • 16 studies located adopting 14 diverse approaches • Converted mean of 75.02%, SD 2.74 Cummins 1996 • Meta-analysis resulted in 173 dimensions with much shared variance • Further analysis reduced to 7 broad domains (material well-being, health, productivity, intimacy, safety, community and emotional well-being) = COMQOL

  8. PWI Development • After several years COMQOL abandoned on grounds of: • Construct validity failure (item loadings) • Conceptual: (Importance) X (satisfaction) fails to explain variance beyond independent measures and, importance adds no explained variance beyond satisfaction • 5-point and 7-point limit discriminative capacity of respondents above point of neutrality • COMQOL > PWI/NWI and Relationship between Deakin University, Melbourne and Australian Unity in 2001

  9. “How satisfied are you with your --------?” Personal relationships How people feel about the domain Personal Health Standard of living How satisfied people feel in general Achieving in life Life as a whole Spirituality/ Religion Community connectedness An over-all average [Subjective wellbeing] A value for each domain that can be used diagnostically as well as potentially an input to policy development Safety Future security Prof Cummins 2012

  10. PWI = Eight questions of satisfaction with specific life domains. How satisfied are you with…? Domains 1. your standard of living? [Standard of Living] 2. your health? [Personal Health] 3. what you are achieving in life? [Achieving in Life] 4. your personal relationships? [Personal Relationships] 5. how safe you feel? [Personal Safety] 6. feeling part of your community? [Community-Connectedness] 7. your future security? [Future Security] 8. your spirituality or religion?¨ [Spirituality – Religion] PLUS one overall: How satisfied are you overall with your life?

  11. How satisfied are you with your ----? [Jones and Thurstone 1955] 11-point, end-defined scale Completely Dissatisfied Completely Satisfied 100 0 Score * 100/(number of scale points – 1) Prof Cummins 2012

  12. National Wellbeing Index (NWI) How satisfied are you with…? • Economic situation • Natural environment • Social conditions • Government • Business • National security

  13. PWI & NWI Current situation • Since 2001/2002 adopted in over 40 countries • Translated in to more than 20 languages • Reported on in more than 120 journal articles • Dedicated section to PWI in Prof Alex MichalosEncyclopedia of QOL, Springer publishing (2013)

  14. Coverage • Ireland • Mexico • Croatia • Germany • Australia • Austria • Spain • Portugal • Columbia • Argentina • China (Hong Kong, Macau, Tibet) • Thailand • New Zealand • USA • Canada • India • Algeria • Iran

  15. Coverage areas • Measurement; development, application and validation • Conceptual & Theory-building (homeostasis, itemisation and face validity) • Economy (wealth, income, material, poverty, capitalism, social class, work and job type • Relationships (parental, spousal, love, attachment, belonging, loneliness) • Consumers and business interface • Religion and spirituality • Community living (aged and young-persons) • Community development • Health (illness, care-giving, mental and depression, stress, yogic lifestyle, substance abuse) • Affect and mood states • Crime and security • Internet usage • Ageing

  16. Homeostasis and Set Point Theory

  17. Australian Unity Studies • Since 2001 = 28 surveys on diverse themes of life in Australia e.g., work, family and relationships, threat of terrorism, climate change and natural disasters, personal health and finance, country living • Sample = approximately n= 2,000 per survey period across all regional states = rich within country picture (Total n = 52,000 approximately)

  18. Prof Cummins 2012

  19. Personal Wellbeing Index2001 - 2011 Key: a = September 11 e = Athens Olympics i = Labor Government Elected m = Labor government re-elected b = Bali Bombing f = Asian Tsunami j = Stock market collapse n = Qld/Vic floods c = Pre-Iraq War g = Second Bali Bombing k = Fires and floods d = Hussein Depose h = New IR Laws l = Stock market recovery Prof Cummins 2012

  20. Personal Wellbeing Index2001 - 2011 This represents a 3.0 percentage point variation Key: a = September 11 e = Athens Olympics i = Labor Government Elected m = Labor government re-elected b = Bali Bombing f = Asian Tsunami j = Stock market collapse n = Qld/Vic floods c = Pre-Iraq War g = Second Bali Bombing k = Fires and floods d = Hussein Depose h = New IR Laws l = Stock market recovery Prof Cummins 2012

  21. 100 90 80 76.4 73.4 70 Subjective Wellbeing Mean = 74.9 60 50 SD = 0.8 40 30 20 10 0 Normative rangeusing survey mean scores as data (N=25 survey periods) Very satisfied Very dissatisfied Prof Cummins 2012

  22. Why is SWB held so steady? Homeostasis Just like we hold body temperature steady • SWB Homeostasis is a management system that acts to keep people feeling normally positive about themself and so resists change Prof Cummins 2012

  23. 90 60 Each person has a set-point for their SWB These set-points lie between 60 and 90 Range for individual set-points Set-points are always POSITIVE ie above 50 Prof Cummins 2012

  24. When nothing much is happening to them, people rate how they feel about their life in terms of their set-point for SWB Each person has a set-point for their SWB 90 The average set-point 75 60 Time Prof Cummins 2012

  25. Overwhelming negative challenges Subjective wellbeing Homeostasis can fail The potential result of SWB loss is depression Prof Cummins 2012

  26. What determines whether we can defend ourselves against homeostatic defeat? Resilience • It is the power to defend wellbeing against sources of threat, such as poverty, ill-health and other negative life events • It is a balance between personal resources and the level of challenge Prof Cummins 2012

  27. SWB constantly under challenge, but is well protected Subjective Wellbeing [normal] X Challenges External resources (eg. Relationships, Money) http://www.asianoffbeat.com/default.asp?display=1165 Prof Cummins 2012

  28. Income is an external resource that enhances resilience 81 Total N ≈ 30,000 80 79.2 * 79 78.3 78.0 * 78 76.5 77 Subjective wellbeing * 76.3 76 * 74.9 75 Normal Range 73.9 74 73.0 73 71.7 72 71 <$15 $15-30 $31-60 $61-90 $91-120 $121-150 $150+ Median Household Income ($'000) Prof Cummins 2012

  29. Internal resources X Subjective wellbeing Challenges External resources (eg. relationships, money) Internal resources (eg. Finding meaning, rationalising event) • God is testing me • It wasn’t my fault • I didn’t need that vase Prof Cummins 2012

  30. The use of internal resources When we fail to control the world around us (Primary Control failure) we engage Secondary Control to protect SWB http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Japanese_car_accident_blur.jpg “It wasn’t my fault” reasons (insert name here!)

  31. Subjective wellbeing Bad stuff X Internal resources (eg. blaming someone else) External resources (eg. relationships, money) Homeostasis failure The result of subjective wellbeing loss is depression X Prof Cummins 2012

  32. Predictions for homeostasis theory • The relationship between the strength of challenge to homeostasis and SWB is non-linear • The level of challenge to homeostasis is cumulative over sources of stress • Of themselves, ill-health and disability only weakly challenge homeostasis • Only the person concerned is qualified to report on their own subjective wellbeing. Prof Cummins 2012

  33. Homeostasis can be challenged by: • Chronic pain (arthritis) • Chronic stress (informal carers) • Lack of intimacy • Living conditions (homelessness) • Incarceration (prisoners) • Poverty (and loss of wealth) • Lack of purpose in life Prof Cummins 2012

  34. High SWB ? Low Very Weak Very Strong Stressor So, what is the Relationship Between negative events (stressors) and SWB? Prof Cummins 2012

  35. Dominant source of control Homeostasis DISTRESS High 75 SWB Threshold Low No stress High stress Stress Level of environmental challenge The Relationship Between Stress and SWB Prof Cummins 2012

  36. Does the presence of a medical condition automatically mean low SWB? Prof Cummins 2012

  37. 80 76.3 78 75.7 76.4 76 73.9 73.7 74 SWB 73.3 72 71.0 70 68 66 64.8 64 62 61.0 60 Blood Diabetes Heart Asthma Arthritis Depression Anxiety pressure problems Subjective Wellbeing is generally insensitive to most medical conditions Normative range NB. The medical condition must be consciously experienced as strongly aversive in order to affect subjective wellbeing Prof Cummins 2012

  38. Underweight Normal Overweight Obese 6.9% N=499 42.0% N=3044 35.6% N=2575 11.2% N=810 2.9% N=207 0.8% N=57 0.3 N=22 Mild Moderate Severe Very severe 77 76.1 76.6 75.3 75.5 Normal Range 75 73.9 73.4 73 SWB 72.7 71.4 71 69 67 66.0 65 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 BMI Body Mass Index (PWI) Prof Cummins 2012

  39. The level of challenge to homeostasis is cumulative over sources of stress Prof Cummins 2012

  40. Household structure 3.7 point change Prof Cummins 2012

  41. Household structure 3.7 point change 10.4 point change Prof Cummins 2012

  42. Household structure 12.2 point change Prof Cummins 2012

  43. Conclusion: Sources of challenge are additive Prof Cummins 2012

  44. The Personal Well-Being Index and the Work of the International Well-Being Group (IWBG)

  45. The International wellbeing Index: A psychometric progress report Robert A. CUMMINS Deakin University, Australia Beatriz ARITA Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Mexico Sergiu BALTATESCU University of Oradea, Romania Jozef DZUKA Presov University, SLOVAKIA Ferran CASAS University of Girona, Spain Anna LAU The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong Linda Luz GUERRERO Social Weather Stations,Philippines Gerard O'NEILL Amárach Consulting, IrelandHabib TILIOUINE University of Oran, AlgeriaGraciela TONON Universidad Nacional de Lomas de Zamora, ArgentinaAnnapia VERRI Neurologic Institute C. Mondino and University of Pavia,Italy. Joar VITTERSO University of Tromso, Norway International Well-Being Group (IWBG)

  46. This is an initiative of the IWBG AIM #1 To examine the relative psychometric performance of a standard SWB Index in different cultural and language groups. International Well-Being Group (IWBG)

  47. AIM #2 To get beyond simplistic (and misleading) between-country comparisons of SWB To build understanding of WHY countries differ in their SWB International Well-Being Group (IWBG)

  48. Sample Demographics and Method International Well-Being Group (IWBG)

  49. Sample Demographics and Method International Well-Being Group (IWBG)

More Related