1 / 27

The International wellbeing Index: A psychometric progress report

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

tanaya
Download Presentation

The International wellbeing Index: A psychometric progress report

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 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

  2. This is an initiative of the International Wellbeing Group. AIM-1 To examine the relative psychometric performance of a standard SWB Index in different cultural and language groups.

  3. AIM-2 To get beyond simplistic (and misleading) between-country comparisons of SWB To build understanding of WHY countries differ in their SWB

  4. Sample Demographics and Method

  5. Sample Demographics and Method

  6. The theoretical conception of the IndexIt represents the First Level Deconstruction of two global constructs.

  7. Two global constructs Satisfaction with Life as a Whole Satisfaction with Life in [country] Personal Wellbeing Index “How satisfied are you with -------” National Wellbeing Index “How satisfied are you with -------” • the economic situation in Algeria? 2. the state of the natural environment in Italy? 3. the social conditions in Spain? 4. Government in Romania? • business in Australia? 6. national security in Argentina? • your standard of living? 2. your health? 3. what you achieve in life? 4. your personal relationships? 5. how safe you feel? • feeling part of your community? 7. your future security?

  8. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Very Disatisfied Very satisfied Response Scale Standardized Scale 0-100 Normative population range for Western countries Personal Wellbeing Index = 70-80

  9. Factor Analysis

  10. Algeria Mexico Romania Spain Australia Italy Ireland Argentina Factor Analysis • All countries tested produce two clean factors (using an item-loading cut-off score of .4 • BUT, the factors emerge in different orders

  11. The strongest factor will be the one with the largest variance Factor 2 Factor 1 0 100 50 Satisfaction scale What causes one factor to be stronger than the other?

  12. SWB Homeostasis Our SWB is actively managed by a system that strives to maintain our level of happiness close to its genetically determined set-point. Set-points lie within the positive sector of the 0 – 100 range ie. between 50 - 100

  13. Control mechanism Homeostasis HI Strength of Homeostatic Control LO Distal (not at all about me) “The Government” Proximal (about me) “My integrity” Cognition “How satisfied are you with your -------” Proximal – Distal Dimension of homeostasis

  14. National wellbeing normally has the largest variance Personal wellbeing: Factor 2 National wellbeing: Factor 1 0 100 50 Satisfaction scale Why does the National Wellbeing Index normally emerge first as the strongest factor?

  15. Personal wellbeing: Factor 1 National wellbeing: Factor 2 0 100 50 Satisfaction scale BUT This will only apply if homeostasis it effective. In situations of homeostatic defeat, the pattern will be reversed

  16. Factor order Variance NWI > PWI NWI : PWI Benign Environment PWI > NWI PWI : NWI Hostile Theory:The factor order can be diagnostic of a hostile environment Prediction

  17. Algeria Mexico Romania Spain Australia Italy Ireland Argentina Factor Analysis

  18. Algeria Mexico Romania Spain Australia Italy Ireland Argentina Factor Analysis Factor Analysis

  19. Algeria Mexico Romania Spain Australia Italy Ireland Argentina Factor Analysis Factor Analysis

  20. Personal Wellbeing Index

  21. GDP/CAP PWI 90 35 30.4 77.4 80 30 73.0 72.8 71.1 71.0 69.6 70 27.8 65.6 25 24.6 60 52.3 20.9 20 50 GDP/CAP Strength $ of (x 1,000) satisfaction 40 15 30 10 8.1 7.4 20 8.8 5.6 5 10 0 0 Mexico Australia Ireland Spain Italy Romania Argentina Algeria Personal Wellbeing Index

  22. Steel, P. & Ones, D.S. (2000). Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 83, 767-81. Compared SWB and Personality

  23. Using population mean scores as data NEO-PI-R: Extraversion & Neuroticism • Predicting affect R² = .79 • Predicting SWB (happiness and satisfaction) R² = .64

  24. Hierarchical Regression Step 1:GDP Step 2: SWB R² = .76 R² = ie. Personality explains MORE of the variance in between-nation SWB than does GDP !! .41

  25. Neuroticismvs.Personal Wellbeing Index

  26. Extraversionvs.Personal Wellbeing Index

  27. Conclusions • These results are consistent with predictions based on Homeostasis Theory 2. In trying to understand why countries differ in their level of SWB, the variance is at least as informative as the mean scores. 3. Extraversion may be a good measure of cultural response bias

More Related