Lecture 7: Happiness across nations, Money & Religion Flashcards
1
Q
What is the link between money and happiness?
A
- Must keep in mind considerable complexity (First, the link between income and happiness is stronger when we define happiness as life satisfaction; the relationship is weaker if we consider emotional experience. Money does less to foster moments of joy, but can generate a sense of satisfaction. Second, although income has an overall positive correlation with happiness, it is stronger at lower levels of income. Said another way, increasing income has diminishing returns for happiness)
- At very high levels of income, it takes large amounts of money to improve satisfaction only slightly.
- Within most countries, the correlation between income and happiness is relatively small.
- When we look across countries, we see more substantial differences in average income—and the benefits that can come with it. Growing national wealth can improve the wellbeing of citizens.
2
Q
What is the Gallup World Poll?
A
- Representative sample of >95% world population (approx. 1000 people in pretty much every place on earth with the exception of a few)
- Survey approach (Differs based on country/nation you are surveying. In North America they could call people however in Africa they would go door to door.
- SWB: PA, NA, ‘ladder’ satisfaction, Social resources (respect, using skills, learning, to compare these to income and wealth
3
Q
What were the major money findings of the GWP?
A
- Money predicts SWB, more for satisfaction (Increasing standard of living increases satisfaction)
- Feelings more impacted by social resources
- National income predicts above individual (It’s nice to live in a rich society. Some, but small, ‘relative deprivation’. Likely a ‘world standard’)
- Rising incomes over time can increase SWB (cf. previous, smaller research)
4
Q
Does it matter what we do with money?
A
- Generally, money has benefits
- But, what we do with it is important
- Policy implications for nations?
- Consider materialism (& SWB) Video: Kasser & high price of materialism. The more that people value materialism (i.e., consumerism society) the lower their well-being and prosocial. Having intrinsic values produce higher quality motivation (community-oriented, relationships).
5
Q
What is the relationship between prosocial spending and happiness?
A
Spending money on others seems to facilitate
happiness
6
Q
What was the initial study that was published in science about pro social spending?
A
- Initial study in science
- U.S. survey data
- Longitudinally, before/after bonus ‘windfall’*
- Experimentally (5$ vs. $20; self vs. other)
- Recruited undergrads and gave them either 5 or 20 dollars (amount of money didn’t seem to be important) and they also randomly assigned people to spend the money on themselves or someone else. What they found is that people who spent the money on other people were happier at the end of the day than those who spent It on themselves. Seems as though spending money on others is causing happiness.
- A ‘double’ affective forecasting error (people asked to think if they would be happier to spend it on themselves or others and they often thought they would be happier if it was spent on themselves and if they had more money, neither of which seemed to be true when actually tested)
7
Q
What did the study that examined sharing find?
A
- that sharing/giving has a similar effect in young
- First, the child meets the puppet, then the child is given eight treats. Then the child gives the experimenters extra treat to puppet. Finally, the child gives their own treat to the puppet.
- They found, through ratings of happiness by coders, that children were happiest when they shared/gave their treat to the puppet
8
Q
What is the relationship between the self-determination theory and pro-social spending?
A
- as a guide to when spending on others boosts moods
- Relatedness (close vs. distant others. More of a boost when you spend on people you’re close to. Experiencing with someone (e.g., buying someone Starbucks and watching them enjoy it, experience more boots)
- Competence (specific impact- people felt better donating to one charity than tey did donating to another)
- Autonomy (choice)
9
Q
What has the previous research on SWB found?
A
- Particular religion not important to SWB
- Though could consider specific teaching empirically
- Participation (i.e., involvement in a religious community) has been associated with SWB
10
Q
What kinds of questions did Deiner et al., ask in their study?
A
- Is religion actually associated with SWB? (consider atheist critics, counter arguments)
- When/where are the benefits of religion greater?
- Why are many in developed nations leaving
religion? - Perhaps religion helps SWB more in difficult
circumstances? - Potential mediators: respect, support, meaning
11
Q
Describe Study 1 in Diener et al.’s religion research
A
Study 1: USA
- Representative sample. Nationwide
- Survey (self report) methods
- Demographics, SWB, religious importance, circumstances
- Results: Religious importance ranged 44% (Vermont) to 88% (Mississippi) (states). Difficult circumstances associated with religion. Difficult circumstances associated with lower SWB (as expected), but religion seemed to help. Religion seems to be a buffer in difficult states (find this pattern at the level of state average and at the individual). Association is stronger when you look at the state level which suggests that the notion of societal fit.
12
Q
What was the method of study 2?
A
- Gallup world Poll (Representative sample of >95% world population, Survey approach
- SWB (PA, NA, Ladder)
- Religion important? Attendance?
- Difficult circumstances (income, education, basic and safety needs)
13
Q
What were the results of study 2?
A
- About 68% of the world finds religion important daily
- Much variation across world (99% to 16%)
- CANADA at 45%; below mean, below US (66%)
14
Q
What are some more GWP results about reliigon
A
- Difficult circumstances associated with more religion
- National circumstances seem to produce religiosity more than indvidual circumstances
- Religiosity predicts lower evaluations (E.g., togo vs. denmark)
- BUT, this eliminated or reversed when controlling for circumstances
- Thus, religion seems to be helping with bad circumstances
- Religion less important in good circumstances
15
Q
What are the potential mediators in religion and happiness?
A
-Social support, meaning, and respect associated with religion & SWB
• Similar pattern:
– Support, respect, & SWB generally high in good circumstances (regardless)
– Support, respect, & SWB boosted by religion in poor circumstances
• Anomaly: meaning and purpose higher with
religion even in good circumstances
– But without the SWB ‘gain’
