Week 7 Flashcards
what are the 3 pros of money/material wealth?
- hedonic appeal of physical pleasures.
- money = greater access to positive rewards.
- material = enhanced autonomy, purpose, progress towards goals.
what are the 4 cons of money/material wealth?
- ambivalent feelings/stereotypes towards you (high competence, low warmth).
- more time earning, less time for leisure and social relationships.
- adaptation.
- is materialistic mindset good for WB?
what are the findings across nations regarding absolute income?
-SOME evidence of relation b/w wealthier nations having higher WB
-influence of other factors: political stability, cultural norms, social resources, etc.
t or f: some countries LS is lower or higher than what we would predict based on GDP?
true
what is the easterlin paradox?
at a point in time, happiness varies directly with income both among and within nations, but over time happiness does not trend upward as income continues to grow.
what are the findings of income across nations regarding changes in national income?
-increases in income have little to no effect on WB
-decreases in income may have a negative effect on WB
-paradox only applies for increases
what are the 3 possible explanations for increases in income at national level ACROSS NATIONS having little/no effect on WB but decreases negatively impacting WB?
- changes in national income are unrelated to national well-being
- desires keep pace with rising income, negating the effect of increasing national income.
- moderated relationship: ex. correlation stronger for poorer nations compared to wealthier nations (absolute income is the moderator, if you have $0, $100 increases WB. but if you have $10k, $100 does not increase WB).
what is the diminishing marginal utility function? what does this explain?
-at low income: increased income = larger increases in WB.
-at high income: increased income = smaller increases in WB.
-explains paradox!
what does the diminishing marginal utility function imply?
-implies a “satiation point”, beyond which increases in income do not provide gains in WB.
-modified easterlin paradox.
is there really a satiation point?
-there is a “weak” version: point after which increases in income provide SMALLER gains in WB.
-never actually levels off… just gets less steep.
describe stevenson & wolfers (2013) study.
-tested strong & weak versions of easterlin & modified easterlin paradox across nations.
-used gallup world poll data (155 countries).
-used $15,000 as satiation point.
FINDINGS:
-no evidence that slope flattens out beyond any “satiation point.”
-no evidence to support strong/weak versions, just shows +income = +WB.
-findings replicated.
what does easterlin’s paradox correctness seem to depend on (2)?
- methodology
- WB measure (ex. kahneman & deaton (2010): diminishing marginal returns using PA & NA, but no evidence of satiation point)
income WITHIN nations: what are the correlations b/w absolute income and WB like? what are diener & biswas-diener’s contributions?
correlations b/w income and WB small to moderate (r = .1 to .3)
diener & biswas-diener find that correlations b/w income & WB vary depending on the aspect of WB (LS: r = 0.13, PA: r = 0.13, NA: r = -0.10).
what are the 3 moderators for absolute income WITHIN NATIONS and WB?
- sex (kinda)
-ex. husband’s personal income influences both own and spouse’s life satisfaction, newer research: primary income earner* not necessarily husband. - wealth of society
-correlation stronger in poorer nations than in wealthier nations. - participant sample
-correlation weaker for college student samples, stronger for adults outside of college.
t or f: education, occupation, employment, age, domain satisfaction and marital status moderate the income-WB relationship?
false