Measures of self-reported well-being: their affective, cognitive, and other components
dc.contributor.author | Andrews, Frank M. | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | McKennell, Aubrey C. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-09-11T13:42:44Z | |
dc.date.available | 2006-09-11T13:42:44Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1980-06 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Andrews, Frank M.; McKennell, Aubrey C.; (1980). "Measures of self-reported well-being: their affective, cognitive, and other components." Social Indicators Research 8(2): 127-155. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/43702> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0303-8300 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1573-0921 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/43702 | |
dc.description.abstract | This investigation begins from the hypothesis that social indicators of perceived well-being — e.g., people's assessment of their own life quality — will, like other attudes, reflect two basic types of influences: affect and cognition. In addition, the indicators were expected to include two other components: unique variance (mainly random measurement error) and correlated measurement error. These ideas are investigated using a structural modeling approach applied to 23 assessments of life-as-a-whole from a national survey of Americans ( N=1072 ) and/or a survey of urban residents in England ( N=932 ). In both sets of data, models that included affective and cognitive factors fit significantly better than more restricted models. Furthermore, as expected, measures of (a) ‘happiness’, ‘fun’, and ‘enjoyment’ tended to be relatively more loaded with affect than were measures of (b) ‘satisfaction’, ‘success’, and ‘meeting needs’; and (c) measures designed to tap both affect and cognition tended to fall between the first two groups. In addition, the results suggest that measures employing relatively many scale points and direct assessments yield more valid indicators of people's evaluations of life-as-a-whole than do measures based on three-point scales or on explicit comparisons with other times or groups. These results contribute to basic knowledge about the nature of life quality assessments, help to explain some previously puzzling relationships with demographic factors such as age and education, and may be useful to designers of future studies of perceived well-being. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 1447210 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 3115 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | |
dc.publisher | Kluwer Academic Publishers; D. Reidel Publishing Company ; Springer Science+Business Media | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Public Health/Gesundheitswesen | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Quality of Life Research | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Microeconomics | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Sociology | en_US |
dc.subject.other | Social Sciences, General | en_US |
dc.title | Measures of self-reported well-being: their affective, cognitive, and other components | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Social Sciences (General) | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | History (General) | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Social Work | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Humanities | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Social Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, USA; Social Sciences Faculty, University of Southampton, England | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, USA; Social Sciences Faculty, University of Southampton, England | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Ann Arbor | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/43702/1/11205_2004_Article_BF00286474.pdf | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00286474 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | Social Indicators Research | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.