Subjective health in relation to hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll

Abstract

This study investigated the relationships between subjective health, hedonic wellbeing (i.e. positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction), and eudaimonic wellbeing (i.e. psycho-social functioning). The sample was drawn from the Gallup World Poll and included a total of 1,567,295 individuals in 165 countries. We found that both hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing were uniquely associated with subjective health. However, the relative contributions of each dimension to subjective health varied, with negative affect demonstrating the strongest relationship with subjective health and life satisfaction demonstrating the weakest association. The moderating effects of some national-level variables were also explored.

Subjective Well-Being and Prosociality Around the Globe: Happy People Give More of Their Time and Money to Others

“…Furthermore, emotions felt recently are remembered more vividly as episodic memories than those felt longer ago and are less vulnerable to influences such as priming (Robinson & Clore, 2002a, 2002b). To form a composite of PA, we followed past research with the GWP (e.g., Diener & Tay, 2015; Helliwell & Wang, 2012; Joshanloo & Jovanovic, 2021; Kahneman & Deaton, 2010) and took the mean of two survey questions: whether or not participants had experienced smiling/laughing and enjoyment “a lot of the day yesterday” ( yes or no for each item), α = .61.…”

“…Similarly, in addition to smiling/laughing and enjoyment, participants were asked whether or not yesterday they felt well-rested , learned something new , and were treated with respect . Following past research (e.g., Diener & Tay, 2015; Helliwell & Wang, 2012; Joshanloo & Jovanovic, 2021; Kahneman & Deaton, 2010) and theory (Diener, 1984; Diener, Heintzelman, et al, 2017; Diener, Ng, et al, 2010), we treated these items as covariates rather than as components of PA. In addition, following Aknin et al (2013), we included social support as a covariate, measured as follows, “If you were in trouble, do you have relatives or friends you can count on to help you whenever you need them, or not?” Finally, since religion has been associated with both prosociality and well-being (Furrow et al, 2010; Green & Elliott, 2009; Witter et al, 1985), we also included religiosity as a covariate: “Is religion an important part of your daily life?” See Table 1 for descriptives and coding information.…”

Mattering Mediates Between Fairness and Well-being

“…However, the ways in which they do so might be mediated by culture-specific factors, such as values, norms, and tradition. Recent evidence taken from the Gallup World Poll (Joshanloo and Jovanović, 2021) appears to align with this perspective in the case of subjective well-being. As shall be discussed, we understand both mattering and fairness in similar terms.…”

Attending live sporting events predicts subjective wellbeing and reduces loneliness

“…Demographic variables largely predicted SWB and loneliness in line with previous research. Specifically, being in better health [see also ( 28 )] and within older age groups [see also ( 20 )] both predicted greater SWB across all four measures and reduced loneliness. Additionally, those living in less deprived areas reported a greater sense that life is worthwhile, higher life satisfaction, and lowered loneliness, mostly in line with previous research [e.g., SWB, ( 22 , 23 ); loneliness, ( 24 , 25 )].…”

“…Gender and age have also both been shown to impact SWB ( 20 , 26 , 27 ). Furthermore, health ( 28 ) and employment status ( 29 ) are both known predictors of SWB. These variables could plausibly impact LSE attendance, either through access (health), affordability (employment, deprivation), or motivation (age, gender), and are therefore candidate confounders that we will control for ( 30 ).…”