IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jhappi/v20y2019i2d10.1007_s10902-018-9965-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Capturing Affective Well-Being in Daily Life with the Day Reconstruction Method: A Refined View on Positive and Negative Affect

Author

Listed:
  • Dave Möwisch

    (German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF))

  • Florian Schmiedek

    (German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF))

  • David Richter

    (German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin))

  • Annette Brose

    (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)

Abstract

In the last years, there has been a shift from traditional measurements of affective well-being to approaches such as the day reconstruction method (DRM). While the traditional approaches often assess trait level differences in well-being, the DRM allows examining affective dynamics in everyday contexts. The latter may ultimately explain why some people feel more happy than others (e.g., because they experience more gratification during everyday experiences). Even though DRM research has increased in the last years, little is known about the structure of affective well-being in everyday life, and potential structural differences of affect at the within- and between-person level have rarely been considered. We thus thoroughly examined the structure of affective well-being in daily life, using data from a nationally representative sample (N = 2401) of the German Socioeconomic Panel Innovation Sample that were obtained with the DRM. Multilevel structural equation models revealed that (1) affective well-being in daily life cannot be reduced to the two global dimensions positive and negative affect (PA and NA) but that the structure of NA is more nuanced; (2) the emerging subfacets of NA have distinct associations with global indicators of well-being (e.g., life satisfaction); (3) there are structural differences of affective well-being at the within- and between-person level, and (4) the relationships between affect subfacets and activities such as “work” can be opposed at the within- and between-person level. These results show that a more differentiated view on the structure of affect contributes to a better understanding of affective well-being in everyday life.

Suggested Citation

  • Dave Möwisch & Florian Schmiedek & David Richter & Annette Brose, 2019. "Capturing Affective Well-Being in Daily Life with the Day Reconstruction Method: A Refined View on Positive and Negative Affect," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 641-663, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jhappi:v:20:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10902-018-9965-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10902-018-9965-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10902-018-9965-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10902-018-9965-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ed Diener & Louis Tay, 2014. "Review of the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(1), pages 255-267, March.
    2. Stefan Engeser & Nicola Baumann, 2016. "Fluctuation of Flow and Affect in Everyday Life: A Second Look at the Paradox of Work," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 105-124, February.
    3. Ivana Anusic & Richard E. Lucas & M. Brent Donnellan, 2017. "The Validity of the Day Reconstruction Method in the German Socio-economic Panel Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 213-232, January.
    4. Andreas Knabe & Steffen Rätzel & Ronnie Schöb & Joachim Weimann, 2010. "Dissatisfied with Life but Having a Good Day: Time-use and Well-being of the Unemployed," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(547), pages 867-889, September.
    5. Kunzmann, Ute & Richter, David & Schmukle, Stefan C., 2013. "Stability and Change in Affective Experience Across the Adult Life Span: Analyses With a National Sample From Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(6), pages 1086-1095.
    6. Robin M. Hogarth & Mariona Portell & Anna Cuxart, 2007. "What Risks Do People Perceive in Everyday Life? A Perspective Gained from the Experience Sampling Method (ESM)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 1427-1439, December.
    7. Robin Hogarth & Mariona Portell & Anna Cuxart, 2007. "What risks do people perceive in everyday life? A perspective gained from the experience sampling method (ESM)," Economics Working Papers 1005, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    8. Albert Satorra & Peter Bentler, 2001. "A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 66(4), pages 507-514, December.
    9. David Richter & Jürgen Schupp, 2015. "The SOEP Innovation Sample (SOEP IS)," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 135(3), pages 389-400.
    10. Wido G. M. Oerlemans & Arnold B. Bakker & Ruut Veenhoven, 2011. "Finding the Key to Happy Aging: A Day Reconstruction Study of Happiness," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 66(6), pages 665-674.
    11. Ed Diener & Frank Fujita & Louis Tay & Robert Biswas-Diener, 2012. "Purpose, Mood, and Pleasure in Predicting Satisfaction Judgments," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(3), pages 333-341, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dave Möwisch & Annette Brose & Florian Schmiedek, 2021. "Do Higher Educated People Feel Better in Everyday Life? Insights From a Day Reconstruction Method Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 227-250, January.
    2. Lingling Su & Suhong Zhou & Mei-Po Kwan & Yanwei Chai & Xue Zhang, 2022. "The impact of immediate urban environments on people’s momentary happiness," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(1), pages 140-160, January.
    3. Qinglu Wu & Junfeng Zhao & Guoxiang Zhao & Xiaoming Li & Hongfei Du & Peilian Chi, 2022. "Affective Profiles and Psychosocial Adjustment among Chinese Adolescents and Adults with Adverse Childhood Experiences: A Person-Centered Approach," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 3909-3927, December.
    4. Eva Asselmann & Jule Specht, 2023. "Climbing the Career Ladder Does Not Make You Happy: Well-being Changes in the Years Before and After Becoming a Leader," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1037-1058, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tobias Wolf & Maria Metzing & Richard E. Lucas, 2022. "Experienced Well-Being and Labor Market Status: The Role of Pleasure and Meaning," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 691-721, September.
    2. Dave Möwisch & Annette Brose & Florian Schmiedek, 2021. "Do Higher Educated People Feel Better in Everyday Life? Insights From a Day Reconstruction Method Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 227-250, January.
    3. Renaud Gaucher, 2022. "The Work Day Reconstruction Method: an adaptation of the Day Reconstruction Method to the work setting," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(6), pages 4487-4509, December.
    4. Leonhard K. Lades & Kate Laffan & Till O. Weber, 2020. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Working Papers 202003, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    5. Noort, Mark C. & Reader, Tom W. & Gillespie, Alex, 2019. "Speaking up to prevent harm: a systematic review of the safety voice literature," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100774, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Karen Bartholomeyczik & Michael T. Knierim & Christof Weinhardt & Gabriele Oettingen & Ulrich Ebner-Priemer, 2024. "Capturing Flow Experiences in Everyday Life: A Comparison of Recall and Momentary Measurement," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 1-26, August.
    7. Paul Dolan & Laura Kudrna & Arthur Stone, 2017. "The Measure Matters: An Investigation of Evaluative and Experience-Based Measures of Wellbeing in Time Use Data," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 57-73, October.
    8. Schröder Carsten & König Johannes & Fedorets Alexandra & Goebel Jan & Grabka Markus M. & Lüthen Holger & Metzing Maria & Schikora Felicitas & Liebig Stefan, 2020. "The economic research potentials of the German Socio-Economic Panel study," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 21(3), pages 335-371, September.
    9. Christian Scheve & Frederike Esche & Jürgen Schupp, 2017. "The Emotional Timeline of Unemployment: Anticipation, Reaction, and Adaptation," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 1231-1254, August.
    10. Huang, Li & Devlin, Nancy & Chen, Gang & Dalziel, Kim, 2024. "A happiness approach to valuing health states for children," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    11. Lades, Leonhard K. & Laffan, Kate & Weber, Till O., 2021. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    12. Ivana Anusic & Richard E. Lucas & M. Brent Donnellan, 2017. "The Validity of the Day Reconstruction Method in the German Socio-economic Panel Study," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 213-232, January.
    13. Peter M. Wiedemann & Frederik Freudenstein & Christoph Böhmert & Joe Wiart & Rodney J. Croft, 2017. "RF EMF Risk Perception Revisited: Is the Focus on Concern Sufficient for Risk Perception Studies?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-13, June.
    14. Rolando Esteban Liranzo-Gómez & Antonio Torres-Valle & Ulises Javier Jauregui-Haza, 2024. "Risk Perception Assessment of Sargassum Blooms in Dominican Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, March.
    15. Steudner, Tobias, 2021. "The Effects of Positive Feelings and Arousal on Privacy Decision-Making," 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference / Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world 238055, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    16. Leonhard K. Lades & Liam Delaney, 2024. "Self-control failures, as judged by themselves," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Laura Vieten & Anne Marit Wöhrmann & Alexandra Michel, 2022. "Work-Time Control and Exhaustion: Internal Work-to-Home Interference and Internal Home-to-Work Interference as Mediators," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-17, March.
    18. Galiani, Sebastian & Gertler, Paul & Bando, Rosangela, 2016. "Non-contributory pensions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 47-58.
    19. Ruth Hancock & Marcello Morciano & Stephen Pudney & Francesca Zantomio, 2015. "Do household surveys give a coherent view of disability benefit targeting?: a multisurvey latent variable analysis for the older population in Great Britain," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 178(4), pages 815-836, October.
    20. Matthias Lühr & Maria K. Pavlova & Maike Luhmann, 2022. "They are Doing Well, but is it by Doing Good? Pathways from Nonpolitical and Political Volunteering to Subjective Well-Being in Age Comparison," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 1969-1989, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jhappi:v:20:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s10902-018-9965-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.