IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v117y2014i2p367-385.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validity of Domain Satisfaction Across Cohorts in the US

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony Bardo
  • Takashi Yamashita

Abstract

Domain satisfaction, a relatively under-researched topic in subjective well-being research, is designed to capture satisfaction in multiple aspects of life (e.g., family, health). In view of the life course perspective, perceptions toward such different domains of life are most likely influenced by the historical and social climate that individuals uniquely experience over their life span. However, little is known about whether domain satisfaction is a valid measure across cohorts, which reflect differing life experiences at each life stage. This study examines the psychometric properties (e.g., validity and reliability) of a domain satisfaction measure across seven theoretically meaningful cohorts (e.g., Baby Boomers) using a nationally representative sample of American adults from multiple waves of the General Social Survey (n = 15,302). Results from confirmatory factor analysis showed that the validity of the domain satisfaction measure was not consistent across cohorts; unlike when all samples (e.g., cohorts were not considered) were analyzed together. A series of follow-up analyses also revealed that temporally proximate cohorts that were born around the same time were more likely to be psychometrically comparable, while temporally distant cohorts were not. In summary, this study provides empirical evidence suggesting that the validity of domain satisfaction is sensitive to cohort effects, and researchers need careful consideration when comparing cohorts chronologically further apart. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony Bardo & Takashi Yamashita, 2014. "Validity of Domain Satisfaction Across Cohorts in the US," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(2), pages 367-385, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:117:y:2014:i:2:p:367-385
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-013-0351-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11205-013-0351-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-013-0351-6?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Linda K. George, 2010. "Still Happy After All These Years: Research Frontiers on Subjective Well-being in Later Life," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 65(3), pages 331-339.
    2. Gerben J. Westerhof & Anne E. Barrett, 2005. "Age Identity and Subjective Well-Being: A Comparison of the United States and Germany," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 60(3), pages 129-136.
    3. Blanchflower, David G. & Oswald, Andrew J., 2008. "Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(8), pages 1733-1749, April.
    4. Richard Easterlin, 2001. "Life Cycle Welfare: Trends and Differences," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-12, March.
    5. Ed Diener & Christie Napa-Scollon & Shigehiro Oishi & Vivian Dzokoto & Eunkook Suh, 2000. "Positivity and the Construction of Life Satisfaction Judgments: Global Happiness is not the Sum of its Parts," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 159-176, June.
    6. Ulrich Schimmack & Peter Krause & Gert Wagner & Jürgen Schupp, 2010. "Stability and Change of Well Being: An Experimentally Enhanced Latent State-Trait-Error Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 19-31, January.
    7. Krueger, Alan B. & Schkade, David A., 2008. "The reliability of subjective well-being measures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1833-1845, August.
    8. David G. Blanchflower & Andrew Oswald, 2000. "The Rising Well-Being of the Young," NBER Chapters, in: Youth Employment and Joblessness in Advanced Countries, pages 289-328, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Neal Krause, 2003. "Religious Meaning and Subjective Well-Being in Late Life," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 58(3), pages 160-170.
    10. David G. Blanchflower & Richard B. Freeman, 2000. "Youth Employment and Joblessness in Advanced Countries," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number blan00-1.
    11. Chia-Huei Wu & Grace Yao, 2006. "Do We Need to Weight Satisfaction Scores with Importance Ratings in Measuring Quality of Life?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 78(2), pages 305-326, September.
    12. van Praag, B. M. S. & Frijters, P. & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., 2003. "The anatomy of subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 29-49, May.
    13. 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.
    14. Brendan Baird & Richard Lucas & M. Donnellan, 2010. "Life Satisfaction Across the Lifespan: Findings from Two Nationally Representative Panel Studies," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 99(2), pages 183-203, November.
    15. Easterlin, Richard A., 1987. "Birth and Fortune," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 2, number 9780226180328.
    16. Richard Lucas & M. Brent Donnellan, 2012. "Estimating the Reliability of Single-Item Life Satisfaction Measures: Results from Four National Panel Studies," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 105(3), pages 323-331, February.
    17. Patricia A. Thomas, 2010. "Is It Better to Give or to Receive? Social Support and the Well-being of Older Adults," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 65(3), pages 351-357.
    18. Robert Cummins, 1996. "The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 303-328, January.
    19. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2004. "To Weight or not to Weight: The Role of Domain Importance in Quality of Life Measurement," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 163-174, September.
    20. Alex Michalos, 1980. "Satisfaction and happiness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 385-422, December.
    21. Chia-Huei Wu & Lung Chen & Ying-Mei Tsai, 2009. "Investigating Importance Weighting of Satisfaction Scores from a Formative Model with Partial Least Squares Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 351-363, February.
    22. Dov Shmotkin, 1990. "Subjective well-being as a function of age and gender: A multivariate look for differentiated trends," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 201-230, November.
    23. Mariano Rojas, 2006. "Life satisfaction and satisfaction in domains of life: is it a simple relationship?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 467-497, November.
    24. Albert Satorra & Peter Bentler, 2010. "Ensuring Positiveness of the Scaled Difference Chi-square Test Statistic," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 243-248, June.
    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. Bucciol, Alessandro & Zarri, Luca, 2020. "Wounds that time can’t heal: Life satisfaction and exposure to traumatic events," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    2. Ferdi Botha & Esperanza Vera-Toscano, 2022. "Generational Differences in Subjective Well-Being in Australia," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(5), pages 2903-2932, October.
    3. Berta Schnettler & Edgardo Miranda-Zapata & Ligia Orellana & Héctor Poblete & Germán Lobos & María Lapo & Cristian Adasme-Berríos, 2020. "Domain Satisfaction and Overall Life Satisfaction: Testing the Spillover-Crossover Model in Chilean Dual-Earner Couples," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-23, October.

    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. Chang-ming Hsieh & Qiguang Li, 2022. "Importance Weighting in the Domain-of-Life Approach to Subjective Well-Being: the Consideration of Age," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 525-540, April.
    2. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2013. "Issues in Evaluating Importance Weighting in Quality of Life Measures," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(2), pages 681-693, January.
    3. Akinori Kitsuki & Shunsuke Managi, 2023. "Importance Weighting in Subjective Well-Being Measures: Using Marginal Utilities as Weights for Domain Satisfaction," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1101-1120, March.
    4. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2016. "Domain Importance in Subjective Well-Being Measures," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 127(2), pages 777-792, June.
    5. Nicolas Loewe & Mehdi Bagherzadeh & Luis Araya-Castillo & Claudio Thieme & Joan Batista-Foguet, 2014. "Life Domain Satisfactions as Predictors of Overall Life Satisfaction Among Workers: Evidence from Chile," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 71-86, August.
    6. Jorge Guardiola & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2013. "Weighting life domains with Data Envelopment Analysis," Working Papers 1311, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    7. Fabio Sabatini & Francesco Sarracino, 2017. "Online Networks and Subjective Well-Being," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(3), pages 456-480, August.
    8. Mohsen Joshanloo, 2023. "How Stable are Life Domain Evaluations over Time? A 20-Year Study," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 791-812, February.
    9. David G. Blanchflower, 2009. "International Evidence on Well-Being," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring the Subjective Well-Being of Nations: National Accounts of Time Use and Well-Being, pages 155-226, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Edsel Beja & David Yap, 2013. "Counting Happiness from the Individual Level to the Group Level," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 621-637, November.
    11. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2019. "Importance of Health and Relative Importance of Satisfaction with One’s Own Health: A Case of Frail Immigrant Older Adults," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 81-93, May.
    12. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2018. "Importance Weighting in Client Satisfaction Measures: Lessons from the Life Satisfaction Literature," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 45-60, July.
    13. Jorge Guardiola & Andrés Picazo-Tadeo, 2014. "Building Weighted-Domain Composite Indices of Life Satisfaction with Data Envelopment Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 257-274, May.
    14. Fumarco, L. & Baert, S. & Sarracino, F., 2020. "Younger, dissatisfied, and unhealthy – Relative age in adolescence," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    15. M. Joseph Sirgy & Min Young Kim & Mohsen Joshanloo & Dong-Jin Lee & Michael Bosnjak, 2020. "The Relationship Between Domain Satisfaction and Domain Importance: The Moderating Role of Depression," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 2007-2030, August.
    16. Clara Viñas-Bardolet & Monica Guillen-Royo & Joan Torrent-Sellens, 2020. "Job Characteristics and Life Satisfaction in the EU: a Domains-of-Life Approach," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(4), pages 1069-1098, September.
    17. Valerie Møller & Benjamin J. Roberts, 2019. "The Best and Worst Times of Life for South Africans: Evidence of Universal Reference Standards in Evaluations of Personal Well-Being Using Bernheim’s ACSA," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 1319-1347, June.
    18. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2022. "Are all Life Domains Created Equal? Domain Importance Weighting in Subjective Well-Being Research," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(3), pages 1909-1925, June.
    19. Chang-Ming Hsieh, 2012. "Importance is Not Unimportant: The Role of Importance Weighting in QOL Measures," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(2), pages 267-278, November.
    20. Clara Viñas-Bardolet & Monica Guillen-Royo & Joan Torrent-Sellens, 2018. "Job characteristics and life satisfaction in Europe: A domains-of-life approach," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20180412, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.

    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:soinre:v:117:y:2014:i:2:p:367-385. 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.