IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v123y2015i1p241-266.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stability of Boundaries Between Response Options of Response Scales: Does ‘Very Happy’ Remain Equally Happy over the Years?

Author

Listed:
  • Tineke DeJonge
  • Wim Kalmijn
  • Ruut Veenhoven
  • Lidia Arends

Abstract

The differences between response scales in number and wording of response options make it hard to compare data from survey research and to perform research syntheses. A recent method that we have developed to tackle this problem is rooted in the idea that the transition points on a bounded continuum, on which verbal response options from a primary scale transit from one point to another, for instance from ‘happy’ to ‘very happy’, remain unchanged over time. The idea behind this is that although people may change their perception of, for example, their own happiness intensity over time, they are assumed not to change the degree of appreciation they attribute to the terms used to label response options. This is an important assumption for research syntheses that requires that everything remains unchanged, except for the change of interest. It means that if our method is applied to measurements at distinct points in time, differences in estimates of the mean and standard deviation can be attributed solely to changes in the frequency distributions on the primary scale. In this paper we apply the method to happiness and show that it is reasonable to assume that the transition points between the response options are stable over time. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Tineke DeJonge & Wim Kalmijn & Ruut Veenhoven & Lidia Arends, 2015. "Stability of Boundaries Between Response Options of Response Scales: Does ‘Very Happy’ Remain Equally Happy over the Years?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 241-266, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:123:y:2015:i:1:p:241-266
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-014-0735-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11205-014-0735-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-014-0735-2?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. Robert Cummins, 2003. "Normative Life Satisfaction: Measurement Issues and a Homeostatic Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 225-256, November.
    2. Wim Kalmijn, 2013. "From Discrete 1 to 10 Towards Continuous 0 to 10: The Continuum Approach to Estimating the Distribution of Happiness in a Nation," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(2), pages 549-557, January.
    3. Guven, Cahit & Senik, Claudia & Stichnoth, Holger, 2012. "You can’t be happier than your wife. Happiness gaps and divorce," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 110-130.
    4. Tineke Jonge & Ruut Veenhoven & Lidia Arends, 2014. "Homogenizing Responses to Different Survey Questions on the Same Topic: Proposal of a Scale Homogenization Method Using a Reference Distribution," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 275-300, May.
    5. Hock-Eam Lim, 2008. "The Use of Different Happiness Rating Scales: Bias and Comparison Problem?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 87(2), pages 259-267, June.
    6. W. Kalmijn & L. Arends & R. Veenhoven, 2011. "Happiness Scale Interval Study. Methodological Considerations," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 497-515, July.
    7. Hongkoo Lee & Kyong-Dong Kim & Doh Shin, 1982. "Perceptions of quality of life in an industrializing country: The case of the Republic of Korea," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 297-317, April.
    8. Frijters, Paul & Johnston, David W. & Shields, Michael A., 2008. "Happiness Dynamics with Quarterly Life Event Data," IZA Discussion Papers 3604, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Tineke DeJonge & Ruut Veenhoven & Wim Kalmijn & Lidia Arends, 2016. "Pooling Time Series Based on Slightly Different Questions About the Same Topic Forty Years of Survey Research on Happiness and Life Satisfaction in The Netherlands," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(2), pages 863-891, March.
    2. Tineke Jonge & Ruut Veenhoven & Lidia Arends, 2014. "Homogenizing Responses to Different Survey Questions on the Same Topic: Proposal of a Scale Homogenization Method Using a Reference Distribution," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 275-300, May.
    3. Haya Al-Ajlani & Luc Ootegem & Elsy Verhofstadt, 2020. "Does Well-Being Vary with an Individual-Specific Weighting Scheme?," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 15(5), pages 1285-1302, November.
    4. Tineke DeJonge & Ruut Veenhoven & Linda Moonen & Wim Kalmijn & Jacqueline Beuningen & Lidia Arends, 2016. "Conversion of Verbal Response Scales: Robustness Across Demographic Categories," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 331-358, March.
    5. Pei-shan Liao, 2014. "More Happy or Less Unhappy? Comparison of the Balanced and Unbalanced Designs for the Response Scale of General Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 1407-1423, December.
    6. Main, Gill & Montserrat, Carme & Andresen, Sabine & Bradshaw, Jonathan & Lee, Bong Joo, 2019. "Inequality, material well-being, and subjective well-being: Exploring associations for children across 15 diverse countries," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 3-13.
    7. Andrew E. Clark & Claudia Senik, 2010. "Will GDP growth increase happiness in developing countries?," PSE Working Papers halshs-00564985, HAL.
    8. Cassondra Batz & Scott Parrigon & Louis Tay, 2016. "The Impact of Scale Transformations on National Subjective Well-Being Scores," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 129(1), pages 13-27, October.
    9. Christian Bjørnskov, 2010. "How Comparable are the Gallup World Poll Life Satisfaction Data?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 41-60, March.
    10. Anna Maffioletti, Agata Maida, Francesco Scacciati, 2019. "Happiness, life satisfaction, well-being: survey design and response analysis," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 16(2), pages 277-312, December.
    11. Francesca Cornaglia & Naomi E. Feldman & Andrew Leigh, 2014. "Crime and Mental Well-Being," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(1), pages 110-140.
    12. Andrew E. Clark, 2015. "SWB as a Measure of Individual Well-Being," Working Papers halshs-01134483, HAL.
    13. Andrew E. Clark, 2016. "Adaptation and the Easterlin Paradox," Creative Economy, in: Toshiaki Tachibanaki (ed.), Advances in Happiness Research, edition 1, chapter 0, pages 75-94, Springer.
    14. Andrew E. Clark & Conchita D’Ambrosio & Simone Ghislandi, 2016. "Adaptation to Poverty in Long-Run Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(3), pages 591-600, July.
    15. Claire Durand & Luis Patricio Peña Ibarra & Nadia Rezgui & David Wutchiett, 2022. "How to combine and analyze all the data from diverse sources: a multilevel analysis of institutional trust in the world," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1755-1797, June.
    16. Andrew E. Clark, 2021. "Demography and well-being," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 19(1), pages 23-28.
    17. Andrew E. Clark & Anthony Lepinteur, 2022. "Pandemic Policy and Life Satisfaction in Europe," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 68(2), pages 393-408, June.
    18. Muhammad Ibrahim & Sim Chung, 2003. "Quality of Life of Residents Living near Industrial Estates in Singapore," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 203-225, February.
    19. Kaiser, Caspar, 2018. "People do not adapt to income changes: A re-evaluation of the dynamic effects of (reference) income on life satisfaction with GSOEP and UKHLS data," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-07, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    20. Jacolyn Norrish & Dianne Vella-Brodrick, 2008. "Is the Study of Happiness a Worthy Scientific Pursuit?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 87(3), pages 393-407, July.

    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:123:y:2015:i:1:p:241-266. 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.