IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hdl/wpaper/2109.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using a factorial survey to estimate the relative importance of well-being dimensions according to older people: insights from a repeated survey experiment in Flanders

Author

Listed:
  • Veerle Van Loon;
  • Koen Decancq;

Abstract

In this paper, we investigated the potential of a factorial survey to estimate the relative importance of the well-being dimensions of health, income, social relations, leisure and religion or spirituality, according to the views of older people. For this purpose, a factorial survey was implemented in a longitudinal online survey among 800 older adults in Flanders (the Flemish region of Belgium). The potential of the factorial survey was explored in two ways. First, we performed several within-sample test-retests to investigate the consistency of the estimated relative importance weights over time (i.e., temporal reliability). Second, we tested the feasibility of the factorial survey for the target population by studying two indicators of cognitive load: response time and response consistency. Overall, we found evidence that the factorial survey works well among a sample of older people. Health, income and social relations were the most important well-being dimensions – followed by leisure and engaging activities. Religion or spirituality appeared to be rather unimportant. The results proved to be consistent in most of the test-retest analyses. In addition, we found that respondents were able to cope well with the complexity of the factorial survey and produced a high level of response consistency within an acceptable amount of response time.

Suggested Citation

  • Veerle Van Loon; & Koen Decancq;, 2021. "Using a factorial survey to estimate the relative importance of well-being dimensions according to older people: insights from a repeated survey experiment in Flanders," Working Papers 2109, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    • Handle: RePEc:hdl:wpaper:2109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://medialibrary.uantwerpen.be/files/6663/9f9d65f0-056e-4184-87f0-06f4acfc11bb.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Layard, R. & Mayraz, G. & Nickell, S., 2008. "The marginal utility of income," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1846-1857, August.
    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. De Neve, Jan-Emmanuel & Oswald, Andrew J., 2012. "Estimating the influence of life satisfaction and positive affect on later income using sibling fixed-effects," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51523, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Crispin H. V. Cooper, 2020. "Quantitative Models of Well-Being to Inform Policy: Problems and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, April.
    3. Savatore Puglisi & Ionuț Virgil Șerban, 2019. "Beyond Gdp: Which Options To Better Represent Modern Socio-Economic Progress?," Sociology and Social Work Review, International Society for projects in Education and Research, vol. 3(1), pages 17-32, June.
    4. Tofallis, Chris, 2020. "Which formula for national happiness?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Kaiser, Caspar, 2020. "People do not adapt. New analyses of the dynamic effects of own and reference income on life satisfaction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 494-513.
    6. Deckers Thomas & Falk Armin & Schildberg-Hörisch Hannah, 2016. "Nominal or Real? The Impact of Regional Price Levels on Satisfaction with Life," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(3), pages 1337-1358, September.
    7. Bergstrom, Katy & Dodds, William, 2021. "The targeting benefit of conditional cash transfers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    8. Proto, Eugenio & Rustichini, Aldo, 2015. "Life satisfaction, income and personality," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 17-32.
    9. Marko Ledić & Ivica Rubil, 2021. "Beyond Wage Gap, Towards Job Quality Gap: The Role of Inter-Group Differences in Wages, Non-Wage Job Dimensions, and Preferences," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 523-561, June.
    10. Binder, Martin & Coad, Alex, 2013. "“I'm afraid I have bad news for you…” Estimating the impact of different health impairments on subjective well-being," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 155-167.
    11. Bonsang, Eric & Klein, Tobias J., 2012. "Retirement and subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 311-329.
    12. Kant, Shashi & Vertinsky, Ilan & Zheng, Bin, 2016. "Valuation of First Nations peoples' social, cultural, and land use activities using life satisfaction approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 46-55.
    13. Layard, Richard & Mayraz, Guy & Nickell, Stephen, 2009. "Does relative income matter? Are the critics right?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28594, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Koen Decancq & Marc Fleurbaey & Erik Schokkaert, 2015. "Happiness, Equivalent Incomes and Respect for Individual Preferences," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82, pages 1082-1106, December.
    15. Chung Choe & SeEun Jung & Ronald L. Oaxaca, 2020. "Identification and decompositions in probit and logit models," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(3), pages 1479-1492, September.
    16. Daniel Kuehnle & Christoph Wunder, 2016. "Using the Life Satisfaction Approach to Value Daylight Savings Time Transitions: Evidence from Britain and Germany," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 2293-2323, December.
    17. Néstor Gandelman & Rafael Porzecanski, 2013. "Happiness Inequality: How Much is Reasonable?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 257-269, January.
    18. Matthew D Rablen, 2012. "The promotion of local wellbeing: A primer for policymakers," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 27(3), pages 297-314, May.
    19. Stern, Nicholas, 2014. "Ethics, equity and the economics of climate change paper 2: economics and politics," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62704, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Thanasis Ziogas & Dimitris Ballas & Sierdjan Koster & Arjen Edzes, 2020. "How happy are my neighbours? Modelling spatial spillover effects of well-being," Papers 2007.11580, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hdl:wpaper:2109. 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: Santiago Burone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csbuabe.html .

    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.