Theory and Validity of Life Satisfaction Scales

Jul 16, 2026

Upload by Levi

Review of the reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of global life satisfaction scales used in research and national well-being accounts. Life satisfaction measures show stability under unchanged conditions while detecting changes tied to life circumstances. Evidence for validity includes cross-national and group differences linked to objective conditions, convergence with non–self-report measures, genetic and physiological associations, systematic change around major life events, and predictive value for future behaviors such as suicide. Influences from question order, mood, and presentation mode are discussed and largely controllable; judgment processes emphasize attention, values, standards, and top-down effects.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages31

Reading Time1 h 18 min

Theory and Validity of Life Satisfaction Scales Ed Diener • Ronald Inglehart • Louis Tay Accepted: 23 April 2012 / Published online: 13 May 2012 􀀂 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012 Abstract National accounts of subjective well-being are being considered and adopted by nations. In order to be useful for policy deliberations, the measures of life satisfaction must be psychometrically sound. The reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of life satisfaction measures are reviewed. The scales are stable under unchanging conditions, but are sensitive to changes in circumstances in people’s lives. Several types of data indicate that the scales validly reﬂect the quality of respondents’ lives: (1) Differences between nations in life satisfaction associated with differences in objective conditions,(2) Differences between groups who live in different circumstances,(3) Correlations with nonselfreport measures of life satisfaction, (4) Genetic and physiological associations with life satisfaction, (5) Systematic patterns of change in the scales before, during, and after signiﬁcant life events, and (6) Prediction by life satisfaction scores of future behaviors such as suicide. The life satisfaction scales can be inﬂuenced by factors such as question order, current mood, and mode of presentation, but in most cases these can be controlled. Our model of life satisfaction judgments points to the importance of attention, values, standards, and top-down effects. Although the scales are useful in research on individual wellbeing, there are policy questions that need more analysis and research, such as which types of subjective well-being measures are most relevant to which types of policies, how standards inﬂuence scores, and how best to associate the scores with current policy deliberations. E. Diener (&) Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, 603 E. Daniel Street, Champaign, IL 61820, USA e-mail: [ediener@illinois.edu](ediener@illinois.edu) E. Diener The Gallup Organization, Washington, DC, USA R. Inglehart Higher School of Economics, Moscow and St. Petersburg, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA L. Tay Psychological Sciences, 703 Third Street, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA e-mail: [stay@purdue.edu](stay@purdue.edu) Keywords Life satisfaction 􀀂 Reliability 􀀂 Validity 􀀂 Global evaluations 􀀂 Quality of life 􀀂 Measurement 􀀂 National policy Global life satisfaction scales ask respondents to evaluate their lives as a whole on a scale ranging from very satisfying to very dissatisfying. These scales have been used by researchers for many decades, and they are now receiving interest in terms of national accounts of well-being, with the scores potentially being used to inform policy deliberations. For example, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, David Cameron, in 2010 announced that the well-being of citizens would be a government concern, and a survey of subjective well-being, including life satisfaction,

Jul 16, 2026

Upload by Levi