Advertisement

Born to Be Mild? Cohort Effects Don’t (Fully) Explain Why Well-Being Is U-Shaped in Age

  • Andrew E. ClarkEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The statistical analysis of cross-section data very often reveals a U-shaped relationship between subjective well-being and age. This paper uses 18 waves of British panel data to try to distinguish between two potential explanations of this shape: a pure life-cycle or aging effect, and a fixed cohort effect depending on year of birth. Panel analysis controlling for fixed effects continues to produce a U-shaped relationship between well-being and age, although this U-shape is flatter for life satisfaction than for the GHQ measure of mental well-being. The pattern of the estimated cohort effects also differs between the two well-being measures and, to an extent, by demographic group. In particular, those born earlier report more positive GHQ scores, controlling for their current age; this phenomenon is especially prevalent for women.

Keywords

Subjective well-being Cohorts Fixed effects Panel data 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Dick Easterlin, Carol Graham, David Halpern, Mike Hagerty, Laurence Hazelrigg, Felicia Huppert, Hendrik Juerges, Nicolai Kristensen, Ken Land, Orsolya Lelkes, Andrew Oswald, Steve Platt, Claudia Senik, Andrew Sharpe, Peter Warr and Rainer Winkelmann for useful discussions. The BHPS data were made available through the ESRC Data Archive. The data were originally collected by the ESRC Research Centre on Micro-social Change at the University of Essex. Neither the original collectors of the data nor the Archive bear any responsibility for the analyses or interpretations presented here.

References

  1. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2). New York/London: Academic.Google Scholar
  2. Argyle, M. (1989). The psychology of happiness. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2004). Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1359–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2008). Is wellbeing U-shaped over the life cycle? Social Science and Medicine, 66, 1733–1749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bouchard, T. J., Lykken, D. T., McGue, M., Segal, N. L., & Tellegen, A. (1990). Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of twins reared apart. Science, 250, 223–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheng, T., Oswald, A. J., & Powdthavee, N. (2017). Longitudinal evidence for a midlife nadir in human well-being: Results from four data sets. Economic Journal, 127, 126–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark, A. E., Frijters, P., & Shields, M. (2008). Relative income, happiness and utility: An explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic Literature, 46, 95–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cribier, F. (2005). Changes in the experience of life between two cohorts of Parisian pensioners, born in circa 1907 and 1921. Aging & Society, 25, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Money and happiness: Income and subjective well-being across nations. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Cross-cultural psychology of subjective well-being. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Easterlin, R. A. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27, 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Easterlin, R. A. (2006). Life cycle happiness and its sources. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27, 463–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Easterlin, R. A., & Schaeffer, C. M. (1999). Income and subjective well-being over the life-cycle. In C. D. Ryff & V. W. Marshall (Eds.), The self and society in aging processes. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., & Frijters, P. (2004). How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness? Economic Journal, 114, 641–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frank, R. H. (1989). Frames of reference and the quality of life. American Economic Review, 79, 80–85.Google Scholar
  15. Frey, B. S. & Stutzer, A. (2002). Happiness and economics. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Frijters, P., & Beatton, T. (2012). The mystery of the U-shaped relationship between happiness and age. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82, 525–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frijters, P., Haisken-DeNew, J., & Shields, M. (2004). Money does matter! Evidence from increasing real incomes and life satisfaction in East Germany following reunification. American Economic Review, 94, 730–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glaeser, E., Laibson, D., & Sacerdote, B. (2002). An economic approach to social capital. Economic Journal, 112, 437–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goldberg, D. P. (1972). The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Graham, C., & Ruiz Pozuelo, J. (2017). Happiness, stress, and age: How the U curve varies across people and places. Journal of Population Economics, 30, 225–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hayo, B., & Seifert, W. (2002). Subjective economic well-being in Eastern Europe. Journal of Economic Psychology, 24, 329–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kapteyn, A., van Praag, B. M. S., & van Herwaarden, F. G. (1978). Individual welfare functions and social reference spaces. Economics Letters, 1, 173–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kassenböhmer, S. C., & Haisken-DeNew, J. (2012). Heresy or enlightenment? The well-being age U-shape effect is flat. Economics Letters, 117, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kohler, H.-P., Behrman, J., & Skytthe, A. (2005). Partner + children = happiness? The effects of partnerships and fertility on well-being. Population and Development Review, 31, 407–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lucas, R., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2003). Re-examining adaptation and the setpoint model of happiness: Reaction to changes in marital status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 527–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lucas, R., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2004). Unemployment alters the set-point for life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 15, 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mroczek, D. K., & Kolarz, C. M. (1998). The effect of age on positive and negative affect: A developmental perspective on happiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1333–1349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mroczek, D. K., & Spiro, A. (2005). Change in life satisfaction during adulthood: Findings from the veterans affairs normative aging study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Rusting, C. L. (1999). Gender differences in well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  30. Oswald, A. J. (1997). Happiness and economic performance. Economic Journal, 107, 1815–1831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pollis, N. P. (1968). Reference group re-examined. British Journal of Sociology, 19, 300–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  33. Rodgers, W. (1982). Trends in reported happiness within demographically defined subgroups, 1957–78. Social Forces, 60, 826–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schwandt, H. (2016). Unmet aspirations as an explanation for the age U-shape in wellbeing. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 122, 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stone, A. A., Schwartz, J. E., Broderick, J. E., & Deaton, A. (2010). A snapshot of the age distribution of psychological well-being in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(22), 9985–9990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tellegen, A., Lykken, D. T., Bouchard, T. J., Wilcox, K. J., Segal, N. L., & Rich, S. (1988). Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1031–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Landeghem, B. (2012). A test for the convexity of human well-being over the life cycle: Longitudinal evidence from a 20-year panel. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 81, 571–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Van Praag, B., & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2004). Happiness quantified. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wunder, C., Wiencierz, A., Schwarze, J., & Küchenhoff, H. (2013). Well-being over the life span: Semiparametric evidence from British and German longitudinal data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95, 154–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zimmerman, A., & Easterlin, R. (2006). Happily ever after? Cohabitation, marriage, divorce, and happiness in Germany. Population and Development Review, 32, 511–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Paris School of Economics – CNRSParisFrance

Personalised recommendations