Does More Money Buy You More Happiness?

  • Manel Baucells
  • Rakesh K. Sarin
Part of the Springer Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 21)

Why do we believe that more money will buy us more happiness when in fact it does not? In this chapter, we propose a model to explain this puzzle. The model incorporates both adaptation and social comparison. A rational person who fully accounts for the dynamics of these factors would indeed buy more happiness with money. We argue that projection bias, the tendency to project into the future our current reference levels, precludes subjects from correctly calculating the utility obtained from consumption. Projection bias has two effects. First, it makes people overrate the happiness that they will obtain from money. Second, it makes people misallocate the consumption budget by consuming too much at the beginning of the planning horizon, or consuming too much of adaptative goods.


Reference Level Social Comparison Optimal Plan Total Utility Rich People 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    M. Baucells and R. Sarin. Predicting utility under satiation and habituation. Technical report, IESE Business School, University of Navarra, Barcelona, Spain, 2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Baucells and R. Sarin. Satiation in discounted utility. Operations Research, 55:170–181, 2007.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Brickman, D. Coates, and R. Janoff-Bullman. Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36:917–927, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. E. Clark. Job satisfaction in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 34:189–217, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Davidson and Colleagues. Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65:564–270, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Davidson, D. Jackson, and N. Kalin. Emotion, plasticity, context, and regulation: Perspectives from affective neuroscience. Psychological Bulletin, 126:890–906, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. A. Davis, T. W. Smith, and P. V. Marsden. General Social Survery, 1972–2000, Cumulative Codebook. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, Storrs, CT, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    E. Diener and W. Tov. National subjective well-being indices: An assessment. In K. C. Land, editor, Encyclopedia of Social Indicators and Quality-of-Life Studies. Springer, New York, 2005.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. diTella and R. MacCullouch. Some uses of happiness data in economics. Journal of Economic Perspective, 20(1):25–46, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. A. Easterlin. Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence in nations and households. In P. A. David and M. W. Redner, editors, Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz, pages 98–125. Academic Press, New York, 1974.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. A. Easterlin. Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27:35–48, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. A. Easterlin. Income and happiness: Towards a unified theory. Economic Journal, 111:465–484, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. H. Frank. Choosing the Right Pond. Oxford University Press, New York, 1985.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. H. Frank. The frame of reference as a public good. The Economic Journal, 107(445):1832–1847, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. H. Frank. Luxury Fever: Why Money Fails to Satisfy in an Era of Excess. Free Press, New York, 1999.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Frederick and G. Loewenstein. Hedonic adaptation. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, and N. Schwarz, editors, Well Being: The Foundation of Hedonic Psychology, pages 302–329. Russell Sage, New York, 1999.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    B. S. Frey and A. Stutzer. Happiness and Economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2002.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. S. Frey and A. Stutzer. What can economists learn from happiness research. Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2):402–435, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. Gilbert. Stumbling on Happiness. Knopf, New York, 2006.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. J. Herrnstein and D. Prelec. A theory of addiction. In G. F. Loewenstein and J. Elster, editors, Choice Over Time. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1992.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. Inglehart and Colleagues. World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys, 1981–84, 1990–93, 1995–97. Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, MI, 2000.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Inglehart and H.-D. Klingemann. Genes, culture, democracy, and happiness. In E. Diener and E. M. Suh, editors, Culture and Subjective Well-Being. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. Kahneman, E. Diener, and N. Schwarz, editors. Well Being: The Foundation of Hedonic Psychology. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    D. Kahneman and A. B. Krueger. Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1):3–24, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    D. Kahneman, A. B. Krueger, D. A. Schkade, N. Schwarz, and A. A. Stone. Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion. Science, 312(30):1776–1780, 2006.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    D. Kahneman and D. T. Miller. Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93(2):136–153, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    D. Kahneman and A. Tversky. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2):263–291, 1979.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    D. Kahneman, P. P. Wakker, and R. K. Sarin. Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2):375–405, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    T. C. Koopmans. Stationary ordinal utility and impatience. Econometrica, 28(2):287–309, 1960.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    R. Layard. Happiness: Lessons from a New Science. The Penguin Press, London, UK, 2005.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    H. S. Lepper. Use of other-reports to validate subjective well-being measures. Social Indicators Research, 44:367–379, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    G. Loewenstein, T. O’Donoghue, and M. Rabin. Projection bias in predicting future utility. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(3):1209–1248, 2003.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    G. Loewenstein, D. Read, and R. Baumeister, editors. Time and Decision. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 2003.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    G. Loewenstein and D. A. Schkade. Wouldn’t it be nice: Predicting future feelings. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, and N. Schwarz, editors, Well Being: The Foundation of Hedonic Psychology, pages 85–108. Russell Sage, New York, 1999.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    V. Medvec, S. Madey, and T. Gilovich. When less is more: Counterfactual thinking and satisfaction among olympic medalists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69:603–610, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    D. Morawetz. Income distribution and self-rated happiness: Some empirical evidence. Economic Journal, 87:511–522, 1977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    R. E. Nisbett and D. E. Kanouse. Obesity, hunger, and supermarket shopping behavior. Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 3:683–684, 1968.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    A. Parducci. Happiness, Pleasure, and Judgment: The Contextual Theory and its Applications. Erlbaum, Hove, UK, 1995.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    W. Pavot and E. Diener. The affective and cognitive cortex of self-reported measures of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 28(1):1–20, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    R. Pollak. Habit formation and dynamic demand functions. Journal of Political Economy, 78:745–763, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    H. E. Ryder and G. M. Heal. Optimal growth with intertemporally dependent preferences. Review of Economic Studies, 40:1–33, 1973.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    P. Samuelson. A note on measurement of utility. Review of Economic Studies, 4:155–161, 1937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    D. A. Schkade and D. Kahneman. Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 9(5):340–346, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    D. M. Smith, K. M. Langa, M. V. Kabeto, and P. A. Ubel. Health, wealth, and happiness. Psychological Science, 16(9):663–666, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    S. Solnick and D. Hemenway. Is more always better? A survey on positional concerns. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 37:373–383, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    A. Stutzer. The role of income aspirations in individual happiness. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 54:89–109, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    B. M. S. vanPraag and A. Ferrer-i-Carbonell. Happiness Quantified: A Satisfaction Calculus Approach. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2004.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    B. M. S. vanPraag and P. Frijters. The measurement of welfare and well-being: The Leyden approach. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, and N. Schwarz, editors, Well Being: The Foundation of Hedonic Psychology, pages 413–433. Russell Sage, New York, 1999.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    L. Wathieu. Habits and the anomalies in intertemporal choice. Management Science, 43(11):1552–1563, 1997.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    L. Wathieu. Consumer habituation. Management Science, 50(5):587–596, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manel Baucells
    • 1
  • Rakesh K. Sarin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Decision AnalysisUniversity of NavarraSpain
  2. 2.UCLA Anderson School of ManagementUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations