Substitution, Buffers and Subjective Well-Being: A Hierarchical Approach

  • Anna Nieboer
  • Siegwart Lindenberg
Part of the Social Indicators Research Series book series (SINS, volume 16)

Abstract

In quality of life research, social aspects have become recognized as important, next to physical aspects such as living conditions and health. However, objective indicators of physical and social aspects often correlate poorly with indicators of subjective well being. We argue that this may be due to buffer and substitution effects People produce their own well-being and there are multiple means for realizing the same ultimate goals. Multiple means allow the formation of buffers which cushion the negative effect of loss and they allow substitution when some means become costlier or inaccessible. In order to trace buffer and substitution effects, one needs a theory that specifies these multiple means and the goals they serve (goal hierarchy) One such theory is Social Production Function theory which we use to trace buffer and substitution effects. We test the hypotheses on these effects with data on 1094 Dutch respondents Even though the data are cross-sectional and thus do not allow us to demonstrate buffer and substitution effects on the individual level, there are good indications in the data that such effects exist

Keywords

Voluntary Work Substitution Effect Buffer Effect Marginal Return Buffer Formation 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiken, L.S. & West, S.G. (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Argyle, M. (1996). Subjective well-being. In A. Offer (Ed). In pursuit of the quality of life. (pp. 18–45). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Argyle, M. (1999). Causes and correlates of happiness. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being the foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 353–373). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  4. Baumeister, R.F & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cantril, H. (1965). The pattern of human concern. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cummins, R.A. (1996). The domains of life satisfaction. An attempt to order chaos Social Indicators Research, 38, 303–332.Google Scholar
  7. Cummins, R.A. (2000). Objective and subjective quality of life: An interactive model. Social Indicators Research, 52, 55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Diener E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diener, E. & Lucas, R.E. (2000). Explaining differences in societal levels of happiness: Relative standards, need fulfillment, culture, and evaluation theory. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1(1), 41–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diener, E., Suh. E.M., Lucas, R.E., & Smith, H.L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302.Google Scholar
  11. Hess, T. (1994). Random individual samples within households or how inadequate methodologies lead to a waste of time and money. Paper presented at the 47th ESOMAR Marketing Research Congress.Google Scholar
  12. Homans, G. (1951). The Human Group. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  13. Lindenberg S. (1986). The paradox of privatization in consumption. In A. Diekmann A. & P. Mitter (Eds.), Paradoxical Effects of Social Behavior. Essays in Honor of Anatol Rapoport. Heidelberg/Wien: Physica-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Lindenberg S. (1991). Social well-being, fertility and female labour market behaviour. In J.J. Siegers, J. De Jong-Gierveld, & I Van Imhoff (Eds.), Female Labour Market Behaviour and Fertility: A Rational Choice Approach. Berlin/ New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Lindenberg S. & Frey B.S. (1993). Alternatives, frames, and relative prices; a broader view of rational choice theory. Acta Sociologica, 36, 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lindenberg, S.M. (1996). Continuities in the theory of social production functions. In S.M. Lindenberg & H.B.G. Ganzeboom (Eds.), Verklarende sociologie: opstellen voor Reinhard Wippler (pp. 169–184). Amsterdam: Thesis.Google Scholar
  17. Nieboer, A.P. (1997). Life-events and well-being: A prospective study on changes in well-being of elderly people due to a serious illness event or death of the spouse. Amsterdam, NL: Thesis Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Nieboer, A.P. & Lindenberg, S. (2000). Substitution and subjective well-being: Why do ive need new measurement instruments’ Paper presented at the Third Conference of the International Society for Quality of Life Studies. July 20–22, Girona, Spain.Google Scholar
  19. Nieboer, A.P., Lindenberg, S.M., & Ormel, J. (1999). Conjugal Bereavement and Well-being of Elderly Men and Women: A preliminary Study, Omega, 38(2), 113–141.Google Scholar
  20. Nieboer, A.P., Lindenberg, S., Boomsma, A., & Van Bruggen, A.C. (forthcoming). Dimensions of wellbeing and their measurement: The SPF-IL Scale.Google Scholar
  21. Offer, A. (Ed.). (1996). In pursuit of the quality of life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ormet, J., Lindenberg, S., Steverink, N. & Verbrugge, L.M. (1999). Subjective well-being and social production functions. Social Indicators Research, 46, 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ormet, J., Lindenberg, S.M., Steverink, N., & Von Korff, M. (1997). Quality of Life and Social Production Functions: A Framework for Understanding Health Effects, Social Science & Medicine, 45(7), 1051–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sociaal en Cultureel Rapport (1994). Rijswijk: Sociaal en Cultured Planbureau.Google Scholar
  25. Steverink, N. (2001) When and why frail elderly people give up independent living: the Netherlands as an example. Ageing and Society, 21, 45–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Van Bruggen, A.C. (2001). Individual production of social well-being: an exploratory study. Ph.D-thesis University of Groningen, Amsterdam, NL: Thela Thesis.Google Scholar
  27. Wagner, D.G. & Berger, J. (1993). Status characteristic theory: The growth of a program. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch (Eds), Theoretical Research Programs (pp. 23–63). Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen. A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wippler, R. (1990). Cultural resources and participation in high culture. In M. Hechter, K.D. Opp, & R Wippler (Eds), Social Institutions Their Emergence, Maintenance, and Effects (pp. 187–204). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna Nieboer
    • 1
  • Siegwart Lindenberg
  1. 1.Department of Health Organisation, Policy and EconomicsUniversity of MaastrichtMaastrichtthe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations