This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My File Cabinet Download to citation manager Request Copyright Permission Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (29) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Easterlin, R. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Easterlin, R. A. Related Content Inaugural Articles Social Bookmarking                What's this?

 Previous Article  | Table of Contents |  Next Article 

Inaugural Article
Social Sciences
Explaining happiness

Richard A. Easterlin ^*

Department of Economics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0253

Contributed by Richard A. Easterlin, May 23, 2003

What do social survey data tell us about the determinants of happiness? First, that the psychologists' setpoint model is questionable. Life events in the nonpecuniary domain, such as marriage, divorce, and serious disability, have a lasting effect on happiness, and do not simply deflect the average person temporarily above or below a setpoint given by genetics and personality. Second, mainstream economists' inference that in the pecuniary domain "more is better," based on revealed preference theory, is problematic. An increase in income, and thus in the goods at one's disposal, does not bring with it a lasting increase in happiness because of the negative effect on utility of hedonic adaptation and social comparison. A better theory of happiness builds on the evidence that adaptation and social comparison affect utility less in the nonpecuniary than pecuniary domains. Because individuals fail to anticipate the extent to which adaptation and social comparison undermine expected utility in the pecuniary domain, they allocate an excessive amount of time to pecuniary goals, and shortchange nonpecuniary ends such as family life and health, reducing their happiness. There is need to devise policies that will yield better-informed individual preferences, and thereby increase individual and societal well-being.

living level | health | marital status | aspirations

Abbreviation: GSS, General Social Survey.

^* E-mail:easterl{at}usc.edu.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles in HighWire Press-hosted journals:

				A. J Oswald Commentary: Human well-being and causality in social epidemiology Int. J. Epidemiol., December 1, 2007; 36(6): 1253 - 1254. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Christensen, A. M. Herskind, and J. W Vaupel Why Danes are smug: comparative study of life satisfaction in the European Union BMJ, December 23, 2006; 333(7582): 1289 - 1291. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Graham Insights on Development from the Economics of Happiness World Bank Res. Obs., September 1, 2005; 20(2): 201 - 231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Ross Health, happiness, and higher levels of social organisation J. Epidemiol. Community Health, August 1, 2005; 59(8): 614 - 614. [Full Text] [PDF]

Current Issue | Archives | Online Submission | Info for Authors | Editorial Board | About Subscribe | Advertise | Contact | Site Map Copyright © 2003 by the National Academy of Sciences