Comparing Measures of Experiential and Evaluative Well-being

比较体验性幸福感和评价性幸福感的衡量标准

• 批准号: 8485493
• 负责人: MICHAEL BRENT DONNELLAN
• 金额: $ 34.11万
• 依托单位: MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 财政年份: 2011
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2011-09-01 至 2016-06-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://reporter.nih.gov/project-details/8485493
• 关键词: Accounting; Affect; Affective; Behavior; Cognitive; Complex; Data; Data Set; Devices; Economics; Evaluation; Event; Feeling; Future; German population; Goals; Gold; Health; Household; Individual; Judgment; Laboratories; Lead; Life; Link; Longevity; Longitudinal Studies; Measurement; Measures; Medicine; Methods; Modeling; Moods; Morbidity - disease rate; Nature; Outcome; Participant; Personal Satisfaction; Persons; Policies; Policy Maker; Procedures; Process; Property; Psychology; Psychometrics; Reaction; Reporting; Research; Research Methodology; Research Personnel; Resources; Respondent; Sample Size; Sampling; Science; Scientist; Signal Transduction; Surveys; Systematic Bias; Testing; Thinking; Time; Validity and Reliability; Work; age related; base; design; end of life; experience; heuristics; improved; interest; longitudinal design; mortality; reconstruction; research study; response; satisfaction; socioeconomics; trait; trend

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Subjective well-being reflects an individual's overarching evaluation of the condition of her or his life. Researchers from economics to psychology to medicine have become increasingly interested in this construct. Health researchers have discovered connections between well-being and mortality, whereas policy-makers are debating how to best use information about well-being to inform policy decisions. The simplest approach to assessing well-being is to use global evaluative measures. Such measures are easily incorporated into large- scale surveys, which has allowed researchers to make substantial contributions to the science of well-being. However, there are pressing concerns about the validity of these evaluative measures. A major alternative is the use of experiential methods that track feelings of satisfaction and affect more or less in real-time. Proponents argue that these approaches are less cognitively demanding than evaluative measures, which makes it less likely that heuristics and biases will affect their validity. The "gold standard" experiential approach is the experience sampling method (ESM) in which a portable recording device is used to track feelings and behaviors in the moment. However, ESM research is expensive, time consuming, and difficult to implement on a large scale. A less intensive alternative is the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) in which participants divide their previous day into psychologically-meaningful units and report what they were doing and how they were feeling during those different episodes. The DRM is more practical than ESM for large panel studies. The broad goals of this project are to critically evaluate the psychometric properties of these three approaches and to incorporate both experiential approaches into an on-going, nationally representative panel study that already includes evaluative measures. The first specific aim is to thoroughly evaluate the properties of the DRM by comparing ESM and DRM responses on the same day and by estimating the stability of DRM assessments using short- and long-term longitudinal studies and advanced psychometric models. The second specific aim is to precisely quantify the extent that mood, survey context, and priming issues compromise the validity of global measures of well-being. This information is essential for making informed judgments about evaluative measures which are the easiest to implement in large-scale survey research. The final specific aim is to incorporate both ESM and DRM assessments into an on-going, nationally representative panel study. This existing study already includes evaluative measures and has been used to make important discoveries regarding well-being over the lifespan. The goal of the final specific aim will be to evaluate how previous aging- related well-being findings obtained with evaluative measures generalize to experiential methods. More importantly, the data from this longitudinal study will be made publicly available so that other researchers can advance the science of well-being using all three approaches.

描述（由申请人提供）：主观幸福感反映了一个人对她或他的生活状况的总体评价。从经济学到心理学再到医学的研究人员对这种结构越来越感兴趣。健康研究人员发现了幸福感和死亡率之间的联系，而政策制定者正在讨论如何最好地利用有关幸福感的信息来为政策决策提供信息。评估福祉的最简单方法是使用全球评估措施。这些措施很容易纳入大规模调查，使研究人员能够为幸福科学做出重大贡献。然而，人们迫切关注这些评价措施的有效性。一个主要的替代方法是使用经验方法，跟踪满意度的感觉，并或多或少地实时影响。支持者认为，这些方法比评估措施的认知要求低，这使得它不太可能的解释和偏见将影响其有效性。“黄金标准”的经验方法是经验采样方法（ESM），其中一个便携式记录设备被用来跟踪的感觉和行为的时刻。然而，无害环境管理的研究是昂贵的，耗时的，难以大规模实施。另一种强度较低的方法是日重建法（DRM），参与者将前一天划分为具有心理意义的单元，并报告他们在这些不同事件中所做的事情以及他们的感受。对于大型面板研究，DRM比ESM更实用。该项目的主要目标是批判性地评估这三种方法的心理测量特性，并将两种经验方法纳入正在进行的具有全国代表性的小组研究，该研究已经包括评估措施。第一个具体目标是通过比较ESM和DRM在同一天的反应，并通过使用短期和长期的纵向研究和先进的心理测量模型估计DRM评估的稳定性，彻底评估DRM的属性。第二个具体目标是精确地量化情绪，调查背景和启动问题的程度妥协的有效性的全球措施的福祉。这些信息对于在大规模调查研究中最容易实施的评价措施做出明智的判断至关重要。最后的具体目标是将无害环境管理和灾害风险管理评估纳入一项正在进行的、具有全国代表性的小组研究。这项现有的研究已经包括了评估措施，并已被用于在整个生命周期的福祉方面做出重要发现。最后的具体目标将是评估如何以前的老龄化相关的幸福感的研究结果与评估措施推广到经验的方法。更重要的是，这项纵向研究的数据将公开，以便其他研究人员可以使用所有三种方法来推进幸福科学。