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: 8676617
• 负责人: MICHAEL BRENT DONNELLAN
• 金额: $ 36.35万
• 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/8676617
• 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）：主观福祉反映了个人对自己一生状况的总体评估。从经济学到心理学再到医学的研究人员对这种结构变得越来越感兴趣。卫生研究人员发现了福祉与死亡率之间的联系，而决策者正在辩论如何最好地使用有关福祉的信息来为政策决策提供信息。评估幸福感的最简单方法是使用全球评估措施。这些措施很容易地纳入大规模调查中，这使研究人员能够为幸福科学做出重大贡献。但是，人们对这些评估措施的有效性存在紧迫的担忧。一个主要的选择是使用经验方法，这些方法可以实时跟踪满意度并或多或少地影响。支持者认为，这些方法比评估措施的认知要求少，这使得启发式方法和偏见的可能性较小，会影响其有效性。 “金标准”体验方法是经验抽样方法（ESM），其中使用便携式记录设备来跟踪当下的感觉和行为。但是，ESM研究很昂贵，耗时，并且很难大规模实施。一个不太密集的替代方法是日期重建方法（DRM），其中参与者前一天将自己的日子分为心理上的单位，并报告他们在做什么以及在这些不同情节中的感觉。对于大型面板研究，DRM比ESM更实用。该项目的广泛目标是批判性地评估这三种方法的心理测量特性，并将两种体验方法纳入正在进行的全国代表性小组研究中，该研究已经包括评估措施。第一个具体目的是通过比较同一天的ESM和DRM响应，并使用短期和长期的纵向研究和高级心理测量模型估算DRM评估的稳定性，从而彻底评估DRM的性质。第二个具体目的是精确量化情绪，调查环境和启动问题损害全球福祉度量的有效性的程度。此信息对于做出有关评估措施的知情判断至关重要，这是在大规模调查研究中最容易实施的措施。最终的具体目的是将ESM和DRM评估同时纳入正在进行的全国代表性小组研究中。这项现有的研究已经包括评估措施，并已用于在整个生命周期内进行有关幸福感的重要发现。最终特定目的的目的是评估以评估度量的概括为体验方法获得的先前与衰老相关的福祉发现。更重要的是，这项纵向研究的数据将公开提供，以便其他研究人员可以使用所有三种方法来提高幸福感。