Comparing Measures of Experiential and Evaluative Well-being

描述（由申请人提供）：主观幸福感反映了一个人对自己生活状况的总体评估。从经济学到心理学再到医学，研究人员对这种结构越来越感兴趣。健康研究人员已经发现了幸福感和死亡率之间的联系，而政策制定者正在争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。评估幸福的最简单方法是使用全球评估措施。这些措施很容易被纳入大规模调查，这使得研究人员对幸福科学做出了实质性的贡献。然而，对这些评价措施的有效性存在迫切的关切。一种主要的替代方法是使用经验方法来跟踪满意度，并或多或少地实时影响。支持者认为，这些方法对认知的要求比评估性措施要低，这使得启发式和偏见不太可能影响它们的有效性。“黄金标准”经验方法是经验抽样法（ESM），其中使用便携式记录设备来跟踪当时的感受和行为。然而，ESM研究是昂贵的，耗时的，并且难以大规模实施。一种不那么密集的替代方法是“一天重建法”（DRM），参与者将他们的前一天分成有心理意义的单元，并报告他们在这些不同的片段中做了什么以及他们的感受。对于大型小组研究，DRM比ESM更实用。该项目的总体目标是批判性地评估这三种方法的心理测量特性，并将这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中，该研究已经包括了评估措施。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纵向研究和先进的心理测量模型来估计DRM评估的稳定性，彻底评估DRM的性质。第二个具体目标是精确量化情绪、调查背景和启动问题对全球幸福感测量有效性的影响程度。这些信息对于对评估措施作出知情判断至关重要，而评估措施在大规模调查研究中是最容易实施的。最后的具体目标是将可持续发展机制和风险管理评估纳入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，并已被用来做出关于寿命幸福感的重要发现。最后的具体目标是评估如何先前的老龄化相关的福祉发现获得评估措施推广到经验方法。更重要的是，这项纵向研究的数据将被公开，以便其他研究人员可以使用这三种方法来推进幸福科学。

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.