Findings on Happiness and VALUES: LIVING UP TO

World Database of Happiness

Correlational Findings on Happiness and VALUES: LIVING UP TO
Subject Code: V05

© on data collection: Ruut Veenhoven, Erasmus University Rotterdam

Classification of Findings
Subject Code Description Nr of Studies
on this Subject
V05VALUES: LIVING UP TO0
V05aaValue success caeer0
V05abCurrent success in values18
V05acAttitudes to succes in values0
 
Appendices
Appendix 1Happiness measures used 
Appendix 2Statistics used 
Appendix 3About the World Database of Happiness 
Appendix 4Further Findings in the World Database of Happiness 
Appendix 5Related Subjects 

Cite as:    Veenhoven, R.: Findings on Happiness and VALUES: LIVING UP TO
World Database of Happiness, Collection of Correlational Findings
Internet: http://worlddatabaseofhappiness.eur.nl/hap_cor/top_sub.php?code=V05
Erasmus University Rotterdam, 2017, Netherlands

Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyLeviatan (2004): study IL 2004
TitleBelief in Values and Their Perceived Realization as Determinants of Quality of Life. The Case of Kibbutz Members.
SourceGlatzer, W.; Von Below, S.; Stoffregen, M.; Eds.: "Challenges for Quality of Life in the Contemplorary World", Kluwer, 2004, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 271 - 294
Public18+ aged, general public, living in Kibbutzim, Israel, 2004
SampleProbability cluster sample
Non-Response30%
Respondents N =4700

Correlate
Author's labelSatisfaction with Value Realization
Page in Source 277, 278, 284, 290
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Selfreport on the extent of personal values realized in 
kibbutz life on 4 questions:
- contribution to building a more just society in 
Israel
- fit with own values
- expression of equality amon members
- expression of social ideals

Rated on 1 (highest or most positive) to 5 (lowest or 
least positive)
Observed distributionM=2.27, SD=.74
Error Estimates?=.71

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-ar=+.42 p < .001
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-arpc=+.13 p < .05
rpc controlled for:
- satisfaction with one's Kibbutz Life
- psychological commitment to one's Kibbutz life
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-aBeta=+.39 ns
Beta controlled for:
- community values
- collectivistic values
- individualistic values
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-aBeta=+.12 p < .05
Beta additionally controlled for:
- satisfaction with one's Kibbutz life
- psychological commitment to one's Kibbutz life
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-aBeta= ns
Beta additonally controlled for:
- satisfaction with fit of Kibbutz life to won 
aspirations an abilities
- satisfaction with feeling of "belonging" and "at 
home" in Kibbutz
- satisfaction with material standard of living
- satisfaction with work domain
- satisfaction with interpersonal relationships in 
Kibbutz
- gender
- years of formal education
- holding central office during the last five 
years


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyLeviatan (2004): study IL 2004
TitleBelief in Values and Their Perceived Realization as Determinants of Quality of Life. The Case of Kibbutz Members.
SourceGlatzer, W.; Von Below, S.; Stoffregen, M.; Eds.: "Challenges for Quality of Life in the Contemplorary World", Kluwer, 2004, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 271 - 294
Public18+ aged, general public, living in Kibbutzim, Israel, 2004
SampleProbability cluster sample
Non-Response30%
Respondents N =4700

Correlate
Author's labelSatisfaction with ability fit
Page in Source 277, 279, 284, 290
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Satisfaction with extent of fit between kibbutz life 
ond one's ability and aspirations

Selfreport on single question, question not reported

Rated 1 (highest or most positive) to 5 (lowest or 
least positve)
Observed distributionM=3.21, SD=.97

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-ar=+.43 p < .001
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-arpc=+.13 p < .05
rpc controlled for:
- satisfaction with one's Kibbutz life
- psychological commitment to one's Kibbutz life
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-aBeta=+.18 p < .05
Beta controlled for:
- satisfaction of feeling of belonging to Kibbutz
- satisfaction with material standard of living
- satisfaction with work domain
- satisfaction with interpersonal relationships in 
Kibbutz
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-aBeta=+.16 p < .05
Beta additionally controlled for:
- community values
- collectivistic values
- individualistic values
- gender
- years of formal education
- age
- holding central office during the last five yers
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-aBeta=+.08 p < .05
Beta additionally controlled for:
- satisfaction with one's Kibbutz life
- psycholoical commitment to one's Kibbutz life


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1999): study US 1998
TitleMindfulness and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: A Further Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1999, Vol. 46, 341 - 368
DOIDOI: 10.1023/A:1006941403481
Public'Back to the landers', USA 1998
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response41,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelDiscrepancy: TSR-CA gap
Page in Source 358
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between the actual use of technology and 
the selfrated importance of country ascetism

TSR: Selfreport on which degree the technologies 
provided their family with self-reliance or 
independence
Respondents were presented with 25 soft-technologies 
and asked whether they possessed or used the 
technologies, for example:
   - garden
   - goats
   - greenhouse
   - composting toilets
   - photo voltaic
Rated 1 (not at all effective) to 4 (very effective)
TSR is calculated by multiplying each technology 
possessed by the efficiency rating claimed for the 
particular technology
theoretical range from 0 - 100

CA: Selfreport on degree of country asceticism
Items include importance of:
- having a gas or electric clothes dryer
- having an indoor tilet or bathroom
- living in a modern house
- having electricity in your home
- having a microwave oven
Rated 1 (very important) to 4 (not at all important)

GAP: The value scales and performance indexes were 
dichotomized at their empirical midpoints (medians) and 
then cross-tabulated with each other. The survey 
respondents then fell into one of four categories: (1) 
low values/low performance (“no gap”), (2) high 
values/low performance (“gap”), (3) low values/high 
performance (“gap”), and (4) high values/high 
performance (“no gap”). These gaps (or absence of gaps) 
are calculated for both performance indicators (TSR 
Index and HFP) and for each of the three value scales 
(Country Asceticism, Homestead Production and 
Ecological Sensitivity). 
The first step to the comparability of the variables is 
to normalize each indicator and then place the 
respondents’ scores along a normalized distribution as 
t-scores with means of 50 and standard deviations of 
10. With respondents possessing comparable scores for 
each of the key indicators which constitute the 
values-performance discrepancies, a “gap score” for 
each value-performance pair was calculated by 
subtracting normalized performance scores from 
normalized value scores.
To faciliate interpretation they just used a subsample 
with values higher than the median for Technological 
Self-Reliance Index (TSR), Country Ascetisism (CA), 
Homestead Production (HP) and Ecological Sensitivity 
(ES) for further analysis

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-br=-.10 ns


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1999): study US 1998
TitleMindfulness and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: A Further Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1999, Vol. 46, 341 - 368
DOIDOI: 10.1023/A:1006941403481
Public'Back to the landers', USA 1998
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response41,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelDiscrepancy: TSR-HP gap
Page in Source 358
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between the actual use of technology and 
the selfrated importance of homestead production

TSR: Selfreport on which degree the technologies 
provided their family with self-reliance or 
independence
Respondents were presented with 25 soft-technologies 
and asked whether they possessed or used the 
technologies, for example:
   - garden
   - goats
   - greenhouse
   - composting toilets
   - photo voltaic
Rated 1 (not at all effective) to 4 (very effective)
TSR is calculated by multiplying each technology 
possessed by the efficiency rating claimed for the 
particular technology
theoretical range from 0 - 100

HP: Selfreport on the importance of homestead 
production:
- growing your own food
- cutting energy consumption
- growing/eating organic food
Rated 1 (very important) to 4 (not at all important)

GAP: The value scales and performance indexes were 
dichotomized at their empirical midpoints (medians) and 
then cross-tabulated with each other. The survey 
respondents then fell into one of four categories: (1) 
low values/low performance (“no gap”), (2) high 
values/low performance (“gap”), (3) low values/high 
performance (“gap”), and (4) high values/high 
performance (“no gap”). These gaps (or absence of gaps) 
are calculated for both performance indicators (TSR 
Index and HFP) and for each of the three value scales 
(Country Asceticism, Homestead Production and 
Ecological Sensitivity). 
The first step to the comparability of the variables is 
to normalize each indicator and then place the 
respondents’ scores along a normalized distribution as 
t-scores with means of 50 and standard deviations of 
10. With respondents possessing comparable scores for 
each of the key indicators which constitute the 
values-performance discrepancies, a “gap score” for 
each value-performance pair was calculated by 
subtracting normalized performance scores from 
normalized value scores.
To faciliate interpretation they just used a subsample 
with values higher than the median for Technological 
Self-Reliance Index (TSR), Country Ascetisism (CA), 
Homestead Production (HP) and Ecological Sensitivity 
(ES) for further analysis

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-br=-.21 p < .005
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bBeta=-.04 ns
Beta controlled for
- gap: importance of homestead food production / 
actual homestead food production
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual use of technology
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual homestead food production
- gap: importance of cultural ascetism / actual 
homestead food production


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1999): study US 1998
TitleMindfulness and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: A Further Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1999, Vol. 46, 341 - 368
DOIDOI: 10.1023/A:1006941403481
Public'Back to the landers', USA 1998
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response41,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelDiscrepancy: TSR-ES gap
Page in Source 358
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between the actual use of technology and 
the selfrated importance of ecological sensitivity

TSR: Selfreport on which degree the technologies 
provided their family with self-reliance or 
independence
Respondents were presented with 25 soft-technologies 
and asked whether they possessed or used the 
technologies, for example:
   - garden
   - goats
   - greenhouse
   - composting toilets
   - photo voltaic
Rated 1 (not at all effective) to 4 (very effective)
TSR is calculated by multiplying each technology 
possessed by the efficiency rating claimed for the 
particular technology
theoretical range from 0 - 100

ES:  Selfreport on importance of:
- the expanion of wilderness areas
- preserving old growth forests
- providing habitat for endangered species
- recycling newspapers
- reducing personal energy consumption
Rated 1 (very important) to 4 (not at all important)

GAP: The value scales and performance indexes were 
dichotomized at their empirical midpoints (medians) and 
then cross-tabulated with each other. The survey 
respondents then fell into one of four categories: (1) 
low values/low performance (“no gap”), (2) high 
values/low performance (“gap”), (3) low values/high 
performance (“gap”), and (4) high values/high 
performance (“no gap”). These gaps (or absence of gaps) 
are calculated for both performance indicators (TSR 
Index and HFP) and for each of the three value scales 
(Country Asceticism, Homestead Production and 
Ecological Sensitivity). 
The first step to the comparability of the variables is 
to normalize each indicator and then place the 
respondents’ scores along a normalized distribution as 
t-scores with means of 50 and standard deviations of 
10. With respondents possessing comparable scores for 
each of the key indicators which constitute the 
values-performance discrepancies, a “gap score” for 
each value-performance pair was calculated by 
subtracting normalized performance scores from 
normalized value scores.
To faciliate interpretation they just used a subsample 
with values higher than the median for Technological 
Self-Reliance Index (TSR), Country Ascetisism (CA), 
Homestead Production (HP) and Ecological Sensitivity 
(ES) for further analysis

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-br=+.24 p < .005
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bBeta=-.16 p < .05
Beta controlled for
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
homestead food production
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual homestead food production
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
technology use
- gap: importance of cultural asceticism / actual 
homestead food production
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bBeta=-.16 p < .05
Beta controlled for
- mindfulness
- relationships
- time for self
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
homestead food production
- age
- homestead food production


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1999): study US 1998
TitleMindfulness and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: A Further Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1999, Vol. 46, 341 - 368
DOIDOI: 10.1023/A:1006941403481
Public'Back to the landers', USA 1998
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response41,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelDiscrepancy: HFP-CA gap
Page in Source 358
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between the actual homestead food 
production and the selfrated importance of country 
ascetism

HFP:percentage of a family's food that the respondents 
reported was produced on ther mini-homesteads

CA: Selfreport on degree of country asceticism
Items include importance of:
- having a gas or electric clothes dryer
- having an indoor tilet or bathroom
- living in a modern house
- having electricity in your home
- having a microwave oven
Rated 1 (very important) to 4 (not at all important)

GAP: The value scales and performance indexes were 
dichotomized at their empirical midpoints (medians) and 
then cross-tabulated with each other. The survey 
respondents then fell into one of four categories: (1) 
low values/low performance (“no gap”), (2) high 
values/low performance (“gap”), (3) low values/high 
performance (“gap”), and (4) high values/high 
performance (“no gap”). These gaps (or absence of gaps) 
are calculated for both performance indicators (TSR 
Index and HFP) and for each of the three value scales 
(Country Asceticism, Homestead Production and 
Ecological Sensitivity). 
The first step to the comparability of the variables is 
to normalize each indicator and then place the 
respondents’ scores along a normalized distribution as 
t-scores with means of 50 and standard deviations of 
10. With respondents possessing comparable scores for 
each of the key indicators which constitute the 
values-performance discrepancies, a “gap score” for 
each value-performance pair was calculated by 
subtracting normalized performance scores from 
normalized value scores.
To faciliate interpretation they just used a subsample 
with values higher than the median for Technological 
Self-Reliance Index (TSR), Country Ascetisism (CA), 
Homestead Production (HP) and Ecological Sensitivity 
(ES) for further analysis

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-br=-.13 p < .05
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bBeta=-.01 p < .05
Beta controlled for
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
homestead food production
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual use of technology
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual homestead food production
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
use of technology


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1999): study US 1998
TitleMindfulness and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: A Further Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1999, Vol. 46, 341 - 368
DOIDOI: 10.1023/A:1006941403481
Public'Back to the landers', USA 1998
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response41,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelDiscrepancy: HFP-HP gap
Page in Source 358
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between the actual homestead food 
production and the selfrated importance of homestead 
production

HFP: percentage of a family's food that the respondents 
reported was produced on ther mini-homesteads

HP: Selfreport on the importance of homestead 
production:
- growing your own food
- cutting energy consumption
- growing/eating organic food
Rated 1 (very important) to 4 (not at all important)

GAP: The value scales and performance indexes were 
dichotomized at their empirical midpoints (medians) and 
then cross-tabulated with each other. The survey 
respondents then fell into one of four categories: (1) 
low values/low performance (“no gap”), (2) high 
values/low performance (“gap”), (3) low values/high 
performance (“gap”), and (4) high values/high 
performance (“no gap”). These gaps (or absence of gaps) 
are calculated for both performance indicators (TSR 
Index and HFP) and for each of the three value scales 
(Country Asceticism, Homestead Production and 
Ecological Sensitivity). 
The first step to the comparability of the variables is 
to normalize each indicator and then place the 
respondents’ scores along a normalized distribution as 
t-scores with means of 50 and standard deviations of 
10. With respondents possessing comparable scores for 
each of the key indicators which constitute the 
values-performance discrepancies, a “gap score” for 
each value-performance pair was calculated by 
subtracting normalized performance scores from 
normalized value scores.
To faciliate interpretation they just used a subsample 
with values higher than the median for Technological 
Self-Reliance Index (TSR), Country Ascetisism (CA), 
Homestead Production (HP) and Ecological Sensitivity 
(ES) for further analysis

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-br=-.25 p < .005
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bBeta=-.20 p < .005
Beta controlled for
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual use of technology
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual homestead food production
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
use of technology
- gap: importance of cultural asceticism / actual 
use of homestead food production
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bBeta=-.14 p < .05
Beta controlled for
- mindfulness
- relationships
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual use of technology
- time for self
- age
- homestead food production


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1999): study US 1998
TitleMindfulness and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: A Further Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1999, Vol. 46, 341 - 368
DOIDOI: 10.1023/A:1006941403481
Public'Back to the landers', USA 1998
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response41,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelDiscrepancy: HFP-ES gap
Page in Source 358
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between the actual homestead food 
production and the selfrated importance ecological 
sensitivity

HFP: percentage of a family's food that the respondents 
reported was produced on ther mini-homesteads

ES: Selfreport on Ecological Sensitivity, rated 
importance of:
- the expanion of wilderness areas
- preserving old growth forests
- providing habitat for endangered species
- recycling newspapers
- reducing personal energy consumption
Rated 1 (very important) to 4 (not at all important)


GAP: The value scales and performance indexes were 
dichotomized at their empirical midpoints (medians) and 
then cross-tabulated with each other. The survey 
respondents then fell into one of four categories: (1) 
low values/low performance (“no gap”), (2) high 
values/low performance (“gap”), (3) low values/high 
performance (“gap”), and (4) high values/high 
performance (“no gap”). These gaps (or absence of gaps) 
are calculated for both performance indicators (TSR 
Index and HFP) and for each of the three value scales 
(Country Asceticism, Homestead Production and 
Ecological Sensitivity). 
The first step to the comparability of the variables is 
to normalize each indicator and then place the 
respondents’ scores along a normalized distribution as 
t-scores with means of 50 and standard deviations of 
10. With respondents possessing comparable scores for 
each of the key indicators which constitute the 
values-performance discrepancies, a “gap score” for 
each value-performance pair was calculated by 
subtracting normalized performance scores from 
normalized value scores.
To faciliate interpretation they just used a subsample 
with values higher than the median for Technological 
Self-Reliance Index (TSR), Country Ascetisism (CA), 
Homestead Production (HP) and Ecological Sensitivity 
(ES) for further analysis

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-br=-.28 p < .005
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bBeta=-.05 ns
Beta controlled for
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
homestead food production
- gap: importance of ecological sensitivity / 
actual use of technology
- gap: importance of homestead production / actual 
use of technology
- gap: importance of cultual ascetiscism / actual 
homestead food production


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelTSR-homestead production gap
Page in Source 193
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between valued and realized self-reliance

VALUE
Reported importance of: 1. Growing your own food; 2. 
Wearing clothes made in your own home; 3.growing/eating 
organic food.

TECNOLOGICAL SELF RELIANCE (TSR)
Performance index is calculated by multiplying tools or 
technology, possessed by a respondent by the efficiency 
rating claimed for the particular technology, resulting 
in the sum of the efficiency rating for each of the 25 
tools.The tools are: 1.garden, 2. greenhouse, 3.root 
cellar, 4.fish pond, 5. solar heat, 6.pigs, 7.wood lot, 
8.wood stove heat, 9.wood stove cooking, 10.composting 
privy, 11.hydro-electric system, 12.graywater(waste 
water) 13.solar water heater, 14.chickens, 15.goats, 
16.beef cattle, 17.milk cow(s) 18.sheep, 19.wind power, 
20.weeder geese, 21.bees, 22.fruit trees, 23.butcher 
larger anaimals, 24.photo voltaic power, 45.work 
horses.
Efficiency is evaluated by asking the respondents about 
the effectiveness of the tool items of 'providing your 
family with independence or self-reliance from a one 
(not at all effective) to four(very effective point 
sequence. The TSR index-scores have a theoretical range 
between 0-100

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and performance indexes 
at their respective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a. No gap, low values-low TSR
b. gap,    high values-low TSR 
c. gap,    low values-high TSR
d. no gap, high values-high TSR.

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-a
Ss, who value technical self reliance high, 
irrespectible of their performance (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.25 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.23 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.21 p<.005

Ss, who value Homestead Food Production high, 
irrespectable their performance, (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.30 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.27 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.21 p<.005


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelTSR -country asceticism gap
Page in Source 192
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between Technical Self Reliance(TSR) and 
Country Asceticism(CA)

TECHNOLOGICAL SELF RELIANCE (TSR) Calculated by 
multiplying tools or technology, possessed by a
respondent by the efficiency rating claimed for the 
particular technology, resulting in the sum of the 
efficiency rating for each of the 25 tools.
The tools are: 1.garden, 2. greenhouse, 3.root cellar, 
4.fish pond, 5. solar heat, 6.pigs, 7.wood lot, 8.wood 
stove heat, 9.wood stove cooking, 10.composting privy, 
11.hydro-electric system, 12.graywater(waste water) 
13.solar water heater, 14.chickens, 15.goats, 16.beef 
cattle, 17.milk cow(s) 18.sheep, 19.wind power, 
20.weeder geese, 21.bees, 22.fruit trees, 23.butcher 
larger anaimals, 24.photo voltaic power, 45.work 
horses.
Efficiency is evaluated by asking the respondents about 
the effectiveness of the tool items of 'providing your 
family with independence or self-reliance from a one 
(not at all effective) to four(very effective point 
sequence. The TSR index-scores have a theoretical range 
betwee 0-100

COUNTRY ASCETISM(CA)
Reported importance of not having: 1.a gas or electric 
clothes dryer; 2.an indoor toilet or bathroom; 3 not 
living in a modern house; 4. electricity in your home; 
a microwave oven.

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and performance indexes 
at their respective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a. No gap, low CA-low TSR
b. gap,    high CA-low TSR 
c. gap,    low CA-high TSR
d. no gap, high CA-high TSR.

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-a
Ss, who value technical self reliance high, 
irrespectible of their performance (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.22 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.18 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.08 ns

Ss, who value Homestead Food Production high, 
irrespectable their performance, (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.24 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.20 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.10 ns


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelTSR-Ecological Sensitivity Gap
Page in Source 192
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between Technological Self Reliance and 
Ecological Sensitivity

PERFORMANCE
Technological Self Reliance. The index is calculated by 
multiplying tools or technology, possessed by a
respondent by the efficiency rating claimed for the 
particular technology, resulting in the sum of the 
efficiency rating for each of the 25 tools.The tools 
are: 1.garden, 2. greenhouse, 3.root cellar, 4.fish 
pond, 5. solar heat, 6.pigs, 7.wood lot, 8.wood stove 
heat, 9.wood stove cooking, 10.composting privy, 
11.hydro-electric system, 12.graywater(waste water) 
13.solar water heater, 14.chickens, 15.goats, 16.beef 
cattle, 17.milk cow(s) 18.sheep, 19.wind power, 
20.weeder geese, 21.bees, 22.fruit trees, 23.butcher 
larger anaimals, 24.photo voltaic power, 45.work 
horses.
Efficiency is evaluated by asking the respondents about 
the effectiveness of the tool items of 'providing your 
family with independence or self-reliance from a one 
(not at all effective) to four(very effective point 
sequence. The TSR index-scores have a theoretical range 
betwee 0-100

VALUE
Ecological Sensitivity is importance of: 1. The 
expansion of wilderness areas; 2.preserving old growth 
forests; 3. Providing habitat for endangered species; 
4. Recycling newspapers; 5. Reducing personal energy 
consumption.

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and performance indexes 
at their respective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a. No gap, low values-low TSR
b. gap,    high values-low TSR 
c. gap,    low values-high TSR
d. no gap, high values-high TSR.

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-a
Ss, who value technical self reliance high, 
irrespectible of their performance (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.22 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.25 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.18 p<.005

Ss, who value Homestead Food Production high, 
irrespectable their performance, (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.29 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.28 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.24 p<.005


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelHFP-homestead production gap
Page in Source 192
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between Homestead Food Production and 
Homestead Production Value

VALUE of homestead production
Reported importance of: 1.growing own food, 2.wearing 
clothes, made in your own home, 3.growing/eating 
organic food.

PERFORMANCE 
% family's food, that the respondents claimed was 
produced for their smallholding. The Homestaed Food 
Production index has a range between 0 and 100 per 
cent.

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and the performance 
indexes at their repective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a.No gap low values-low HFP
b.gap    high values-low HFP
c.gap    low values-high HFP
d.no gap high values-high HFP

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-ar=-
Ss, who value technical self reliance high, 
irrespectible of their performance (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.32 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.22 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.25 p<.005

Ss, who value Homestead Food Production high, 
irrespectable their performance, (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.33 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.23 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.25 p<.005


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelHFP- country asceticism gap
Page in Source 192
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between Homestead food production and 
country asceticism

VALUE
Country Asceticism is importance of not having: 1.a gas 
or electric clothes dryer; 2.an indoor toilet or 
bathroom; 3. Not living in a modern house; 4. 
Electricity in your home; 5. A microwave oven.

PERFORMANCE is the percentage
of a family's food, that the respondents claimed was 
produced for their smallholding. The Homestaed Food 
Production index has a range between 0 and 100 per 
cent.

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and the performance 
indexes at their repective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a.No gap low values-low HFP
b.gap    high values-low HFP
c.gap    low values-high HFP
d.no gap high values-high HFP

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-ar=-
Ss, who value technical self reliance high, 
irrespectible of their performance (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.26 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.17 p<.01
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.12 ns

Ss, who value Homestead Food Production high, 
irrespectable their performance, (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.28 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.18 p<.01
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.13 p<.05


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelRealized homestead production
Page in Source 187
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between valued and achieved homestead 
production

VALUE of Homestead Production(HPF)
Reported importance of 1.growing own food, 2.wearing 
clothes, made in your own home, 3.growing, eating 
organic food.
 
PERFORMANCE: Technological Self
Reliance(TSR)
Index calculated by multiplying tools or technology, 
possessed by a respondent by the efficiency rating 
claimed for the particular technology, resulting in the 
sum of the efficiency rating for each of the 25 tools.
The tools are: 1.garden, 2. greenhouse, 3.root cellar, 
4.fish pond, 5. solar heat, 6.pigs, 7.wood lot, 8.wood 
stove heat, 9.wood stove cooking, 10.composting privy, 
11.hydro-electric system, 12.graywater(waste water) 
13.solar water heater, 14.chickens, 15.goats, 16.beef 
cattle, 17.milk cow(s) 18.sheep, 19.wind power, 
20.weeder geese, 21.bees, 22.fruit trees, 23.butcher 
larger anaimals, 24.photo voltaic power, 45.work 
horses.
Efficiency is evaluated by asking the respondents about 
the effectiveness of the tool items of 'providing your 
family with independence or self-reliance from a one 
(not at all effective) to four(very effective point 
sequence. The TSR index-scores have a theoretical range 
between 0-100

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and performance indexes 
at their respective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a. No gap, low values-low TSR
b. gap,    high values-low TSR 
c. gap,    low values-high TSR
d. no gap, high values-high TSR.

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-aDM=+
a. M=3.21
b. M=3.17
c. M=3.28
d. M=3.37

b-c difference not significant


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelRealized Ecological Sensitivity
Page in Source 187
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancies between valued and achieved ecological 
sensitivity

VALUE of Ecological Sensitivity (VES)
Reported importance of: the expansion of wlderness 
area, 2. Preserving old growth forests, 3.providing 
habitat for endangered species, 4.recycling newspapers, 
5.reducing personal energy consumption.

PERFORMANCE : Technological Self
Reliance(TSR)
Index calculated by multiplying tools or technology, 
possessed by a respondent by the efficiency rating 
claimed for the particular technology, resulting in the 
sum of the efficiency rating for each of the 25 tools.
The tools are: 1.garden, 2. greenhouse, 3.root cellar, 
4.fish pond, 5. solar heat, 6.pigs, 7.wood lot, 8.wood 
stove heat, 9.wood stove cooking, 10.composting privy, 
11.hydro-electric system, 12.graywater(waste water) 
13.solar water heater, 14.chickens, 15.goats, 16.beef 
cattle, 17.milk cow(s) 18.sheep, 19.wind power, 
20.weeder geese, 21.bees, 22.fruit trees, 23.butcher 
larger anaimals, 24.photo voltaic power, 45.work 
horses.
Efficiency is evaluated by asking the respondents about 
the effectiveness of the tool items of 'providing your 
family with independence or self-reliance from a one 
(not at all effective) to four(very effective point 
sequence. The TSR index-scores have a theoretical range 
between 0-100

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and performance indexes 
at their respective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a. No gap, low values-low TSR
b. gap,    high values-low TSR 
c. gap,    low values-high TSR
d. no gap, high values-high TSR.

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-aDM=+
a. M=3.20
b. M=3.16
c. M=3.34
d. M=3.36

b-c difference not significant


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelRealized Country Asceticism
Page in Source 188
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between valued and achieved country 
asceticism.

VALUE of country asceticism:
Reported importance of not having: 1.gas or electric 
clothesdryer, 2.indoor toilet or bathroom, 
3.electricity in your own home, 4.micro-wave oven, 
5.not living in an modern house 

PERFORMANCE: Home Food Production(HFP)
Index calculated by measuring the percentage of 
family's food that the respondents claimed was produced 
from their smallholding.

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and performance indexes 
at their respective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a. No gap, low values-low TSR
b. gap, high values-low TSR 
c. gap, low values-high TSR
d. no gap, high values-high TSR.
Observed distributionHFP: M=35.96 Med=30.0

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-aDM=+
a. M=3.22
b. M=3.05
c. M=3.30
d. M=3.50

b-c difference significant p<.05


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelRealized Homestead Production
Page in Source 188
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between valued and achieved Homestead 
Production.

VALUE of homestead production
Reported importance of: 1.growing own food, 2.wearing 
clothes, made in your own home, 3.growing/eating 
organic food.

PERFORMANCE
Percentage of a family's food, that the respondents 
claimed was produced for their smallholding. The 
Homestaed Food Production(HFP) index has a range 
between 0 and 100 per cent.

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and the performance 
indexes at their repective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a.No gap low values-low HFP
b.gap    high values-low HFP
c.gap    low values-high HFP
d.no gap high values-high HFP
Observed distributionHFP M=35.96 Med=30.0

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-a
a.M=3.15
b.M=3.13
c.M=3.31
d.M=3.43

b-c difference not significant


Correlational finding on Happiness and Current success in values
Subject code: V05ab

StudyJacob & Brinkerhoff (1997): study US 1989
TitleValues, Performance and Subjective Well-Being in the Sustainability Movement: An Elaboration of Multiple Discrepancies Theory.
SourceSocial Indicators Research, 1997, Vol. 42, 171 - 204
DOIDOI:10.1023/A:1006858618686
Public'Back to the land' mini farmers, USA,1989
SampleNon-probability purposive sample
Non-Response43,8
Respondents N =565

Correlate
Author's labelHFP-Ecological sensitivity gap
Page in Source 192
Our classificationCurrent success in values, code V05ab
Operationalization
Discrepancy between Homestead Food Production and 
Ecological Sensitivity

VALUE
Ecological sensitivity is importance of: 1. The 
expansion of wilderness areas; 2.preserving old growth 
forests; 3. Providing habitat for endangered species; 
4. Recycling newspapers; 5. Reducing personal energy 
consumption.

PERFORMANCE is the percentage
of a family's food, that the respondents claimed was 
produced for their smallholding. The Homestaed Food 
Production index has a range between 0 and 100 per 
cent.

GAP between value and performance is constructed by 
dichotomizing the value scale and the performance 
indexes at their repective medians and to cross these 
indicators with each other. The respondents will fall 
in one of the four categories: 
a.No gap low values-low HFP
b.gap    high values-low HFP
c.gap    low values-high HFP
d.no gap high values-high HFP

Observed Relation with Happiness
Happiness
Measure
StatisticsElaboration/Remarks
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-ar=-
Ss, who value technical self reliance high, 
irrespectible of their performance (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.29 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.24 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.27 p<.005

Ss, who value Homestead Food Production high, 
irrespectable their performance, (N=±280)
-high Country Asceticism     r=-.30 p<.005
-high Homestead Production   r=-.25 p<.005
-high Ecological Sensitivity r=-.28 p<.00-


Appendices

Appendix 1: Happiness measures used

CodeFull Text
O-H?-?-sq-v-4-aSelfreport on single question:

Lead item not reported
4 very happy
3 quite happy
2 not very happy
1 not at all happy
O-H?-c-sq-v-5-bSelfreport on single question:

Lead item not reported.
5 very happy
4 happy
3 neutral
2. unhappy
1 very unhappy
O-SL?-?-sq-v-5-aSelfreport on single question:

"....... satisfaction with life ....."
(full question not reported)
5 very satisfied
4 satisfied
3 don't know/satisfied
2 don't know/not satisfied
1 disappointed in life


Appendix 2: Statistics used

SymbolExplanation
Beta STANDARDIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENT by LEAST SQUARES (OLS)
Type: test statistic.

Measurement level: Correlates: all metric, Happiness: metric.
Range: [-1 ; +1]

Meaning:
beta > 0 « a higher correlate level corresponds to a higher happiness rating on average.
beta < 0 « a higher correlate level corresponds to a higher happiness rating on average.
beta = 0 « no correlation.
beta = + 1 or -1 « perfect correlation.
DMDIFFERENCE of MEANS
Type: descriptive statistic only.
Measurement level: Correlate: dichotomous, Happiness: metric
Range: depending on the happiness rating scale of the author; range symmetric about zero.

Meaning: the difference of the mean happiness, as measured on the author's rating scale, between the two correlate levels.
rPRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENT (Also "Pearson's correlation coefficient' or simply 'correlation coefficient')
Type: test statistic.
Measurement level: Correlate: metric, Happiness: metric
Range: [-1; +1]

Meaning:
r = 0 « no correlation ,
r = 1 « perfect correlation, where high correlate values correspond with high happiness values, and
r = -1 « perfect correlation, where high correlate values correspond with low happiness values.
rpcPARTIAL CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
Type: test statistic
Measurement level: Correlate: metric, Happiness: metric
Range: [-1; +1]

Meaning: a partial correlation between happiness and one of the correlates is that correlation, which remains after accounting for the contribution of the other influences, or some of them, to the total variability in the happiness scores.
Under that conditions
rpc > 0 « a higher correlate level corresponds with a higher happiness rating,
rpc < 0 « a higher correlate level corresponds with a lower happiness rating,


Appendix 3: About the World Database of Happiness

Structure of the collections

The World Database of Happiness is an archive of research findings on subjective enjoyment of life .
It brings together findings that are scattered throughout many studies and provides a basis for synthetic work.

World literature on subjective wellbeing


Selection on fit with definition of happiness

Bibliography    and     Directory    

Selection of empirical studies and within these on valid measurement: Happiness measures
Abstracting and classification of findings

How happy people are, distributional findings What goes together with happiness

Happiness in nations
Happiness in regions
Happiness in publics
Correlational findings

  Listing of comparable findings in nations  
States of nations   ,   Trends in nations


Size of the collections
11627 publications in Bibliography of happiness, of which 6066 report an empirical study that is eligible for inclusion in the findings archive.
1124 measures of happiness, mostly single survey questions varying in wording and response scale.
12236 distributional findings in the general public, of which 8479 in 172 nations (former nations and de facto nations included) and 3757 findings in 2454 regions and cities in nations.
2072 studies with findings in 160 specific publics.
15337 correlational findings observed in 2016 studies, excerpted from 1541 publications.

Appendix 4 Further Findings in the World Database of Happiness

Main Subjects Subject Description Number of Studies
A01ACTIVITY (how much one does)72
A02ACTIVITY: PATTERN (what one does)112
A03AFFECTIVE LIFE82
A04AGE661
A05AGGRESSION14
A06ANOMY33
A07APPEARANCE (good looks)24
A08ATTITUDES11
A09AUTHORITARIANISM4
B01BIRTH CONTROL0
B02BIRTH HISTORY (own birth)205
B03BODY99
C01CHILDREN12
C02CHILDREN: WANT FOR (Parental aspirations)13
C03CHILDREN: HAVING (parental status)306
C04CHILDREN: CHARACTERISTICS OF ONE'S CHILDREN32
C05CHILDREN: RELATION WITH ONE'S CHILDREN17
C06CHILDREN: REARING OF ONE'S CHILDREN (parental behavior)35
C07COMMUNAL LIVING16
C08CONCERNS40
C09CONSUMPTION113
C10COPING64
C11CREATIVENESS7
C12CRIME2
C13CULTURE (Arts and Sciences)41
D01DAILY JOYS & HASSLES7
D02DISASTER1
E01EDUCATION516
E02EMPLOYMENT 739
E03ETHNICITY169
E04EXPRESSIVE BEHAVIOR12
F01FAMILY OF ORIGIN (earlier family for adults, current for young)311
F02FAMILY OF PROCREATION102
F03FAMILY OF RELATIVES189
F04FARMING66
F05FREEDOM56
F06FRIENDSHIP236
G01GENDER622
G02GRIEF1
H01HABITS2
H02HANDICAP47
H03HAPPINESS: VIEWS ON HAPPINESS119
H04HAPPINESS: DISPERSION OF HAPPINESS18
H05HAPPINESS: CAREER225
H06HAPINNESS: EFFECT OF CONDITIONS FOR HAPPINESS1
H07HAPPINESS: CORRESPONDENCE OF DIFFERENT MEASURES342
H08HAPPINESS OF OTHERS6
H09HAPPINESS: REPUTATION OF HAPPINESS26
H10HEALTH-BEHAVIOR32
H11HELPING16
H12HOPE35
H13HOUSEHOLD: COMPOSITION238
H14HOUSEHOLD: WORK41
H15HOUSING261
I01INCOME1042
I02INSTITUTIONAL LIVING44
I03INTELLIGENCE86
I04INTERESTS17
I05INTERVIEW 87
I06INTIMACY141
L01LANGUAGE18
L02LEADERSHIP13
L03LEISURE328
L04LIFE APPRAISALS: OTHER THAN HAPPINESS457
L05LIFE CHANGE70
L06LIFE EVENTS106
L07LIFE GOALS119
L08LIFE HISTORY11
L09LIFE STYLE 39
L10LOCAL ENVIRONMENT701
L11LOTTERY14
L12LOVE-LIFE44
M01MARRIAGE: MARITAL STATUS CAREER108
M02MARRIAGE: CURRENT MARITAL STATUS862
M03MARRIAGE: RELATIONSHIP155
M04MARRIAGE: PARTNER76
M05MEANING29
M06MEDICAL TREATMENT107
M07MENTAL HEALTH302
M08MIGRATION: TO OTHER COUNTRY97
M09MIGRATION: MOVING WITHIN COUNTRY (residential mobility)49
M10MIGRATION: MIGRANT WORK5
M11MILITARY LIFE13
M12MODERNITY5
M13MOOD338
M14MOTIVATION21
M15MOBILITY20
N01NATION: NATIONALITY68
N02NATION: ERA (temporal period)121
N03NATION: NATIONAL CHARACTER (modal personality)75
N04NATION: CONDITION IN ONE'S NATION996
N05NATION: POSITION OF ONE'S NATION16
N06NATION: ATTITUDES TO ONES NATION190
N07NATION: LIVABILITY OF ONE'S NATION53
N08NATION: ATTITUDINAL CLIMATE14
N09NATION: REGION132
N10NUTRITION36
N11NATION: AREA2
O01OCCUPATION222
O02ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION16
P01PERSONALITY: HISTORY55
P02PERSONALITY: CHANGE11
P03PERSONALITY: CURRENT ORGANIZATION10
P04PERSONALITY: CURRENT TRAITS722
P05PERSONALITY: LATER21
P06PHYSICAL HEALTH 814
P07PLANNING11
P08POLITICAL BEHAVIOUR279
P09POPULARITY30
P10POSSESSIONS152
P11PRISON3
P12PROBLEMS30
P13PSYCHO-SOMATIC COMPLAINTS63
P14PETS4
R01RELIGION414
R02RESOURCES29
R03RETIREMENT151
R04ROLES31
S01SCHOOL201
S02SELF-IMAGE311
S03SEX-LIFE76
S04SLEEP17
S05SOCIAL MOBILITY25
S06SOCIAL PARTICIPATION: PERSONAL CONTACTS98
S07SOCIAL PARTICIPATION : VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS150
S08SOCIAL PARTICIPATION: TOTAL (personal + associations)54
S09SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS189
S10SOCIAL SUPPORT: RECEIVED115
S11SOCIAL SUPPORT: PROVIDED24
S12SPORTS62
S13STIMULANTS79
S14SUICIDE9
S15SUMMED DETERMINANTS165
T01TIME 105
T02THERAPY56
T03TOLERANCE37
T04TRUST43
V01VALUES: CAREER6
V02VALUES: CURRENT PREFERENCES (own)158
V03VALUES: CLIMATE (current values in environment)13
V04VALUES: SIMILARITY (current fit with others)13
V05VALUES: LIVING UP TO18
V06VICTIM 31
W01WAR7
W02WISDOM1
W03WORK: CAREER1
W04WORK: CONDITIONS111
W05WORK: ATTITUDES409
W06WORK: PERFORMANCE (current)37
W07WORRIES51
X01UNCLASSIFIED34


Appendix 5: Related Subjects

SubjectRelated Subject(s)
V05VALUES: LIVING UP TOL07acRealization of lifegoals
V05abCurrent success in valuesL07acRealization of lifegoals
V05abCurrent success in valuesV04adValue-environment fit
V05acAttitudes to succes in valuesL07ac04Satisfaction with goal-achievement

A report of the World Database of Happiness, Correlational Findings