Happiness level in nations

Overall happiness    Life satisfaction    Best-Worse possible life    Hedonic level of affect   

Average happiness in the general population

Unhappiness

1. Only items that concern happiness in the sense of 'subjective appreciation of life-as-a-whole, as assessed in surveys by direct questions' and passed the validity test for inclusion in the World Database of Hapiness.

2. Mean scores per era per country. Mostly based on only one survey, sometimes 10 or more.

3. Data taken from World Database of Happiness (WDH), section 'Distributional Findings in nations'; selected to obtain sets that are comparable across a sufficient number of nations in an era.

4. Transformed to 0-10 by Thurstone transformation. Experts rated response options such as 'very happy' and 'unhappy' on a 0 to 10 point scale. Next average scores were computed on the basis of these weights. See Veenhoven 1993 pp 108-114. An advantage of this method is that responses on different questions can be compared. This yields a greater number of cases. Yet the transformation is discutable.

5. Transformed to 0-10. Thurstone transformation. Experts rated response options such as 'very satisfied' and 'dissatisfied' on a 0 to 10 point scale. Next average scores were computed on the basis of these weights. See Veenhoven 1993 pp 108-114. An advantage of this method is that responses on different questions can be compared. This yields a greater number of cases. Yet the transformation is discutable.

6. 10 step stretched to 11. Transformation procedure described in Veenhoven 1993 pp 115.

7  In this decade all nations had a score on 10-step life-satisfaction in the year 1990. Double information (also 11-step) is only available for Belgium, Germany, Norway, Russia and Slovenia). Extra years only for Germany.

8. Most scores are based on responses to the following question: "All things considered, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your life-as-a-whole now? 1 dissatisfied to10 satisfied" (item code O-SLW/c/sq/n/10/a). This classification is explained in section 4/3 of the introductory text. Scores on this 1-10 scale were transformed linearly to range 0-10. This transformation in explained in the introductory text, chapter 7.3.
Scores of ten nations are based on responses to a somewhat different question: "Suppose the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder the worst possible life. Where on this ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time?" The response was rated on a ladder scale ranging from 0 to 10 (item code O-BW/c/sq/l/11/c). We transformed the scores using the information of  nations in which both this item and the above question on life-satisfaction had been used in about the same years.  There are 34 such cases and the scores on the two items appears to be highly correlated: r = +.85. We computed the regression equation and used these to estimate the score on 0-10 life-satisfaction. The formula is: Estimated 0-10 life satisfaction = 0.031 + 1.0 x observed score on the Best-Worst item.These estimates are reported in this table. The 95% confidence interval around these estimated values is about 3 points, which means that these estimates are quite rough. The original means on the Best Worst item were: Angola, 4,04; Bolivia, 5,47; Guatemala, 7,33; Honduras, 6,83; Ivory Coast, 5,42; Kenya, 4,86; Kuwait, 6,67; Libanon, 4,99; Mali, 4,55; Senegal, 5,34 and Uzbekistan 5,91.This estimation technique is described in more detail in the Introductory Text, chapter 7 'Comparability of the data' in section 7/3.1 'Converting scores on measures of different happiness variants'.

9. Full distribution of responses not yet published. Approximate averages taken from page 361, chart 1, Gallup 'The State of Global Well-Being 2007

10. Allmost all scores are based on responses to the Best-Worst Possible Life Question from the Gallup 2007 survey (BW11_06): “”Please Imagine a ladder with steps numbered from 0 at the bottom to 10 at the top. Suppose we say that the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. If the top step is 10 and the bottom step is 0, on which step of the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time?” Scores on four nations (Algeria, Iceland, Malta Luxembourg) are based on responses to the life satisfaction question from the World Value Survey 1999 (ls10_99): Taking all together, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?’. Respondents were required to rate their lives from 1 to 10. We transformed the scores using the information of nations in which both these questions had been used.  There are 66 such cases and the scores on the two items appears to be highly correlated: r = +.73. We computed the regression equation and used these to estimate the score on 0-10 Best-Worst Possible Life. The formula is: Best Worst Possible Life = 1.448 + 0.68 x Life Satisfaction. The original means on the Life Satisfaction item were: Algeria: 5.67, Iceland: 8.05, Malta: 8:21, Luxembourg; 7.87. This estimation technique is described in more detail in the Introductory Text, chapter 7 'Comparability of the data' in section 7/3.1 'Converting scores on measures of different happiness variants'.

For an overview of survey items per nation, per era see caselist

States of Nations is an inventory of country characteristics. It is part of the World Database of Happiness

Keywords added: Cross-national, Life Satisfaction, Well-being