print

Correlational findings

Study Fischer (2009b): study ZZ OECD member states 1997 /1

Public:
Adults, general public, 30 OECD Countries, 1997-2001
Sample:
Respondents:
N = 45000
Non Response:
not reported
Assessment:
Interview: face-to-face

Correlate

Authors's label
Labour market mobility (income mobility)
Our Classification
Operationalization
Intergerational earnings elasticity: Dependency of one's own life-time income to parental income based on a farther son comparison.

Value 0 denotes no dependency between between parent and child outcomes, value -1 denotes complete dependency between parent and child outcomes.

Observed Relation with Happiness

Happiness Measure Statistics Elaboration / Remarks O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-a b = +1.3 p < .01 All individuals O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-a b = +1.8 p < .05 Political conservative individuals O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-a b = +.91 p < .10 Political leftist individuals

B's are controlled for:
- National net income per capita
- Individual demographic factors
- Individual socio-economics factors
O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-a b = +1.2 p < .01 Additionally controlled for perceived social mobility, all individuals

B +1.2 means that complete dependency between parent and child outcomes in nation goes with -1.2 points less happiness on the scale 0-10 compared to complete no income mobility
O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-a b = -.31 p < .05 Interaction of labour market mobility and market income inequality. Individuals are the most happy in countries:
- with low income mobility and high income inequality
- with high income mobilty and low income inequality
O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-a b = +.02 ns Interaction term of labour market mobility and final income inequality does not affect happiness