print

Correlational findings

Study Posel & Casale (2011): study ZA 2008

Public:
17+ aged general public, South-Africa., 2008
Survey name:
US-National Income Dynamics Study (NIDS) 2008
Sample:
Respondents:
N = 28000
Non Response:
Assessment:
Interview: face-to-face
Assumed by WDH team.

Correlate

Authors's Label
Toilet
Our Classification
Distribution
a: 56%, b: 34%, c: 10%
Operationalization
a. flush toilet
b. chemical toilet/pit latrine (not for whites)
c. bucket toilet/no toilet (reference)

Rated:
1 yes
0 no

Observed Relation with Happiness

Happiness Measure Statistics Elaboration / Remarks O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-I OPRC = +.31 p < .01 Flush toilet (vs bucket/no toilet),All O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-I OPRC = +.22 p < .01 Flush toilet (vs bucket/no toilet), Africans only O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-I OPRC = +.18 p < .01 Chemical toilet/pit latrine (vs bucket/no toilet), All O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-I OPRC = +.17 p < .01 Chemical toilet/pit latrine (vs bucket/no toilet), Africans only O-SLW-c-sq-n-10-I = OPRC's controled for:
- individual characteristics
  - ethnicity
  - head
  - age
  - years of schooling
  - sexe
  - marital status
  - health status
- household characteristics
  - number of children
  - number of pensioners
  - quality dwelling place
- social capital variables
  - involved in religious activities
  - neigbours
  - crime in neighbourhood
  - member of a group
  - owns a cellular phone
- income variables
  - per capita household income (Rands)
  - actual rank in SA (richest, middle, poorest)
  - percieved rank in SA (richest, middle, poorest)
  - percieved rank in village/suburb (richest, middle, poorest)
  - percieved to be better/same/worse than at age 15
  - expect to be better/same/worse off 2 years hence