print

Correlational findings

Study Latif (2011): study CA 1994

Public:
45+ aged adults, Canada, followed 13 years. 1994-2007
Survey name:
CA National Population Health Survey: pooled waves
Sample:
Respondents:
N = 22040
Non Response:
Assessment:
Interview: computer assisted (CAPI)
every 2 years

Correlate

Authors's Label
Income
Our Classification
Remarks
T1:1994-1995, T7:2006-2007 Most respondents retired in this period
Operationalization
3 Highest
2 Upper middle
1 Low middle
0 Low (reference)

Observed Relation with Happiness

Happiness Measure Statistics Elaboration / Remarks O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d LRCD = +.94 p < .01 CURRENT happiness by CURRENT income
Highest         (vs Low)
O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d LRCD = +.55 p < .01 Upper middle    (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d LRCD = +.45 p < .01 Low middle      (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d b = +.12 p < .01 Highest         (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d b = +.08 p < .01 Upper middle    (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d b = +.05 p < .01 Low middle      (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d OLRC = +.59 p < .01 Highest         (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d OLRC = +.31 p < .01 Upper middle    (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d OLRC = +.17 p < .01 Low middle      (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d b-fix = +.04 p < .01 T1-T7 CHANGE in happiness by income level:
- Highest         (vs Low)
O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d b-fix = +.02 ns - Upper middle    (vs Low) O-HL-?-sq-v-5-d b-fix = +.00 ns - Low middle      (vs Low)

LRCD, b, OLRC, b-fix controlled for
- gender
- age, age squared
- marital status
- education level
- health status
- province
- lives in an urban area
- home owner

Instrumental Variable used for retirement yields similar results
- discontinuous age specific retirement incentives