How Locus of Control Predicts Subjective Well-Being and its Inequality: The Moderating Role of Social Values

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1007/s10902-024-00821-z

Roger Fernandez-Urbano, Vicente Royuela

{"title":"How Locus of Control Predicts Subjective Well-Being and its Inequality: The Moderating Role of Social Values","authors":"Roger Fernandez-Urbano, Vicente Royuela","doi":"10.1007/s10902-024-00821-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Previous research has established the central role of an individuals’ locus of control (LoC) in influencing subjective well-being. However, earlier studies have predominantly omitted an exploration of potential moderating factors at the country-level and have rarely delved into the influence of LoC on an important yet often-overlooked dimension of well-being—namely, subjective well-being inequality. Addressing these gaps, this study examines the association between individuals’ LoC and subjective well-being, considering both the mean and inequality aspects. Additionally, it explores the moderating influence of country’s social values, particularly the individualism-collectivism dimension. Utilizing data from the Integrated Values Survey, comprising 170,000 observations across 37 countries from 1996 to 2022, our study confirms a strong positive relationship between LoC and subjective well-being while also unveiling a strong negative relationship with subjective well-being inequality. Moreover, it demonstrates that country’s social values exert significant moderation effects on the relationship between LoC and subjective well-being, affecting both the mean level and inequality aspects, albeit in opposing directions. By employing the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, our findings support the importance of structural effects. Understanding how increasing LoC shapes people’s wellbeing in a society holds implications for policymaking and contributes to ongoing discussions on collective choice and inequality.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00821-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous research has established the central role of an individuals’ locus of control (LoC) in influencing subjective well-being. However, earlier studies have predominantly omitted an exploration of potential moderating factors at the country-level and have rarely delved into the influence of LoC on an important yet often-overlooked dimension of well-being—namely, subjective well-being inequality. Addressing these gaps, this study examines the association between individuals’ LoC and subjective well-being, considering both the mean and inequality aspects. Additionally, it explores the moderating influence of country’s social values, particularly the individualism-collectivism dimension. Utilizing data from the Integrated Values Survey, comprising 170,000 observations across 37 countries from 1996 to 2022, our study confirms a strong positive relationship between LoC and subjective well-being while also unveiling a strong negative relationship with subjective well-being inequality. Moreover, it demonstrates that country’s social values exert significant moderation effects on the relationship between LoC and subjective well-being, affecting both the mean level and inequality aspects, albeit in opposing directions. By employing the Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition, our findings support the importance of structural effects. Understanding how increasing LoC shapes people’s wellbeing in a society holds implications for policymaking and contributes to ongoing discussions on collective choice and inequality.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

控制感如何预测主观幸福感及其不平等：社会价值观的调节作用

以往的研究已经确立了个人控制感（LoC）在影响主观幸福感方面的核心作用。然而，以往的研究主要忽略了对国家层面潜在调节因素的探讨，也很少深入研究LoC对幸福感的一个重要但却经常被忽视的维度--即主观幸福感不平等--的影响。为了弥补这些不足，本研究从均值和不平等两个方面考察了个人 LoC 与主观幸福感之间的关联。此外，本研究还探讨了国家社会价值观（尤其是个人主义-集体主义维度）的调节作用。我们的研究利用了综合价值观调查（Integrated Values Survey）的数据，其中包括 1996 年至 2022 年期间 37 个国家的 170,000 个观测值，证实了 LoC 与主观幸福感之间的密切正相关关系，同时也揭示了 LoC 与主观幸福感不平等之间的密切负相关关系。此外，研究还表明，国家的社会价值观对 LoC 与主观幸福感之间的关系具有显著的调节作用，既影响平均水平，也影响不平等程度，尽管方向相反。通过采用瓦哈卡-布林德分解法，我们的研究结果证明了结构效应的重要性。了解 LoC 的增加如何影响人们在社会中的幸福感对政策制定具有重要意义，并有助于当前关于集体选择和不平等的讨论。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Happiness Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

6.50%

发文量

110

期刊介绍： The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?