Supplementary analysis for lifestyle and wellbeing: Exploring behavioral and demographic covariates in a large US sample

Q1 Economics, Econometrics and Finance International Journal of Wellbeing Pub Date : 2020-09-30 DOI:10.5502/IJW.V10I4.831
J. Eichstaedt, D. Yaden, Fernando Ribeiro, A. Adler, Margaret L. Kern
{"title":"Supplementary analysis for lifestyle and wellbeing: Exploring behavioral and demographic covariates in a large US sample","authors":"J. Eichstaedt, D. Yaden, Fernando Ribeiro, A. Adler, Margaret L. Kern","doi":"10.5502/IJW.V10I4.831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using data from a nationally representative sample of 46,179 US adults from the Gallup-Healthways Wellbeing Index, we investigate covariates of four subjective mental wellbeing dimensions spanning evaluative (life satisfaction), positive affective (happiness), negative affective (worry), and eudaimonic wellbeing. Negative covariates were generally more strongly correlated with the four dimensions than positive covariates, with depression, poor health, and loneliness being the greatest negative correlates and excellent health and older age being the greatest positive correlates. We reproduce previous evidence for a “midlife crisis” around age 50 across the four wellbeing dimensions. Notably, although salutogenic behaviors (diet, exercise, socializing) correlated with greater wellbeing, there were diminishing benefits beyond thresholds of about four hours a day spent socializing, four days per week of consuming fruits and vegetables, and four days per week of exercising. Findings suggest that wellbeing is easier lost than gained, underscore the influence that relatively malleable lifestyle factors have on wellbeing, and stress the importance of multidimensional measurement for public policy.","PeriodicalId":36390,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Wellbeing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Wellbeing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5502/IJW.V10I4.831","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Using data from a nationally representative sample of 46,179 US adults from the Gallup-Healthways Wellbeing Index, we investigate covariates of four subjective mental wellbeing dimensions spanning evaluative (life satisfaction), positive affective (happiness), negative affective (worry), and eudaimonic wellbeing. Negative covariates were generally more strongly correlated with the four dimensions than positive covariates, with depression, poor health, and loneliness being the greatest negative correlates and excellent health and older age being the greatest positive correlates. We reproduce previous evidence for a “midlife crisis” around age 50 across the four wellbeing dimensions. Notably, although salutogenic behaviors (diet, exercise, socializing) correlated with greater wellbeing, there were diminishing benefits beyond thresholds of about four hours a day spent socializing, four days per week of consuming fruits and vegetables, and four days per week of exercising. Findings suggest that wellbeing is easier lost than gained, underscore the influence that relatively malleable lifestyle factors have on wellbeing, and stress the importance of multidimensional measurement for public policy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生活方式和幸福感的补充分析:在美国大样本中探索行为和人口统计学协变量
利用来自盖洛普-健康幸福指数的46179名美国成年人的全国代表性样本的数据,我们调查了四个主观心理健康维度的协变量,包括评估性(生活满意度)、积极情感(幸福)、消极情感(担忧)和幸福。负共变量与四个维度的相关性通常比正共变量更强,其中抑郁、健康状况不佳和孤独是最大的负相关,而健康状况良好和年龄较大是最大的正相关。我们在四个幸福维度上重现了50岁左右出现“中年危机”的先前证据。值得注意的是,虽然有益健康的行为(饮食、运动、社交)与更大的幸福感相关,但超过每天约4小时的社交、每周4天的水果和蔬菜消费、每周4天的锻炼,这些益处就会逐渐减少。研究结果表明,幸福易失难得,强调了相对可塑的生活方式因素对幸福的影响,并强调了多维度衡量对公共政策的重要性。
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
International Journal of Wellbeing
International Journal of Wellbeing Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
A provisional global comparison framework: One hundred psychologically salient ways of conceptualizing and evaluating the world Beyond a single story: The heterogeneity of human flourishing in 22 countries The brief thriving scale: Assessing the ability to learn, grow, and find benefits in stressful events Well-being and ill-being on campus Brief computerised self-help interventions, the “Miracle Question,” and the moderating effects of openness-to-experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1