The Academic Discourse of Subjective Well-Being Within a Cultural Context: Methodological Limitations and Underlying Problems
DOI:
Abstract Views:
5 times
PDF-Full Text Downloads:
4 times
Abstract
Cross-cultural comparisons of data obtained through self-reports underlie several methodological limitations to find objective determinants of Subjective Well-Being (SWB). Cultural relativism emphasizes that because societies vary in their values, individuals in them use different criteria for judging the performance of societies, which heavily influence respondent’s self-report measurements. Also translation of questionnaires might have an impact on SWB measurement results of self-reports. Furthermore there are several interfering factors like response biases and cultural differences which affect measuring SWB scores between societies. The methodological limitations and difficulties of cross-cultural measurements have been marginally addressed in empirical research and might impact SWB scaling across nations. Furthermore they might affect underlying comparisons and the validity of drawn conclusions within the academic discourse of SWB. It is necessary to consider these methodological issues in further studies to provide more clarity.
Perbandingan lintas-budaya data yang diperoleh melalui laporan-diri mendasari keterbatasan metodologis untuk menemukan penentu objektif kenyamanan subjektif (KS). Relativisme budaya menekankan bahwa karena masyarakat bervariasi dalam nilai, individu di dalamnya memakai criteria berbeda untuk menilai tampilan masyarakat, yang amat memengaruhi pengukuran laporan-diri para responden. Demikian pula terjemahan kuesioner dapat berdampak terhadap hasil pengukuran laporan-diri. Selanjutnya terdapat beberapa faktor penyela seperti kerancuan respons dan perbedaan budaya yang memengaruhi pengukuran skor KS di antara masyarakat. Keterbatasan dan kesulitan metodologis pengukuran lintas-budaya telah diteliti secara terbatas dalam penelitian empiris dan dapat berdampak terhadap penyekalaan KS antar- negara. Selanjutnya hal tersebut juga dapat memengaruhi perbandingan dan validitas yang mendasarisimpulan yang ditarik dalam wacana akademik KS. Amatlah perlu mempertimbangkan isu-isu metodologis ini dalam studi-studi selanjutnya agar makin diperoleh kejelasan.
Downloads
References
Boas, F. (1887). Museums of ethnology and their classification. Museum Studies: An Anthology of Contexts, 126.
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions: Russell Sage Foundation.
Cohen, S., Doyle, W. J., Turner, R., Alper, C. M., & Skoner, D. P. (2003). Sociability and susceptibility to the common cold. Psychological Science, 14(5), 389-395.
Conceição, P., & Bandura, R. (2008). Measuring subjective well-being: a summary review of the literature. Office of Development Studies, UNDP, NY: USA. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row, 1990.
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective Well-Being. Psychological Bulletin. 95:3, pp. 542-75.
Diener, E. (1999). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American psychologist, 55(1), 34.
Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69(5), 851.
Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1994). Resources, personal strivings, and subjective well-being: A nomothetic and idiographic approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 926-935.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 403-425.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., Lucas, R. E., & Suh, E. M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: Perspectives from needs and values. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 25(8), 980-990.
Diener, E., & Suh, E. M. (eds): 2003, Culture and Subjective Well-being (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1998). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological bulletin, 125(2), 276.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., & Oishi, S. (1997). Recent findings on subjective well-being. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 25-41.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Smith, H., & Shao, L. (1995). National differences in reported subjective well-being: Why do they occur? Social Indicators Research 34: 7-32.
Griffee, D. T. (2001). Questionnaire Translation and Questionnaire Validation: Are They the Same?.
Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2004), ‘A Survey Method for Characterizing Daily Life Experience: The Day Reconstruction Method’, Science 306, 1776–1780.
Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2006). Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion. Science, 312(5782), 1908-1910.
Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., McGuire, L., Robles, T. F., & Glaser, R. (2002). Psychoneuroimmunology: psychological influences on immune function and health. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 70(3), 537.
Kim, U. E., & Berry, J. W. (1993). Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context: Sage Publications, Inc.
Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of personality and social psychology, 71(3), 616.
Nikias, C. L., & Shao, M. (1995). Signal processing with alpha-stable distributions and applications: Wiley-Interscience.
Oishi, S., Diener, E., Suh, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Value as a moderator in subjective well-being. Journal of personality, 67(1), 157-184. Ouweneel, P. & Veenhoven, R. (1991) Cross-national differences in happiness; cultural bias or societal quality? In: Bleichrodt, N. & Drenth, J.P. (eds) ‘Contemporary issues in cross-cultural psychology’, Swetz & Zeitlinger, Lisse, Netherlands, pp. 168-184.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69(4), 719. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G.L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513-523.
Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1999). Reports of subjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications. Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology, 61-84.
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human values. Journal of personality and social psychology, 53(3), 550.
Shao, J. (1993). Linear model selection by cross-validation. Journal of the American statistical Association, 486-494.
Steptoe, A., Wardle, J., & Marmot, M. (2005). Positive affect and health-related neuroendocrine, cardiovascular, and inflammatory processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(18), 6508.
Stone, A. A., & Shiffman, S. (1994). Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) in behavorial medicine. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 6(3),199-202. Suh, E. M. (1999). Self and the use of emotion information: Joining culture, personality, and situational influences. Manuscript submitted for publication, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Suh, E. M., Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Triandis, H. C. (1998). The shifting basis of life satisfaction judgments across cultures:Emotions versus norms. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(2), 482.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Urry, H. L., Van Reekum, C. M., Johnstone, T., Kalin, N. H., Thurow, M. E., Schaefer, H. S., et al. (2004). Amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex are inversely coupled during regulation of negative affect and predict the diurnal pattern of cortisol secretion among older adults. The Journal of Neuroscience, 26(16), 4415-4425.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles published in ANIMA are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license. You are free to copy, transform, or redistribute articles for any lawful, non-commercial purpose in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to ANIMA and the original Author(s), link to the license, indicate if changes were made, and redistribute any derivative work under the same license.
Copyright on articles is retained by the respective Author(s), without restrictions. A non-exclusive license is granted to ANIMA to publish the article and identify itself as its original publisher, along with the commercial right to include the article in a hardcopy issue for sale to libraries and individuals.
By publishing in ANIMA, Author(s) grant any third party the right to use their article to the extent provided by the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
