|
on Economics of Happiness |
|
Issue of 2025–08–25
two papers chosen by Viviana Di Giovinazzo, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca |
| By: | Kaiser, Caspar F. (Warwick Business School); Lepinteur, Anthony (University of Luxembourg) |
| Abstract: | Economists routinely use survey measures of, for example, risk preferences, trust, political attitudes, or wellbeing. The literature generally treats numerical response categories as if they represent equal psychological intervals. We provide the first systematic test of this assumption, developing a general framework to quantify how easily results can be overturned when this linearity assumption is relaxed. Using original experimental data, we show that respondents interpret survey scales in ways that do deviate from linearity, but only mildly. Focusing on wellbeing research, we then replicate 30, 000+ coefficient estimates across more than 80 papers published in top economics journals. Replicated coefficient signs are remarkably robust to mild departures from linear scale-use. However, statistical inference and estimates of relative effect magnitudes become unreliable, even under modest departures from linearity. This is especially problematic for policy applications. We show that these concerns generalise to many other widely used survey-based constructs. |
| Keywords: | life satisfaction, wellbeing, ordinal scales, Likert scales, survey methods |
| JEL: | I31 C18 C87 |
| Date: | 2025–07 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp18029 |
| By: | Diaz Sanchez, Jose Luis |
| Abstract: | Hedonic adaptation—the tendency to return to a baseline level of well-being after changes in life circumstances—offers a new perspective on theodicy, the attempt to reconcile suffering with a benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient God. Since perceived suffering tends to revert to baseline, reductions in actual suffering may provide only temporary relief. This paper develops a simplified theoretical model, drawing on economic methods, to analyze how perceived suffering evolves over time, whether adjusting adaptation speeds could reduce distress, and what this reveals about the normative limits of benevolent intervention. The model demonstrates a structural trade-off: while slower adaptation may extend relief, it can also intensify distress during hardship. These dynamics lend support to soul-making theodicies by showing how persistent suffering fosters resilience and moral growth, and they echo free will theodicies by portraying adaptation as a built-in human feature, shaped by evolutionary pressures. At the same time, it challenges interventionist theodicies by emphasizing that suffering may persist despite benevolent efforts. It thereby invites greater attention to the recurrence of suffering, not only its intensity, as a concern for theodical reflection. |
| Keywords: | Hedonic adaptation; perceived suffering; philosophy of religion; economic modeling; normative constraints. |
| JEL: | A12 B4 D03 D91 Z10 Z12 |
| Date: | 2025–07–03 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:125400 |