The Subjective Wellbeing Scale: How Reasonable is the Cardinality Assumption?

Inga Kristoffersen
Additional contact information
Inga Kristoffersen: UWA Business School, The University of Western Australia

No 11-15, Economics Discussion / Working Papers from The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics

Abstract: This paper empirically investigates the reasonability of assuming subjective wellbeing (SWB) data are cardinal. The inability or reluctance to assume cardinality implies limitations to use of data and methodology, which has been demonstrated to yield potentially biased results. This analysis uses the concept of transitivity to investigate the likely functional form of the SWB reporting function via a second alternative wellbeing measure. Here, data on mental health are used for this purpose. Results indicate that the SWB reporting function cannot deviate strongly from linearity, implying that the cardinality assumption is reasonable in most research contexts. An auxiliary analysis examines the bias that may result from possible nonlinearities in the SWB reporting function, which gives an indication of the potential cost of wrongfully imposing cardinality upon these data.

Pages: 22 pages
Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.business.uwa.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_ ... ality-Assumption.pdf

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:uwa:wpaper:11-15

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Economics Discussion / Working Papers from The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sam Tang ().