1、 Subjective well-being 1. Introduction Subjective measures of well-being are measures of well-being based on questions such as: Taking things all together, how would you say things are these days would you say youre very happy, pretty happy, or not too happy these days? (Gurin, Veroff, & Feld,1960,
2、p. 411, italics in original).1 Subjects maybe prompted to give a number between 1 and 7, where 1 represents In general, I consider myself not a very happy person and 7 In general, I consider myself a very happy person (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999, p. 151). In the past, they were asked whether they sa
3、tisfied descriptions such as: Cheerful, gay spirits most of the time. Occasionally bothered by something but can usually laugh it off, Ups and downs,now happy about things, now depressed about balanced in the long run, and Life often seems so worthless that there is little to keep one going. Nothing
4、 matters very much, there has been so much of hurt that laughter would be empty mockery (Watson, 1930, p. 81). Answers to such questions are used to construct numerical measures of both individual well-being (the well-being of persons) and social wellbeing(the well-being of groups). Subjective measu
5、res of well-being have become the subject of heated discussion in the academy and beyond. One reason is that they are frequently presented as substitutes for, or complements to, traditional income-based economic welfare measures and to indicators inspired by the capability approach (Kesebir & Diener
6、, 2008). Indeed, to encourage the use of subjective measures for public policy purposes, proponents have advocated National Well-BeingAccounts (NWBAs), which track population-level scores on subjective measures over time (Diener & Seligman, 2004； Diener, 2006； Kahneman, Krueger, Schkade, Schwarz, &
7、Stone, 2004). While it is hard to predict the extent to which subjective measures will assume the role traditionally played by other measures, subjective measures seem to be gaining ground. For instance, their use was recently endorsed by French President Nicholas Sarkozys Commission on the Measurem
8、ent of Economic Performance and Social Progress. The Commission, which was headed by Nobel Memorial Prize laureates Joseph E. Stiglitz and Amartya Sen, had been charged with the task of exploring alternatives to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a measure of economic performance and social progress(St
9、iglitz, Sen, & Fitoussi, 2009). Subjective measures of well-being are frequently referred to as measures of subjective well-being (Andrews&Robinson, 1991). Thus, for example, Stiglitz and coauthors write: Recommendation 1: Measuresof subjective well-being provide key information about peoples qualit
10、y of life. Statistical offices should incorporate questions to capture peoples life evaluations, hedonic experiences and priorities in their own surveys (Stiglitz et al., 2009, p. 58, italics in original). The termsubjective well-being (Diener, 1984) denoting that which subjectivemeasures of well-be
11、ing are designed to represent has itsown encyclopedia entries (e.g., Diener, 2001) and handbook articles(e.g., Diener, Lucas, & Oishi, 2005). By now, an established body ofliterature employs subjective measures of well-being to shed lighton the causes and correlates of subjective well-being. Though
12、issuesabout the reliability and validity of such measures remain, scientificand validity and more on examining substantive empiricalrelationships. Nevertheless, considerable confusion remains when it comes to what subjective well-being is and how it relates to what I will call well-being simpliciter
13、: what we have ， when our lives are going well for us, when we are living lives that are not necessarily morally good, but good for us (Tiberius, 2006, p. 493, italics in original). It has been pointed out that subjective measures differ from economic and capability-based measures with respect to th
14、e underlying account of welfare or well-being (Adler & Posner, 2008； Angner, 2008, 2009a).2 It has also been noted that proponents of subjective measures differ among themselves (Bruni, 2008, pp.117120； Tiberius, 2006, pp. 494495). Yet, when it comes to the nature of subjective well-being and its re
15、lation to well-being simpliciter, existing literature fails to capture the degree of diversity,and disagreement, among proponents of subjective measures. The result is a false impression of homogeneity and an obstacle to fruitful communication and cooperation within and across disciplinary boundarie
16、s. This paper examines the notion of subjective well-being as the term is used in literature on subjective measures of well-being. In order to examine what subjective well-being is and how it relates to well-being simpliciter, I begin by exploring the accounts of wellbeing implicit in the literature
17、 on subjective measures as well as the role that subjective well-being plays in those accounts and proceed to examine what subjective well-being is thought to be. My aim is to establish that proponents of subjective measures differ at least superficially on at least two points. First, they disagree
18、about the relationship between subjective well-being and wellbeing simpliciter: about whether subjective well-being constitutes well-being simpliciter or merely is a component of it. Second, they disagree about the nature of subjective well-being: about whether it is constituted by a cognitive, hedo
19、nic, emotional, or mood state, or some combination, and about whether to call that state happiness, satisfaction, or something else entirely. In an effort to reconcile these differences, I propose an interpretation according to which subjective measures presuppose preference hedonism: an account according to which well-being is a matter of desired mental states. This reading has not (to my knowledge) been explicitly endorsed by proponents of subjective measures. Yet, it succeeds in reconciling much that has been written about subjective
