Social Indicators Research

Thinkers have discussed the “good life” and the desirable society for millennia. In the last decades, scientists offered several alternative approaches to defining and measuring quality of life: social indicators such as health and levels of crime, subjective well-being measures (assessing people's evaluative reactions to their lives and societies), and economic indices. These alternative indicators assess three philosophical approaches to well-being that are based, respectively, on normative ideals, subjective experiences, and the ability to select goods and services that one desires. The strengths and weaknesses of the various approaches are reviewed. It is argued that social indicators and subjective well-being measures are necessary to evaluate a society, and add substantially to the regnant economic indicators that are now favored by policy makers. Each approach to measuring the quality of life contains information that is not contained in the other measures.

Traditional approaches to themeasurement of leisure's relationship toquality of life have emphasised place-centredindicators (e.g., the frequency of leisurefacility usage) and tended to ignoreperson-centred criteria (e.g., satisfactionwith leisure experiences). Moreover, theunderlying assumption in subsequent policyoutcomes has been that increasing the number offacilities and services will automaticallyenhance people's QOL. This paper focuses onboth the content and measurement of leisure andits relationship to quality of life. Itreports the results of a study that examinedthe relative importance of selected place andperson-centred leisure attributes in predictingquality of life. The study tested a set ofobjective and subjective indicators that peopleare most concerned with in their leisure lives. Overall, it was found that the person-centredleisure attribute, leisure satisfaction, wasthe best predictor of quality of life. Place-centred attributes failed to influencequality of life. Further analysis revealedthat people who engage in social activitiesmore frequently and who are more satisfied withthe psychological benefits they derive fromleisure, experience higher levels of perceivedquality of life. The results suggest thatthere is a need to reconcile objectiveknowledge with subjective perceptions ofleisure in order to achieve greaterunderstanding and comprehensive measurement ofthis complex domain and its relationship toquality of life.

Twelve measures of material well-being inthe U.S. States were subjected to factoranalysis. Four factors emerged: Security,Mastery, Harmony and Autonomy. Fiveself-reported measures of stress, mental healthand general health are regressed upon the fourquality of life measures. Only Harmony provedto be significantly associated with thestress-health factors. The elements of Harmonyare shown to have a reasonable causativelinkage to the stress-health factors. Foranother demonstration, money income of arepresentative sample of the U.S. populationis shown to be associated with self-reportedhappiness, but with variation, enabling aclassification of the population as to itsWell-Being, Dissonance, Adaptation orDeprivation in the income-happinessrelationship. Material well-being, thus, isshown to be linked to non-material,self-reported stress and health conditions.

The validity and utility of a dual-factor system (DFS) of mentalhealth was explored. Factors were the traditional perspective onmental health, psychopathology (PTH), and the more recentperspective, subjective well-being (SWB). Research has shown thatPTH and SWB are not simply opposite poles of a single continuum,however, the constructs have yet to be integrated.The sample consisted of 407 children in Grades 3–6. Subjects wereclassified as high or low on each construct, offering fourresearch groups, two challenging the unidimensional perspective.Group membership was the classification variable in a series ofdiscriminant function analyses. Predictors assessed the domainsof temperament, personality, self-concept, locus of control, andinterpersonal relations.Results offered strong initial evidence for the validity andpotential utility of a DFS. Results are discussed, as areimplications for mental illness prevention/intervention.