SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: COVID-19 Special Issue

Will We be Happier in the Future? Research on the Effect of Covid-19 on Income and Life Satisfaction of the US Citizens

Hatime KAMİLÇELEBİ
Pages
541–553
Publication Date
2020-10-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

At the same time, the projection bias underlying the life satisfaction level of individuals in the next five years is explained by comparing with the previous years, and it is suggested that this situation should be taken into consideration upon determining policies regarding income and life satisfaction by supporting the idea that life satisfaction estimates may be erroneous given the literature.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, individuals’ mispredictions regarding their own income and life satisfaction in the future and projection bias effect, as one of the reasons for these mispredictions, are explained.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Our study aims to explain that the life satisfaction of individuals, upon experiencing certain negative events such as Covid-19, tends to revert to their previous level when such negativity disappears or becomes a normal part of life, meaning, when individuals adapt to this situation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:At the same time, the projection bias underlying the life satisfaction level of individuals in the next five years is explained by comparing with the previous years, and it is suggested that this situation should be taken into consideration upon determining policies regarding income and life satisfaction by supporting the idea that life satisfaction estimates may be erroneous given the literature.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mis-Predicted Subjective Well-Being · Projection Bias · Life Satisfaction

Abstract

In this study, individuals’ mispredictions regarding their own income and life satisfaction in the future and projection bias effect, as one of the reasons for these mispredictions, are explained. Projection bias, a cognitive bias associated with individuals’ inability to empathize with their future selves, renders individuals mistaken that they would think the way they do now while making predictions about the future, and causes them to be mis-predicted about their future life satisfaction. Individuals may make systematic mistakes, by not considering adaptation to the future situation, upon currently predicting their future life satisfaction. Our study aims to explain that the life satisfaction of individuals, upon experiencing certain negative events such as Covid-19, tends to revert to their previous level when such negativity disappears or becomes a normal part of life, meaning, when individuals adapt to this situation. In our study, based on the data of the Gallup Panel and Gallup National Health and Well-Being Index in the USA, it is revealed that the income and life satisfaction of the US citizens decreased as soon as Covid-19 pandemic broke out. At the same time, the projection bias underlying the life satisfaction level of individuals in the next five years is explained by comparing with the previous years, and it is suggested that this situation should be taken into consideration upon determining policies regarding income and life satisfaction by supporting the idea that life satisfaction estimates may be erroneous given the literature.

🔖

Cite This Article

KAMİLÇELEBİ, H. (2020). Will We be Happier in the Future? Research on the Effect of Covid-19 on Income and Life Satisfaction of the US Citizens. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: COVID-19 Special Issue, 541–553. https://ajindex.com/articles/91293

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Bernheim, B. D., & Rangel, A. (2016). Davranışsal Kamu Ekonomisi: Standart Olmayan Karar Mercileri ile Refah ve Politika Analizi. In Hatime Kamilçelebi (Ed.), Davranışsal İktisat ve Davranışsal İktisadın Uygulamaları. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yay., 7-81.
  2. Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H.Appley (Ed.). Adaptation level theory: A symposium. New York: Academic Press, 287–302.
  3. Cantril, H. (1965). The Pattern of Human Concern. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
  4. Chang, T. Y., Huang, W., & Wang, Y. (2018). Something in the Air: Projection Bias and the Demand for Health Insurance. The Review of Economic Studies, 85(3), 1609–1634. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdy016
  5. Chena, S., Qin, P., Tan-Soo, J., & Wei, C. (2019). Recency and projection biases in air quality valuation by Chinese residents. Science of The Total Environment, 648, 618-630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.153
  6. Clark, A. E., Diener, E., Georgellis, Y., & Lucas, R. (2008). Lags and Leads in Life Satisfaction: A Test of the Baseline Hypothesis. Economic Journal, 118(529): F222- F243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02150.x
  7. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective Well-Being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542-575.
  8. Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist, 61(4), 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.305
  9. Diener, E. (2009). Assessing Subjective Well-Being: Progress and Opportunities. Assessing Well-Being The Collected Works of Ed Diener, Ed. Ed Diener, Social Indicators Research Series, 39, 103-157.
  10. Easterlin, R. A. (2003). Building a Better Theory of Well-Being. In Luigino Bruni and Pier Luigi Porta (eds). Economics and Happiness: Framing the Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 29-64.
  11. Erta, K., Iscenko, Z., Hunt, S., & Brambley, W. (2013). Applying behavioural economics at the Financial Conduct Authority. Financial Conduct Authority, London. Fehr, E., & Camerer, C. F. (2007). Social neuroeconomics: The neural circuitry of social preferences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(10), 419-427. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2007.09.002 Frederick, S., & Loewenstein, G. (1999).
  12. Hedonic adaptation. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology, Russell Sage Foundation, 302–329.
  13. Frey, B., & Stutzer, A. (2014). Economic Consequences of Mispredicting Utility. Journal of Happin