What is more important for well-being: money or autonomy?
The regular seminar of the ILSCR “Culture matters” took place on 17th November. The speaker was Ronald Fisher, senior lecturer at Victoria University (Wellington, New Zealand), with a lecture "What is more important for well-being: money or autonomy?".
At the beginning of his report, R. Fisher spoke about the Centre of Applied Cross-Cultural Research (CACR) at the University of Victoria. The main activities of the Centre are cross-cultural comparative studies, studies of the indigenous knowledge and psychology, problems of acculturation, adaptation and cultural diversity. Centre also deals with practical directions: on education of foreign students, employment of immigrants, problems of identity and intergroup relations.
The study presented by R. Fisher (see below), lay the eternal human question: What makes life (and society) good? There is a huge amount of empirical research accumulated on the subject. Together with his co-author Diane Bauer Ronald conducted 3-level meta-analysis of publicly available databases of international studies (WVS, ESS, UN, UNDP, World Bank, Global Peace Index, etc.), as well as studies of mental health, optimism, achievement motivation, leader behavior, etc. from the database PsycInfo (not only in English but in other languages too). Overall the empirical base of research data was 420.599 respondents in 63 countries.
The theoretical base of the study were the Easterlin paradox – wealth and happiness are not connected with each other; Needs theory, Livability theory – money and happiness are a linear function, Diminishing marginal utility and Postmodernization theory – after reaching a certain level of prosperity it has no impact on happiness, and freedom and happiness are a linear function; Multi-option treadmill, Tyranny of freedom, Choice overload, Postmodern paradox – after reaching a certain level of prosperity and autonomy it is of harm to humans; Self-determination theory – satisfaction of universal human needs of autonomy, relatedness and competence leads to greater happiness and well-being.
Based on the fact that self-report about the level of happiness and life satisfaction is cultural-specific (members of collectivist societies tend to underestimate their level of happiness), the researchers decided to go to the contrary: to identify the determinants of mental health (psychological distress, anxiety, and burnout), not well-being. To determine the effect of different combinations of variables (money and individualism) and different types of relationship (linear, quadratic, cubic) 10 analytical models were built. The study found that predictor of happiness is autonomy (freedom, individualism), not money. However, wealth leads to more autonomy and freedom, which in turn leads to higher well-being. Self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2002) was of the greatest support in the study among other theoretical concepts. Providing individuals with choices in their lives is a good predictor for their well-being, though too much of both wealth and autonomy can be counterproductive - this may be important implications for policy makers and governance, and there is still scope for future research.
Olga Pavlenko
Trainee researcher