Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.30> Article
Research Article

A Literature Review on the Explanations and Theories of the Easterlin Paradox

Rui ZhengTsinglan School* Ziqian YangTaizhou High School Yiyang ZouWuhan Britain-China School Luyang ZhangGolden Apple Jincheng No.1 Secondary School

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

This article is a literature review of the explanations and theories of the Easterlin paradox. The Easterlin paradox had been well researched in multiple interpretation paths, focusing on either the micro or macro level of the paradox. However, it has not been able to provide a perfect explanation for the paradox so that policies can be formulated and implemented. To facilitate future research, the past and latest research on theories of the Easterlin paradox will be organized and criticized. It will be shown that theories of direct and indirect mental mechanisms had their main problem with single factor analysis, while theories of external social mechanisms lacked dynamic analysis. This synthesis of current research will be helpful for further research on the real causes and solutions of the Easterlin paradox.

Keywords: Easterlin paradox; Economic growth; Subjective well-being
Published: May 17, 2024
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/30/20231756
Volume: CHR Vol.30
pp. 168-174
Download PDF

References

  1. Easterlin, R. A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In Nations and households in economic growth (pp. 89-125). Academic press.
  2. J. Kansky, E. Diener (2004) Benefits of well-being: Health, social relationships, work, and resilience
  3. Easterlin, R. A. (1973). Does money buy happiness?. The public interest, 30, 3.
  4. Veenhoven, R. (1991). Is happiness relative?. Social indicators research, 24, 1-34.
  5. Easterlin, R. A. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all?. Journal of economic behavior & organization, 27(1), 35-47.
  6. Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2008). Economic growth and subjective well-being: Reassessing the Easterlin paradox (No. w14282). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  7. Easterlin, R. A., McVey, L. A., Switek, M., Sawangfa, O., & Zweig, J. S. (2010). The Happiness-Income Paradox Revisited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
  8. Brickman, P. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. Adaptation level theory, 287-301.
  9. Stutzer, A. (2004). The role of income aspirations in individual happiness. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 54(1), 89-109.
  10. McBride, M. (2010). Money, happiness, and aspirations: An experimental study. Journal of economic behavior & organization, 74(3), 262-276.
  11. Headey, B., & Wearing, A. (1989). Personality, life events, and subjective well-being: Toward a dynamic equilibrium model. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 57(4), 731.
  12. Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological science, 7(3), 186-189.
  13. Cummins, R. A. (1998). The second approximation to an international standard for life satisfaction. Social indicators research, 43, 307-334.
  14. Asadullah, M. N., Xiao, S., & Yeoh, E. (2018). Subjective well-being in China, 2005–2010: The role of relative income, gender, and location. China Economic Review, 48, 83-101.Clark, A. E., Frijters, P., & Shields, M. A. (2008). Relative income, happiness, and utility: An explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic literature, 46(1), 95-144.
  15. Clark, A. E., Frijters, P., & Shields, M. A. (2008). Relative income, happiness, and utility: An explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic literature, 46(1), 95-144.
  16. Boyce, C. J., Brown, G. D., & Moore, S. C. (2010). Money and happiness: Rank of income, not income, affects life satisfaction. Psychological science, 21(4), 471-475.
  17. Aknin, L. B., Barrington-Leigh, C. P., Dunn, E. W., Helliwell, J. F., Burns, J., Biswas-Diener, R., ... & Norton, M. I. (2013). Prosocial spending and well-being: cross-cultural evidence for a psychological universal. Journal of personality and social psychology, 104(4), 635.
  18. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social indicators research, 97, 143-156.
  19. Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Seidlitz, L., & Diener, M. (1993). The relationship between income and subjective well-being: Relative or absolute?. Social indicators research, 28, 195-223.
  20. Layard, R. (2011). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. London: Penguin.
  21. Diener, E., Seligman, M. (2004). Beyond Money: Toward an Economy of Well-Being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 5 (1), 1-31.
  22. José Atilano Pena-López, José Manuel Sánchez-Santos , Matías Membiela-Pollán (2016). Individual Social Capital and Subjective Wellbeing: The Relational Goods,811-901.
  23. Nikolas Papavlassopulos & David Keppler, (2014). Inequality and well-being.
  24. Nicholas R Buttrick, Samantha J Heintzelman, Shigehiro Oishi, (2017). Life Expectancy and Subjective Well-Being.
  25. Alberto Prati, (2023). The Well-Being Cost of Inflation Inequalities.
  26. Rainer Winkelmann, (2009). Unemployment, Social Capital, and Subjective Well-Being, 421-430.
  27. Frank, R.H. (1999). Luxury fever. New York: Free Press.
  28. Long working hours and health. (2021). The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific, 11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2021.100199