Papaiakovou Ioannis


Background: Subjective well-being, as individuals’ cognitive and affective evaluations of their satisfaction with life, depends on a wide range of factors, the importance of which is yet to be explored. Aim: This paper investigates the importance attributed by individuals for evaluating their subjective well-being in terms of five demographic (gender, age, family status, education, income) and five life domain factors (life and environment quality, health, job status, free time, social and institutional environment). Methodology: A quantitative research was conducted via a questionnaire distributed to 1,017 individuals, addressing the most important life domains affecting subjective well-being, including demographic variables. Results: All five life domain factors are considered as important for individuals’ subjective well-being, although the level of importance attributed differs according to their demographic profile. Education and income have a positive and strong relationship with subjective well-being. Discussion: According to existing literature, demographic factors affect subjective well-being; and moreover, this study suggests that the importance of various life domains for individuals’ subjective well-being depends on their demographic profile, with education and income playing a major role on life evaluation.


Article visualizations:

Hit counter



social policy, subjective well-being, life-domain factors, sport participation, social groups

Full Text:



Bjornskov, C. (2007). The multiple facets of social capital. European Journal of Political Economy, 22(1), 22–40.

Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2004). Money, sex and happiness: An empirical study. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 106(3), 393–415.

Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2008). Is well-being U-shaped over the life cycle? Social Science & Medicine, 66(8), 1733-1749.

Boarini, R., Comola, M., Smith, C., Manchin, R. & de Keuenaer, F. (2012). What Makes for a Better Life? The Determinants of Subjective Well-Being in OECD Countries – Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. OECD Statistics Working Papers, 2012/03, OECD Publishing.

Delhey, J., & Dragolov, G. (2016). Happier together. Social cohesion and subjective well‐being in Europe. International Journal of Psychology, 51(3), 163-176.

Diener, E. (1994). Assessing Subjective Well-Being: Progress and Opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31(2), 103-157.

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13(1), 81–84.

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money. Toward and economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(1), 1-31.

Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (2009). Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. In Culture and well-being (pp. 43-70). The Netherlands: Springer.

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.

Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(1), 94-122.

Easterlin, R. (2006). Life cycle happiness and its sources: intersections of psychology, economics, and demography. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27(4), 463-482.

Eiffe, F., Ponocny, I., Gartner, K., & Till, M. (2016). Analytical report on subjective well-being: 2016 Edition. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Eurofound (2012). Third European Quality of Life Survey – Quality of Life in Europe: Impacts of the Crisis. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2005). Income and well-being: an empirical analysis of the comparison income effect. Journal of Public Economics, 89(5), 997-1019.

Helliwell, J. F. (2003). How’s life? Combining individual and national variables to explain subjective well-being. Economic Modelling, 20(2), 331–360.

Layard, R. (2010). Measuring subjective well-being. Science, 327(5965), 534-535.

Lelkes, O. (2006). Knowing what is good for you. Empirical analysis of personal preferences and the ‘‘objective good’’. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 35(2), 285–307.

Meisenberg, G., & Woodley, M. A. (2015). Gender differences in subjective well-being and their relationships with gender equality. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(6), 1539-1555.

Newman, D. B., Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2014). Leisure and subjective well-being: A model of psychological mechanisms as mediating factors. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(3), 555-578.

Pressman, S. D., Matthews, K. A., Cohen, S., Martire, L. M., Scheier, M., Baum, A., & Schulz, R. (2009). Association of enjoyable leisure activities with psychological and physical well-being. Psychosomatic Medicine, 71(7), 725-739.

Sacks W. D., Stevenson, B. & Wolfers, J. (2010). Subjective Well-being, Income, Economic Development and Growth. NBER Working Paper No 16441, National Institute of Economic Research.

Schoon, I., Hansson, L., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2005). Combining work and family life: Life satisfaction among married and divorced men and women in Estonia, Finland and the UK. European Psychologist, 10(4), 309–319.

Steptoe, A., Deaton, A., & Stone, A. A. (2015). Subjective wellbeing, health, and ageing. The Lancet, 385(9968), 640-648.

Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2013). Subjective well-being and income: Is there any evidence of satiation? The American Economic Review, 103(3), 598-604.

Stutzer, A. (2004). The role of income aspirations in individual happiness. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organisation, 54(1), 89–109.

Tesch-Römer, C., Motel-Klingebiel, A., & Tomasik, M. J. (2008). Gender differences in subjective well-being: Comparing societies with respect to gender equality. Social Indicators Research, 85(2), 329-349.

Tinkler, L., & Hicks, S. (2011). Measuring Subjective Well-being. London: Office for National Statistics.

Verbakel, E. (2012). Subjective well-being by partnership status and its dependence on the normative climate. European Journal of Population, 28(2), 205-232.

Winkelmann, R. (2009). Unemployment, social capital, and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 10(4), 421-430.

Yakovlev, P., & Leguizamon, S. (2012). Ignorance is not bliss: On the role of education in subjective well-being. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41(6), 806-815.


Copyright (c) 2018 Papaiakovou Ioannis

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.

Copyright © 2015 - 2018. European Journal Of Social Sciences Studies (ISSN 2501-8590) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and  Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.


Hit counter