I have read several times that there is evidence of a U-curve in happiness over an individual’s life. People are happy in their youth, and happy again after retirement, but suffer from a serious malaise in between as they grapple with their finances, careers and family life. Seeing as how I’m about to embark on this part of my life, that isn’t a particularly appealing idea! Today I was glad to find some evidence that the U-curve is just a statistical illusion. Australian economists Paul Frijters and Tony Beatton have analysed large panel data sets from Australia (n>10,000), the UK (n>25,000) and Germany (n>20,000) and produced the
Sorry, R S. Look at the figures. The peak of happiness according to them comes at the end of the 60s or even in the early 70s. No particular decline in the 60s. Broader lit that this conflicts with says happiness keeps rising until mid-80s. I think the value of this study is that those were cross-section rather than this panel, which has a bias due to the happier living longer.
Robin, You have managed to misread these figures. "Nearly flat from 20 to middle age" Really? In fact all of them show some decline with minima ranging from around 40 (OZ) to mid-50s. The peak of happiness is later, between late 60s and early 70s in all cases. The main difference with earlier studies is the sharp dropoff after 75 or so, with others seeing it hold up until mid-80s, assuming one holds health and spousal death constant. Also, 10-year panels are not long enough to support the claims made in this paper. Your summary is both way overblown and misleading.
Regardless of the country, there is a steep decline in happiness through the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Which simply confirms there is no such thing as "successful aging". Aging is physical and mental deterioration combined with the approach of oblivion. Which is why it's high time we agreed that anti-aging technology would be a good development for mankind.
To clarify, it is the cross-sections that have the bias, not "this study."
Sorry, R S. Look at the figures. The peak of happiness according to them comes at the end of the 60s or even in the early 70s. No particular decline in the 60s. Broader lit that this conflicts with says happiness keeps rising until mid-80s. I think the value of this study is that those were cross-section rather than this panel, which has a bias due to the happier living longer.
This isn't my post; the author is Rob.
Robin, You have managed to misread these figures. "Nearly flat from 20 to middle age" Really? In fact all of them show some decline with minima ranging from around 40 (OZ) to mid-50s. The peak of happiness is later, between late 60s and early 70s in all cases. The main difference with earlier studies is the sharp dropoff after 75 or so, with others seeing it hold up until mid-80s, assuming one holds health and spousal death constant. Also, 10-year panels are not long enough to support the claims made in this paper. Your summary is both way overblown and misleading.
Any thoughts on whether this happy-people-too-busy bias also affects studies on the effect of children on happiness?
This post is an example why statistics should be a controlled substance.
is it longitudinal analyis data?
i should move away from germany in my early 40ies..
It's going to suck when I get into my 80's and my happiness drops from a 7 all the way to a 6. What's the point of even living then.
Great - at 53 I'm just heading into two decades of peak happiness! :)
Regardless of the country, there is a steep decline in happiness through the 60's, 70's, and 80's. Which simply confirms there is no such thing as "successful aging". Aging is physical and mental deterioration combined with the approach of oblivion. Which is why it's high time we agreed that anti-aging technology would be a good development for mankind.
http://www.fightaging.org/a...
A free copy of the paper by Frijters and Beatton is available here.