This document summarizes research comparing causes of happiness in East and Southeast Asian societies. It hypothesizes that different country groups will have different levels of happiness and different mechanisms driving happiness. The results found that Southeast Asian countries were happier and more equal on average, while East Asian countries like Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan had more shared mechanisms influencing happiness like family, income, and employment. These common factors explained happiness more in East Asia, suggesting rewarding structures. Meanwhile, Southeast Asian countries had no shared mechanism and diverse influences on happiness, indicating potentially flatter structures. Therefore, country groups matter for understanding well-being, with East Asia resembling similar siblings and Southeast Asia resembling diverse friends.

1. 1
Is Well-being
Equal or Unequal?:
Causes of Happiness
in Asian Societies
June 29, 2018 SWB Seoul
Jun Kobayashi (Seikei U)
Dolgion Aldar (IRIM)
1

2. 2
How happy? Why?

3. 3
Research question
 Well-being Inequality in Asia?
Different or similar Mechanisms?
Compare country groups of
East/Southeast
RQ

4. 4
Literature
Layard (2005)’s big seven:
Family, income, employment,
community, health, freedom,
philosophy of life
Still, no guarantee in Asia

5. 5
Hypos
 Different groups  different
levels of happiness
 Different groups  different
mechanisms
Mechanism
East/SE
level,
inequality
1
2
H1
H2

6. 6
Introduction
Methods
Results
Conclusion

7. 7
Data
International Comparative Survey on
Lifestyle and Values (7 countries)
Measuring Subjective Well-being-
2016 (MN)
Resample JP, KR, TW to 1,200 each
N=8,669
7

8. 8
Dependent: Cantril’s ladder

9. 9
Independent
Male, Age, Married/Widowed/
Divorced, No. of household
Years of edu, Employment,
Household Income

10. 10
Introduction
Methods
Results
Conclusion

11. 11
Answers by Country
Mostly single-peaked
SE... Higher

12. 12
Mean happiness by Country
SE... happier (p<.001)
SE... more equal (p<.001)

13. 13
Regression (N=8,669)
E SE
JP KR TW MN PH IN VN TH
Male †nega * *nega *nega †nega
Age *** *nega
Married *** *** *** †nega
Widowed/
Divorced
** † **nega †nega ***nega
#Household
Edu ** *** * * †nega **
Employed † * †nega *
Income *** *** ** ** *** *** †
R2
0.11 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.03

14. 14
Therefore
Country groups matter
East... Common effects of Family,
Income, highly explained
Rewarding?
SE... No shared mechanism
Flat? Especially VN, TH

15. 15
Robustness
No change if general happiness,
satisfaction, health added as x

16. 16
Introduction
Methods
Results
Conclusion

17. 17
Summary
 Supported. SE... happy, equal
 Supported. East.. shared
mechanism w/ clear drives, explained
SE... diverse mechanisms
SE
Unhappy, Unequal
Shared
H1
H2
East
Happy, Equal
Diverse

18. 18
Interviews 1, JP
Female, 20s, service worker

19. 19
Interviews 2, IN
Male, 60s, ex-public officer

20. 20
Conclusion
Country groups matter
Answer to : Well-being gaps b/w
East and SE Asia
Different levels, drives, mechanisms
East.. Similar siblings
SE... Diverse friends
RQ

21. 21
Next steps
To become inclusive society, which?
East... “Well-being unequal” but
Rewarding
SE... “Well-being equal” but Flat

22. 22
감사합니다!
(Gamsahamnida)
Thank you!

23. 23
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the MEXT-Supported
Program for the Strategic Research Foundation at
Private Universities of Japan, 2014-2018 (S1491003).
“International Comparative Surveys on Lifestyle and
Values” were designed and conducted by the Center
for Social Well-being Studies, Institute for the
Development of Social Intelligence, Senshu University,
Japan, in collaboration with Social Well-being
Research Consortium in Asia
Measuring Subjective Well-being-2016 data were
collected by IRIM