Value As A Moderator in Subjective Well-Being: Shigehiro Oishi Ed Diener Eunkook Suh Richard E. Lucas

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 28

Value as a Moderator in Subjective

Well-Being
Shigehiro Oishi
Ed Diener
Eunkook Suh
Richard E. Lucas
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
ABSTRACT We investigated individual differences in the processes of sub-
jective well-being (SWB). There were considerable individual differences in the
domain that was most strongly associated with global life satisfaction. Individu-
als also differed significantly in the types of activities that they found satisfying.
Moreover, these individual differences in the patterns of SWB were systemati-
cally related to value orientations. A 23-day daily diary study revealed that
intraindividual changes in satisfaction were strongly influenced by the degree
of success in the domains that individuals value. The present findings highlight
the meaningful individual differences in the qualitative aspects of subjective
well-being.
Subjective well-being (SWB) is an individuals cognitive evaluation of
life, the presence of positive emotions, and the lack of negative emotions
(Diener, 1994). Over the last 15 years, SWB researchers have found
surprisingly strong cross-situational consistency and temporal stability
for mean levels of SWB (e.g., Diener & Larsen, 1984; Diener, Sandvik,
Journal of Personality 67:1, February 1999.
Copyright 1999 by Blackwell Publishers, 350 Main Street, Malden, MA02148, USA,
and 108 Cowley Road, Oxford, OX4 1JF, UK.
We wish to acknowledge Alexander Grob and Ulrich Schimmack for their valuable
comments on earlier versions of this article. We would also like to thank Sara Garske and
Sharon Maies for their help in the preparation of this manuscript.
Pavot, & Fujita, 1992; Headey & Wearing, 1989). Individuals who
experience high levels of positive affect in social situations are also likely
to experience high levels in nonsocial situations. Adults who evaluate
their lives as satisfying at Time 1 also tend to evaluate their lives as
satisfying weeks, months, or even years later. Furthermore, these indi-
vidual differences in SWB are consistently and systematically related to
extraversion and neuroticism (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1980; Emmons &
Diener, 1985; McCrae & Costa, 1991). These findings constitute one of
the most extensive construct validations and nomological networks in
personality research, and clarify key relations among important con-
structs, measures, and operationalizations of personality and SWB (see
Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1997, for a review).
By emphasizing the stability of interindividual differences, however,
SWB researchers often neglect changes in SWB that occur within indi-
viduals. For example, suppose Steve and Jim are equally satisfied with
their lives, and on average they experience the same amounts of positive
and negative emotions. However, Steve typically feels ecstatic when he
beats his friends in racquetball, whereas Jim feels happy when he gets
praised by friends. Although Steve and Jim have the same mean level of
SWB, the patterns of their emotional experiences and life satisfaction are
very different. Information on individual differences in the mean level of
SWB does not provide sufficient information on individual differences
in the qualitative aspects of SWB. In order to understand why individuals
experience and report positive and negative SWB, we must explore
patterns of emotional experiences and life satisfaction judgments. The
present article examines the roles of values in determining the patterns
of intraindividual and interindividual variation of SWB.
Intraindividual and Interindividual
Differences in SWB
Moderating Processes of SWB
Mischel and Shoda (1995) highlighted the importance of a process-
oriented approach in personality research, stating that clues about the
persons underlying qualitiesthe construals and goals, the motives and
passions, that drive individualsmay be seen in when and where a type
of behavior is manifested, not only in its overall frequency (p. 248).
Using this approach, Shoda, Mischel, and Wright (1994) found system-
158 Oishi et al.
atic if . . . then . . . situationbehavior relations in childrens aggressive
behavior. For instance, Child A tends to get aggressive when teased by
peers, whereas Child B tends to get aggressive when scolded by adults.
This important pattern of aggressive behavior is largely ignored by
personality researchers from the trait approach. Trait-oriented re-
searchers tend to stress universal dimensions by which they can rank-
order individuals across situations, and attempt to accurately measure
stable interindividual differences in the target dimensions, using multiple
methods, measures, and aggregation. Although overall levels of aggres-
sion provide important information on general tendencies, the if . . . then
. . . relations provide additional information about the childs individu-
ality and generate further questions regarding situation-specific courses
of aggressive behavior.
Recent research usingthe dailydiarymethodhas alsofoundsystematic
if . . . then . . . relations between situations and emotional experiences.
Emmons (1991), for instance, had 48 college students record daily events
and emotional experiences for 21 consecutive days. Students reported
two positive and two negative events each day. Emmons coded these life
events intothe followingcategories: Achievement, Interpersonal, Health-
Related, Enjoyment/Relaxation, Impersonal, and Other. Emmons then
examined how students emotional reactions to these events were medi-
ated by 15 personal strivings they had listed prior to this daily study.
Within-subject analyses revealed that the stronger ones Achievement
orientation, the stronger the intensity of both positive and negative
emotional reactions to Achievement-related events. Likewise, the
stronger ones Affiliation and Intimacy motives, the stronger the intensity
of negative emotional reactions to negative interpersonal events. Em-
monss (1991) findings suggest that the intensity of emotional experi-
ences is moderated by the type of personal strivings individuals pursue
in their daily lives.
Similarly, Cantor et al. (1991) documented 54 female college students
life tasks, daily events, and emotional experiences for 15 days, using the
experience sampling method. At the beginning of the study, participants
generated 10 life tasks they were working on, and then rated these tasks
for rewardingness, difficulty, and outcome evaluation. When signaled by
an alarm during the day, participants recorded the situation they were in
and rated their emotional states at the time. At the end of each day, they
rated the relevance of the situations to the life tasks. Within-subject
analyses revealed that when participants were in situations related to
Values and SWB 159
important life tasks, they tended to experience more intense and more
positive emotions. This outcome, coupled with Emmonss (1991) findings,
suggests that patterns of emotional experiences are influenced by daily
events and their relation to important life tasks and personal strivings.
Direct Relations Between Values and SWB
Whereas Emmons (1991) and Cantor et al. (1991) emphasize the mod-
erating effects of goal constructs on daily events and emotional experi-
ences, Kasser and Ryan (1993, 1996) maintain that the type of goals
individuals pursue influences mean levels of well-being. In three studies
that included both college students and noncollege students, Kasser and
Ryan (1993) found that the importance of financial success for ones
goals was negatively correlated with self-actualization and vitality, and
positively correlated with depression and anxiety. Conversely, the impor-
tance of self-acceptance and community feelings was positively related
to self-actualization and vitality. Furthermore, Kasser and Ryan (1996)
found that individuals who pursue extrinsic goals, such as financial
success, social recognition, and physical attractiveness, tended to exhibit
more physical symptoms as well as low self-actualization, low vitality,
and high depression and anxiety.
Based on self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), Ryan,
Sheldon, Kasser, and Deci (1996) posit that activities that reflect intrinsic
needs such as personal growth, satisfying relationships, and community
contribution are more satisfying than activities reflecting extrinsic needs
such as social recognition and physical attractiveness. Sheldon, Ryan,
and Reis (1996) examined this hypothesis in a 14-day daily diary study
of 60 college students. For each day, the participants listed the three
activities in which they spent the most time, and rated them in terms of
autonomy (i.e., to what degree activities were initiated for intrinsic
reasons rather than external reasons) and competence (i.e., howeffective
they felt at that activity). The participants also recorded positive and
negative emotional experiences, vitality, and physical symptoms on each
day. Analyses of intraindividual variations, using the hierarchical linear
model, revealed that daily well-being of the participants was predicted
from the degree of autonomy and competence the activities reflected.
In a semester-long longitudinal study, Sheldon and Kasser (in press)
found that progress toward intrinsic goals (i.e., the goals related to
self-acceptance, personal growth, intimacy, friendships, and social
160 Oishi et al.
contribution) was more strongly related to positive changes in well-being
than progress toward extrinsic goals (i.e., the goals related to physical
attractiveness, popularity, recognition, and financial success). Sheldon
and Kasser argued that activities are linked to individuals positive daily
well-being more strongly when these activities reflect intrinsic needs. For
most people, activities related to personal growth, relationships, and
community contribution seem to be more satisfying than those related to
social fame and physical attractiveness. It should be noted, however, that
Sheldon, Ryan, Kasser, and their colleagues did not examine whether
these activities are equally intrinsically satisfying across individuals. It
is possible that some people find activities related to societal contribution
(e.g., volunteer work) intrinsically satisfying, whereas others do not. In
other words, although on average pursuit of intrinsic goals may be more
conducive to a higher level of psychological well-being than that of
extrinsic goals, there might be important individual differences in the
degree to which progress toward intrinsic goals is related to positive
changes in well-being. Specifically, doing volunteer work may be more
satisfying for those who value Social Equality than those who value
Power. As a consequence, volunteer activities may be related to a better
sense of well-being for individuals who value Social Equality, but not for
those who stress Power.
The existence of universally pleasurable activities must not be taken
for granted in any study of satisfaction or optimal experience. For
instance, Csikszentmihalyi (1975) believes that the highly pleasurable
experience of flow (i.e., a state of intense positive emotion and in-
creased functioning) follows involvement in an activity that is optimally
challenging, has clear goals, and has immediate feedback. Again, it is
unclear whether certain activities are universally linked to flow experi-
ences, or if there are systematic individual differences in the activities
that elicit flow experiences. To extend our understanding of processes in
SWB, we should take a closer look at individuals goals, values, and the
type of activities they find satisfying.
Beyond Intraindividual Patterns of
Emotional Experiences
Studies of intraindividual variations in emotional experiences (e.g.,
Cantor et al., 1991; Emmons, 1991) attempt to understand courses of
happiness and changes in levels of well-being within the individual.
Values and SWB 161
However, these patterns of intraindividual variation can also inform our
study of interindividual differences in the processes of SWB. The degree
to which global life satisfaction is related to domain satisfaction ratings
or self- esteem might systematically differ across individuals. Thus far,
however, differential relations among central constructs in SWB have
been explored only in cross-cultural and developmental studies of SWB.
Diener and Diener (1995), for instance, found that self-esteem was a
stronger predictor of life satisfaction in individualist nations than in
collectivist nations. Suh, Diener, Oishi, and Triandis (1998) found that
emotions were more highly correlated with global life satisfaction in
individualist nations, whereas norms were more strongly related to life
satisfaction in collectivist nations. Presumably, different criteria are used
to judge satisfactionwith ones life in different cultures, and these criteria
are based on the value priorities of the culture being studied. Autonomy
and internal attributes, including emotions, are stressed in individualist
nations, whereas norms and duty are emphasized in collectivist nations
(Triandis, 1995). The stronger relation among life satisfaction, emotions,
and self-esteem may reflect the greater importance of these internal
attributes among individualist cultures.
Nomological relations between domain satisfactions and global life
satisfaction may also shift across developmental phases (Cantor & Blan-
ton, 1996; Cantor &Harlow, 1994; Cantor &Sanderson, in press; Cantor
& Zirkel, 1990). Cantor and Sanderson (in press) posit that active
participation in personally and culturally valued life tasks enhances
well-being, and that these life tasks change across the life span. For
example, Harlow and Cantor (1996) found that social participation was
a stronger predictor of life satisfaction for retirees than for elders who
still hold a job. Social participation is more important for life satisfaction
during stages when the opportunity for social interaction is limited by the
loss of a job. In short, satisfaction with the domain relevant to the
salient life task at the time is more strongly related to global life
satisfaction than satisfaction with the domain irrelevant to the life task.
Value as a Moderator in SWB
Based on data collected from 40 countries, Schwartz and Sagiv (1995)
postulated the existence of 10 universal values (i.e., Power, Achievement,
Hedonism, Stimulation, Self-Direction, Universalism, Benevolence,
Tradition, Conformity, and Security). Schwartzs (1992) theory of values
162 Oishi et al.
is at present the most comprehensive theory of values, and has been
widely used in cross-cultural studies (e.g., Schwartz & Sagiv, 1995;
Triandis, McCusker, & Hui, 1990) as well as in within-culture studies
(e.g., Feather, 1996; Sagiv & Schwartz, 1995). Schwartz and Sagiv
defined Benevolence as preservation and enhancement of the welfare of
people with whom one is in frequent personal contact (e.g., true friend-
ship, helpful, and loyal). Thus, satisfaction with social life characterizes
the value of Benevolence. Similarly, Schwartz and Sagiv defined
Achievement as personal success through demonstrating competence
according to social standards (e.g., successful, capable, and ambitious).
Satisfaction with grades, therefore, represents the value of Achievement.
Furthermore, satisfaction with family exemplifies the value of Conform-
ity, which is defined by duty and honoring parents and elders (see
Schwartz & Sagiv, 1995, for definitions of the other values).
In the present study, we propose the value-as-moderator model, based
on Schwartzs (1992) theory of values, to integrate intraindividual,
developmental, and cross-cultural variations in the processes of SWB
discussed above (see Figure 1). This model assumes that individuals
values are influenced by their culture and may change across develop-
mental stages. Salient values at the time, in turn, influence determinants
of global life satisfaction. For instance, individuals in an individualist
culture tend to value Autonomy. Therefore, it is predicted that global life
satisfactionwould be more strongly related to personal achievements and
self-esteemin individualist cultures than in collectivist cultures. In young
adulthood, building an intimate relationship is one of the main life tasks.
For individuals in this life stage, romantic relationship should be valued,
and therefore should be a strong predictor of global life satisfaction.
Similarly, the value-as-a-moderator model predicts that global life satis-
faction of individuals who value Benevolence would be strongly related
to their satisfaction with social relationships.
With regard to intraindividual variation, this model posits that indi-
viduals who stress values of Achievement would feel more satisfied on
days when they receive positive feedback on the job or at school. In other
words, the more one values Achievement, the stronger the relation
between daily satisfaction and daily achievement satisfaction for that
individual. Similarly, the more one values Benevolence, the stronger the
relation between daily satisfaction and daily social life satisfaction.
Furthermore, the value-as-a-moderator model predicts that people
gain a sense of satisfaction out of activities congruent with their values.
Values and SWB 163
People with high Power-orientation, for instance, should gain a stronger
sense of satisfaction out of Power-related activities such as making a lot
of money and buying expensive clothes than those with low Power-
orientation. Likewise, the more one values Universalism (i.e., egalitari-
anism, environmental protection), the more satisfaction he or she will get
out of Universalism-related activities such as recycling and partici-
pating in a fund-raising for people and families with AIDS.
Summary
Previous research on SWB has shown that personality traits such as
extraversion and neuroticism account for a substantial amount of
Figure 1.
Values Influencing the Sources of Subjective Well-Being.
Note. Bold lines indicate stronger relations between variables.
164 Oishi et al.
interindividual variance in SWB. However, these studies are limited in
their ability to explain the underlying processes of SWB. In this regard,
studies on intraindividual processes provide important information on
the patterns of relations between daily activities and emotional experi-
ences. Unfortunately, to this date, there has not been an explicit effort to
extend our understanding of intraindividual variations of daily emotional
experiences to interindividual differences in the patterns of relations
among the key constructs of SWB. As a result, theoretical attempts to
integrate intraindividual, interindividual, developmental, and cross-cul-
tural variations in the processes of SWB are lacking. The goals of the
present investigation are (1) to investigate the moderating roles of values
in intraindividual patterns of relations between daily domain satisfac-
tions and daily satisfaction; (2) to examine the moderating roles of values
in patterns of relations between domain satisfactions and global life
satisfaction at the interindividual level; and (3) to clarify individual
differences in the types of activities from which people gain a sense of
satisfaction. The present study extends previous process-oriented re-
search on emotional experiences to larger nomological relations in SWB,
and is a first step in generating a synthetic framework for intraindividual,
interindividual, developmental, and cross-cultural variations in SWB
research.
METHOD
Participants
Sample 1 consists of 121 introductory psychology students at the University of
Illinois (58 male, 63 female; 90 White Americans, 5 Black Americans, 6
Hispanic Americans, and 20 Asian Americans). Seventy-two percent of the
participants were 17- or 18-years-old, 16 percent of them were 19-years-old.
Participants received course credit by participating in the experiment. They
participated three times over a semester with a 3-week interval between the
sessions. Each time, theyindicatedtheir life satisfactionand domainsatisfaction.
At Time 3, participants answered the value scale described below.
Sample 2 consists of 151 University of Illinois students (41 male, 110 female;
114 White Americans, 6 Black Americans, 9 Hispanic Americans, 17 Asian
Americans) enrolled in an advanced psychology course on personality and
well-being. Sixty-four percent of the participants were 20- or 21-years-old at
the beginning of the study, and 20 percent of them were 18- or 19-years-old.
Because of the prerequisite requirements for this course, no first-year students
participated in this study. Participants partially fulfilled a class requirement by
Values and SWB 165
participating in the experiment. They participated three times over a semester
with a 3-week interval between the sessions. Sample 2 participants participated
in all experiments, whereas Sample 1 participants did not participate in the daily
diary study and satisfying activity ratings.
Measures
Subjective Well-Being measures. Global life satisfaction was measured by the
Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, &Griffin, 1985).
The SWLS consists of five statements, to which respondents are asked to
indicate their degree of agreement, using a 7-point scale, ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The total SWLS score ranges from 5
to 35. Its psychometric properties were proven to be adequate in the United
States (Pavot &Diener, 1993). To measure the frequency of Positive Affect (PA)
and Negative Affect (NA), we selected eight emotion words based on the
structure of affect proposed by Diener, Smith, and Fujita (1995). Four of these
words (affection, joy, contentment, and pride) reflected PAand four (fear, anger,
sadness, and guilt) reflected NA. The participants indicated how often they had
experienced each of the eight emotions during the past month using a 7-point
scale, ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (about half of the time) to 7 (always).
Domain satisfaction. The participants answered how satisfied they were with
each of the five domains of their lives: romantic relationship, finances, grades,
family, and social life and friends. Responses ranged from 1 (extremely dissat-
isfied) to 4 (neutral) to 7 (extremely satisfied). We asked respondents to skip the
items that were not applicable (e.g., if they did not have family, romantic
partners, their own finances). About 20%of Sample 1 participants indicated that
satisfaction with romantic relations and satisfaction with finances were not
applicable; about 10% of Sample 2 participants indicated that satisfaction with
finances were not applicable. Because of these missing data, we used three
domains in our analyses: satisfaction with grades, family, and social life
and friends.
Value priorities. Value priorities were measured by the Pairwise Comparison
Value Survey (PCVS: Oishi, Schimmack, Diener, & Suh, 1998). The PCVS
consists of 45 pairwise comparisons, based on the 10 value types postulated by
Schwartz and Sagiv (1995). The participants rated all possible pairs among the
10 values (see Appendix B), on the degree to which they stress one value type
over the other. For instance, participants rated the degree to which Conformity
is more important than Power. Adequate testretest reliability (mean = .67 over
a 16-day interval) and concurrent validity (mean =.59 controlling for the general
response sets) with the Schwartz Value Survey (Schwartz, 1992) are reported in
Oishi et al. (1998).
166 Oishi et al.
Satisfying Activity Scale (SAS). In order to assess satisfying activities, we de-
veloped a new scale. The final SAS consists of 32 items, covering various
activities. The first list of the 56 SASitems was originally written so as to include
a wide range of activities representing Schwartzs (1992) value types. To avoid
redundancy, the number of items was reduced to 32 before this study (i.e., four
items for each of the eight values: Power, Achievement, Hedonism/ Stimulation,
Self-Direction, Universalism, Benevolence, Tradition/Conformity, and Secu-
rity). The participants rated the degree to which they gained a sense of satisfac-
tion and happiness by engaging in each of the 32 activities. Response options
ranged from 1 (not at all) to 4 (somewhat) to 7 (extremely).
We first performed a principal axis factor analysis. Based on the eigenvalue
and scree test, we extracted five factors using Varimax rotation. We examined
the communality of each item, and removed the items with less than .30
communality. Low communalities indicate that items did not load strongly on
any of the five factors. We then repeated the factor analysis with 28 remaining
items. We next removed items that had loadings greater than .30 on more than
one factor, and had a difference between the loadings of less than .10. Six items
were removed based on this criterion. The final factor loadings of the 22 items
retained are shown in Appendix A. The first factor consists of activities related
to Benevolence (e.g., showing that you care about others) and Conformity (e.g.,
following rules set by a group you belong to). The second factor consists of items
representing Achievement (e.g., making a conscious effort to achieve your
goals). The third factor consists of Universalism-related activities (e.g., attend-
ing a rally to support conservation of nature). The fourth factor consists of
Power-relatedactivities (e.g., buying expensive clothes). The fifthfactor consists
of activities related to Hedonism and Stimulation (e.g., going to a loud party).
Internal consistency coefficients for the five subscales were also acceptable,
ranging from .59 to .79, with the median of .74.
Daily satisfaction. For 23 consecutive days, the participants rated at the end of
each day how good or bad that day was, using a 9-point scale, ranging from 1
(extremely bad) to 5 (neutral) to 9 (extremely good). After several filler items
(e.g., How much of the day were you hungry? How many drinks of alcohol did
you have today?), participants rated how satisfied they were with two domains
on that day. Specifically, we asked How satisfied were you today with your
achievements? and How satisfied were you today with your social life?
Participants rated these items using a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (ex-
tremely dissatisfied) to 4 (neutral) to 7 (extremely satisfied). Participants
submitted each daily report the following morning with the exception of
weekends. Daily reports from Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays were submit-
ted on Mondays.
Values and SWB 167
RESULTS
Overview
We present three types of analyses. First, we present the results of
intraindividual variations in daily satisfaction based on a 23-day daily
diary study. Second, we present the results of the relations betweenvalues
and the types of satisfying activities. Finally, we present the results of
interindividual differences in the relation between domain satisfactions
and global life satisfaction.
Within-Individual Analyses: Daily Diary Study
We examined first whether values of Achievement and Benevolence are
related to the level of mean dailysatisfaction. Next, we examinedwhether
individuals were satisfied on days when they were successful in the
achievement and social life domains. Finally, based on the value-as-a-
moderator model, we examined whether the link between daily achieve-
ment satisfaction and daily satisfaction would be stronger among
individuals who value Achievement than those who do not value Achieve-
ment. Similarly, we examined whether the link between daily social life
satisfaction and daily satisfaction would be stronger among individuals
who value Benevolence than those who do not value Benevolence.
To test these hypotheses, we adopted a hierarchical linear model
(HLM) approach (Bryk & Raudenbush, 1992), using the HLM/2L pro-
gram. The HLM allows a more stringent test of whether higher level
variables explain the degree of relations among the variables within-
individual, without losing the lower level variation (see Bryk & Rauden-
bush, 1992, for details). Conceptually, it is equivalent to the following.
First, day satisfaction was regressed on satisfaction with achievement
and social life on that day for each individual (level 1). This analysis
examined the degree to which satisfaction with achievement and social
life on each day predicted day satisfaction within each individual. Next,
the level 1 regression coefficients of achievement and social life, respec-
tively, were regressed on person level variables, including sex, Achieve-
ment values, and Benevolence values (i.e., level 2). The level 2 analysis
examined the degree to which person level variables predicted the vari-
ations in level 1 regression slopes of achievement and social life.
The HLM analysis for the intercept (see the first section of Table 1)
indicated that interindividual differences in mean daily satisfaction was
168 Oishi et al.
not accounted for by sex, values of Achievement, nor values of Benevo-
lence. Whereas Kasser and Ryan (1993) found the positive relation
between values of Benevolence (affiliation aspiration) and psychological
well-being, the present daily diary study did not show any direct relation
between values of Benevolence and daily satisfaction. Next, Sheldon et
al. (1996) found that individuals were more satisfied on days when they
were successful in competence and autonomy domains. Replicating
Sheldon et al.s (1996) findings, individuals in our study felt more
satisfied on days when they were successful in achievement ( = + .31,
p < .01) and social life ( = + .42, p < .01) domains. Finally, the HLM
analyses for the slope for daily achievement satisfaction (see the second
section of Table 1) indicated that daily satisfaction with achievement was
a significantly stronger predictor of daily satisfactionfor individuals high
Table 1
Hierarchical Linear Model: Predicting the Day Level Regression
Slopes fromPerson Level Variables, Sex, Achievement Values, and
Benevolence Values
Fixed Effects Coefficient SE T-ratio
Model for Intercept (
0
)
Intercept, 00 6.122 .19 32.21**
Sex, 01 .008 .106 0.07
Achievement Value, 02 .006 .006 1.06
Benevolence Value, 03 .001 .006 0.14
Model for Achievement slope (
1
)
Intercept, 10 .310 .087 3.57**
Sex, 11 .037 .049 0.77
Achievement Value, 12 .005 .002 2.13*
Model for Social Life slope (
2
)
Intercept, 20 .417 .105 3.97**
Sex, 21 .076 .059 1.29
Benevolence Value, 22 .005 .002 1.79*
Note. N = 146. The model specified was as follows:
Level 1 (Day): Day satisfaction =
0
+
1
*satis w/achievement on that day +
2
*satis
w/social life on that day. Level 2 (Person):
1
= 10 + 11*(Sex) + 12 (value of
Achievement) + e.
2
= 20 + 21*(Sex) + 22*(value of Benevolence) + e.
Average Ordinary Least Square Regression Model at Level 1: Day Satisfaction = 6.12 +
.266*Achievements + .636*Social Life + e.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01 (one-tailed test was used because the direction was predicted by the
model).
Values and SWB 169
in Achievement values than for those low in Achievement values. Like-
wise, the HLM analyses for the slope for daily social life satisfaction
indicated that daily satisfaction with social life was a significantly
stronger predictor of daily satisfactionfor those high in Benevolence than
for those low in Benevolence values (see the third section of Table 1).
On the other hand, there was no gender difference in how much social
life and achievement on the day accounted for daily satisfaction. The
HLM analysis, therefore, shows that intraindividual processes of satis-
faction, or day-to-day satisfaction, are influenced by the degree of
success in the domain individuals value most, supporting the value-as-a-
moderator model.
Values and Types of Activities
We tested the relations between value priorities and sources of life
satisfaction by examining the extent to which individuals gain a sense of
satisfaction from various types of activities. The value-as-a-moderator
model predicts that value-congruent activities are more satisfying than
value-incongruent activities because it assumes that the relation between
participation in activities and a sense of satisfaction will be moderated
by individuals value orientations. More specifically, we predicted that
the more individuals value Power, the more satisfaction they should get
from Power-related activities. Similarly, we predicted that the more they
value Achievement, the more satisfaction they should get from Achieve-
ment-related activities. On the other hand, the self-determination theory
of well-being (Ryan et al., 1996) predicts that Universalism-related
activities would be positively correlated with any values, because it
assumes that intrinsic activities are satisfying for everyone. Also, Ryan
et al. (1996) predict that Universalism-related activities would be posi-
tively correlated with SWB measures, whereas Power-related activities
would be negatively correlated with SWB because (they argued) indi-
viduals who enjoy Universalism-related activities (e.g., volunteer activi-
ties) should be higher in well-being than those who enjoy Power-related
activities (e.g., buying expensive clothes).
In support of the value-as-a-moderator model, Table 2 shows conver-
gence between values and the type of activities people enjoy. The more
individuals valued Power, the more satisfaction they gained out of
activities related to Power. Also, the more individuals stressed Achieve-
ment values, the more satisfaction they got out of Achievement-related
170 Oishi et al.
Table 2
Correlations Among Pairwise Comparison Value Survey (PCVS) , Satisfying Activity Scale (SAS), Satisfaction With Life
Scale (SWLS), Positive Affect (PA), and Negative Affect (NA).
PCVS SWB
Pow Ach Hed Stim Self Univ Bene Trad Con Sec SWLS PA NA
SAS
Pow .35** .30** .06 .05 .29** .31** .08 .06 .08 .01 .02 .15 .15
Ach .13 .42** .17* .00 .03 .12 .12 .00 .02 .06 .10 .35** .10
Hed/Stim .11 .20* .41** .41** .02 .03 .28** .33** .23** .22* .13 .24** .16
Univ .24** .08 .23** .03 .05 .52** .08 .05 .12 .10 .01 .19* .04
Bene/Conf .02 .00 .11 .14 .28** .10 .22** .13 .18* .13 .13 .35** .07
SWB
SWLS .07 .13* .06 .05 .03 .02 .03 .01 .04 .06 .55** .50**
PA .00 .24** .03 .03 .01 .05 .04 .07 .01 .05 .27**
NA .13* .09 .05 .06 .06 .13* .07 .05 .06 .09
Family .00 .14* .01 .00 .03 .10 .03 .05 .06 .01 .47** .27** .23**
Grades .08 .09 .04 .00 .05 .05 .03 .03 .01 .03 .31** .13* .32**
Social .03 .16* .05 .05 .00 .07 .08 .02 .05 .05 .51** .57** .35**
M 6.86 3.30 6.21 1.38 6.32 2.21 7.61 7.33 5.18 .48 23.36 4.50 2.75
SD 9.19 5.87 6.11 6.33 5.83 9.02 5.97 7.69 7.41 5.88 6.13 .91 .59
Note. N = 136 for the SAS. N = 256 to 271 for all other scales. Pow = Power. Ach = Achievement. Hed = Hedonism. Stim = Stimulation. Self =
Self-Direction. Univ = Universalism. Bene = Benevolence. Trad = Tradition. Con = Conformity. Sec = Security. Family = Satisfaction with Family.
Grades = Satisfaction with Grades. Social = Satisfaction with Social Life.
* p < .05, ** p < .01.
activities. Similarly, the more individuals emphasized Hedonism and
Stimulation values, the more satisfaction they got out of activities related
to Hedonism and Stimulation, such as going to a loud party. The more
they valued Universalism, the more satisfaction they got out of Univer-
salism-related activities, such as recycling. Finally, the more individuals
emphasized Benevolence and Conformity values, the more enjoyment
they got out of activities relatedto Benevolence (e.g., caring about others)
and Conformity (e.g., doing what parents want you to do).
Schwartz (1992) assumes a circular structure of values such that
individuals high in Power are low in Universalism, and individuals high
in Hedonism and Stimulation are low in Conformity (see Appendix B).
Schwartzs structure of values, therefore, predicts inverse relations be-
tween Power and Universalism, and Hedonism/Stimulation and Con-
formity. Table 2 confirms these predictions. The more individuals valued
Power, the less they enjoyed Universalism-related activities. The more
individuals stressed Universalism values, the less they enjoyed Power-
related activities. Similarly, the more people emphasized Conformity
values, the less they enjoyed activities related to Hedonism and Stimu-
lation. Consistent with intraindividual analyses, therefore, there are
meaningful individual differences in the type of activities that are linked
to individuals SWB. More important, such differences can be predicted
by individuals value orientations. Activities are satisfying to the extent
that they are congruent with individuals values.
As predicted by Ryan et al. (1996), Universalism-related activities
were positively correlated with positive emotions. However, other types
of activities such as Achievement-related activities and Benevo-
lence/Conformity-related activities were also positively correlated with
positive emotions. Whereas self-determination theory (Ryan et al., 1996)
predicts positive correlations between Self-Direction, Universalism, and
Benevolence values and SWB measures (i.e., SWLS, PA, NA, and
domain satisfactions) and negative correlations between Conformity,
Tradition, Security, and Power values and SWB measures, these predic-
tions were not supported (see Table 2). For instance, the values of Power
were not related to lower life satisfaction nor to negative emotional
well-being. The values of Universalism and Benevolence were not
related to greater life satisfaction nor to positive emotional well-being.
Overall, the size of direct relations between values and SWB indicators
was small.
172 Oishi et al.
Interindividual Analyses: Domain Satisfaction
and Global Life Satisfaction
Finally, we tested the value-as-a-moderator model in the relations be-
tween domain satisfaction and global life satisfaction. This model pre-
dicts that the life satisfaction of individuals high in Achievement values
should be more strongly related to satisfaction with grades than for those
individuals low in Achievement values. Likewise, the life satisfaction of
individuals high in Benevolence values should be more strongly related
to satisfaction with social life than for those individuals low in Benevo-
lence values. Similarly, the life satisfaction of individuals high in Con-
formity values should be more strongly related to satisfactionwith family
than for those individuals low in Conformity values. To test the moder-
ating roles of values in the relations between domain satisfactions and
global life satisfaction, we used regression analyses with interaction
terms between values and domain satisfaction (Aiken & West, 1991).
Before the main analysis, we first examined whether the relation
between domain satisfactions and global life satisfaction would be
different between sexes. We performed regression analysis, regressing
life satisfaction on sex, domain satisfactions, and the interactions be-
tween sex and domain satisfactions. The interactions between sex and
domain satisfactions were not significant, thereby indicating that the
relation between domain satisfaction and global life satisfaction did not
differ for men and women. Therefore, we did not include sex in the
following analysis. We performed regression analysis, regressing life
satisfaction on domain satisfaction, values, and the interactions between
values and domain satisfactions. The complete analysis is presented in
Table 3. Life satisfaction was first regressed on satisfaction with grades,
family, and social life as a first block. Values of Achievement, Conform-
ity, and Benevolence were entered as a second block. Finally, the third
block was entered, which contained three interaction terms: (1) the
interaction between Achievement values and satisfaction with grades,
(2) the interaction between Benevolence values and satisfaction with
social life, and (3) the interaction between Conformity values and satis-
faction with family. Following Aiken and Wests (1991) guidelines, we
centered values and domain satisfactions around respective means first,
and formed the interaction terms by multiplying centered values and
domain satisfactions.
Values and SWB 173
As predicted by the value-as-a-moderator model, the three interaction
terms significantly explained variance of life satisfaction, above and
beyond the main effects of domain satisfactions and values (R
2
= .03,
F = 4.46, p < .01). Specifically, the interaction between Achievement
values and satisfaction with grades was significant, indicating that the
stronger the values of Achievement, the stronger the relation between
satisfaction with grades and global life satisfaction (see Block 3 of Table
3). Similarly, the interaction between Benevolence values and satisfac-
tion with social life was significant, indicating that the stronger Benevo-
lence values are, the stronger the relation between satisfactionwith social
life and life satisfaction. Likewise, the interaction between Conformity
values and satisfaction with family was significant, indicating that the
stronger Conformity values are, the more strongly satisfaction with
family was related to global life satisfaction. In short, the regression
analysis supported the value-as-a-moderator model: Value-congruent
domain satisfaction is more strongly related to global life satisfaction
than is value-incongruent domain satisfaction.
Table 3
Hierarchical Regression: Predicting the SWLS
fromDomain Satisfactions, Values, and
Interactions of Domain Satisfactions and Values
Block/Variable B (final) SE (final) df R
2
F
Block 1
Family Satisfaction 2.06 .32 .33** 3, 256 .40 56.98**
Grade Satisfaction .80 .31 .13**
Social Life Satisfaction 2.53 .32 .40**
Block 2
Achievement Values .03 .32 .01 3, 253 .00 .28
Benevolence Values .18 .32 .03
Conformity Values .22 .31 .04
Block 3
Grade Achievement .75 .26 .14** 3, 250 .03 4.46**
Family Conformity .49 .27 .09*
Social Life Benevolence .54 .30 .09*
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01 (one-tailed test was used because the direction was predicted by the
model).
174 Oishi et al.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Previous research in the field of SWB has focused mostly on interindi-
vidual differences: Who is happy? (e.g., Myers & Diener, 1995) and
Is their happiness consistent and stable? (e.g., Diener &Larsen, 1984).
An alternative approach to understanding SWB is to examine intraindi-
vidual variation based on Mischel and Shodas (1995) framework. Al-
though researchers have made some progress understanding this
intraindividual variation (e.g., Cantor et al., 1991; Emmons, 1991), few
studies have tried to integrate findings from the interindividual tradition
with findings from the intraindividual tradition. The current study at-
tempted to further our understanding of the interplay of intraindividual
and interindividual processes in SWB. More specifically, we proposed
and found support for the value-as-a-moderator model, in which domains
affect SWB most strongly when they are congruent with ones value
orientations.
Value Priorities and Predictors of
Life Satisfaction
From the value-as-a-moderator model, we predicted that the relations
between domain satisfactions and global life satisfactions would system-
atically vary, depending on individuals value orientations. As predicted,
the interindividual analyses indicate that value-congruent domain satis-
faction was more strongly related to global life satisfaction than was
value-incongruent domain satisfaction. More specifically, global life
satisfaction was strongly influenced by social life for individuals high in
Benevolence values, whereas it was strongly influenced by family life
for individuals high in Conformity values. Satisfaction with grades was
a stronger predictor of global life satisfaction for individuals who stress
Achievement than for those who do not. These results suggest that global
life satisfaction judgments are derived from different life domains for
different individuals, and that these interindividual differences are mod-
erated by their value orientations.
Intraindividual Processes
In addition to the relations between domain satisfactions and global life
satisfaction, we examined the relations between daily satisfaction and
Values and SWB 175
daily domain satisfactions to explore the processes of life satisfaction
judgment at the two different levels. The hierarchical linear model
analysis revealed that within-individual variation of day-to-day satisfac-
tion is strongly influenced by daily satisfaction with the most valued
domain. In other words, Achievement-oriented individuals tended to
evaluate a day as good when they excelled in achievement domains,
whereas those who stressed Benevolence evaluated the day as good when
they had a positive social interaction. Emmons (1991) and Cantor et al.
(1991) focused, in their daily diary studies, on the patterns of emotional
experiences. The present investigation extended the prior studies to daily
satisfaction, and showed that there are intraindividual variations in the
patterns of daily satisfaction judgments, which can be reliably predicted
from individuals value orientations.
Equally important, the within-individual analysis converged with the
patterns that emergedat the interindividual level. Admittedly, the patterns
of relations between domain satisfactions and global life satisfaction
might be influenced by memory bias such that the level of global life
satisfaction distorts the level of certain domain satisfaction. However, the
consistent patterns of relations were obtained in the daily diary study,
which is less susceptible to memory bias. Therefore, it appears that
meaningful individual differences do exist in the patterns of relations
between domain satisfactions and global life satisfaction. The converging
processes of daily satisfaction and long-term global satisfaction judg-
ments present a unified view, however preliminary, of how different
individuals evaluate their life satisfaction.
The current daily diary study also extended Sheldon et al.s (1996)
results, by examining the different degrees of importance assigned to the
domain related to competence. Sheldon et al. found that daily satisfaction
was strongly related to the degree of success in competence and auton-
omy domains. They implied that the degree of success in competence
and autonomy determines the level of day-to-day well-being, regardless
of individuals value orientations. It is interesting to note that in the
present analysis we also found that daily achievement as well as social
life was a positive predictor of how good the day was (see the average
ordinary least square regression equation in Table 1). However, we also
found that the degree to which the achievement of the day influences the
evaluation of the day as a whole differs significantly across individuals,
depending on the values of Achievement. That is, although on average
satisfaction with social life and achievement are both significant predic-
176 Oishi et al.
tors of daily satisfaction, there are significant individual differences in
the extent to which each domain influences individualsjudgment of how
good or badthe daywas. As such, consideringvalue orientations provides
a more sophisticated understanding of the intraindividual processes of
SWB.
Analogous to Mischel and Shodas (1995) if . . . then . . . signature,
the present findings indicate that there are important interindividual and
intraindividual differences in the patterns of relations between domain
satisfaction and global life satisfaction. If they were successful in
achievement domains, then people high in Achievement values would
feel satisfied with life, whereas if they were successful in the social life
domain, then people with high Benevolence values would feel satisfied
with life in general. The patterns of relations between domain satisfac-
tions and global life satisfaction provide valuable information on indi-
viduals SWB, beyond the mean level of life satisfaction. In order to
understand individuals subjective well-being, it is critical to document
the processes through which individuals construe various facets of life
domains and life as a whole.
What Are Satisfying Activities?
Furthermore, the analysis on satisfying activities showed that people find
different activities more or less rewarding. For instance, individuals high
in Universalism values found recycling and participating in civic activi-
ties very satisfying, whereas those high in Power values perceived buying
expensive clothes as highly satisfying. As Table 2 indicates, therefore,
there are considerable individual differences in the type of activities that
generate a sense of satisfaction. Csikszentmihalyi (1975) argues that the
crucial ingredient of flow activities is the balance between skills and
challenges. Csikszentmihalyi and Csikszentmihalyi (1988) compare
chess with Tic-Tac-Toe, and insist that the flow activities involve com-
plexities and challenges. Although Csikszentmihalyi discusses various
manifestations of flow experiences, including drawing, chess, and bas-
ketball, and their emotional consequences, it remains unclear how dif-
ferent activities are linked to flow experiences for different individuals.
Nakamura (1988), for instance, found that high school students with
similar math ability exhibited striking differences in enjoyment of solv-
ing math problems. That is, even among individuals with similar skills,
there are substantial individual differences in the degree to which the
Values and SWB 177
same activity generates flow experiences. The present findings suggest
that it is value-congruent activities that provide a sense of satisfaction.
The present analysis also has an important implication for the self-
determination theory of SWB(e.g., Ryan et al., 1996). Recently, Sheldon
and Kasser (in press) argued that a higher level of well-being can be
obtained only through successful pursuit of intrinsic goals related to
self-acceptance, intimacy, and social contribution. On the other hand,
they asserted that attainment of financial goals would not lead to indi-
viduals sense of well-being as strongly as the attainment of intimacy
goal. It should be noted, however, that even the activities apparently
related to extrinsic motivation, such as doing what parents want me to
do, did provide a sense of satisfaction for individuals who value Con-
formity (see Table 2). That is, although on average the activities related
to interpersonal relationships and community contribution tend to be
associated with positive emotional experiences, to the extent that the
activity reflects individuals important values, it provides a sense of
satisfaction. In contrast to the self-determination theory of SWB (Ryan
et al., 1996), the present study suggests that there is more than one path
to a higher level of well-being.
Future Directions
One limitation of this study is that domains in which we tested the
value-as-a-moderator model were limited mostly to Achievement, Be-
nevolence, and Conformity. In the future, the model should be tested in
other value domains. Second, participants in this study were college
students. Compared to older adults, their value orientations might not be
well crystallized. It is important, therefore, to test the value-as-a-mod-
erator model in older samples. This will allowus to test the generalizabil-
ity of the model as well as to examine whether the size of moderator
effects of values on SWB varies, depending on the stability of value
orientations.
Third, although we found evidence that values moderate the patterns
of relations between domain satisfactions and global life satisfaction, the
present study did not examine why values serve as a moderator. Apossible
explanation for this is that value-congruent domains are chronically more
accessible. With respect to self-regulation, Higgins (1996) has shown that
chronically accessible self-concepts (e.g., ideal-self, ought-self) are
related to the type of emotional experiences and the type of stories
178 Oishi et al.
people remember. Consistent with the accessibility hypothesis, Strack,
Martin, and Schwarz (1988) found that domain satisfactions correlate more
strongly with global life satisfaction when the domain is accessible to the
individual than when it is not accessible. Future studies should examine
whether values represent chronically accessible concepts. In other words,
are concepts status, money, and physical attractiveness more acces-
sible to individuals who value Power than to those who value Universalism?
Similarly, the accessibility hypothesis of SWB suggests that temporally
accessible domains are stronger predictors of life satisfaction than nonac-
cessible domains. The domain social life may be more accessible and
therefore more important on weekends than on weekdays. Future studies
should examine whether daily social life satisfaction will be a stronger
predictor of daily satisfaction on weekends than on weekdays.
Finally, we tested the value-as-a-moderator model at intraindividual
and interindividual levels. In the future, this model should be tested in
developmental and cross-cultural contexts. Is satisfaction with family a
stronger predictor of life satisfaction among those who are married with
children than among teenagers? Does the deprivation of freedom result
in a more negative emotional reaction among people in individualist
cultures than among people in collectivist cultures? These multilevel
phenomena could be investigated using the value-as-a-moderator model.
CONCLUSION
Until recently, it appeared that all the important individual differences in
SWB could be explained by personality traits (e.g., Costa & McCrae,
1980; McCrae, & Costa, 1991). Such a perception prevailed, in part, due
to the lack of attention to the qualitative aspects of SWB among re-
searchers, and to the focus on nomothetic analysis. As demonstrated in
the present study, however, there are meaningful individual differences
in the patterns of relations among the key constructs in SWB. The
systematic understanding of the individual differences in the qualitative
aspects of SWB supplements the limitations of the trait approach to
SWB, providing a powerful tool to explain the processes of SWB. The
examination of individual, developmental, and cross-cultural variations
in the processes of SWB is a promising pathway to gain insights into the
nature of SWB, which can be undertaken from the value-as-a-moderator
model.
Values and SWB 179
REFERENCES
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting
interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bryk, A. S., &Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and
data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cantor, N., &Blanton, H. (1996). Effortful pursuit of personal goals in daily life. In J. A.
Bargh & P. M. Gollwitzer (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and
motivation to behavior (pp. 338359). New York: Guilford Press.
Cantor, N., & Harlow, R. (1994). Social intelligence and personality: Flexible life-task
pursuit. In R. J. Sternberg & P. Ruzgis (Eds.), Personality and intelligence (pp.
137168). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cantor, N., Norem, J., Langston, C., Zirkle, S., Fleeson, W., & Cook-Flannagan, C.
(1991). Life tasks and daily life experience. Journal of Personality, 59, 425451.
Cantor, N., & Sanderson, C. A. (In press). Life task participation and well-being: The
importance of taking part in daily life. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwartz
(Eds.), Understanding quality of life: Scientific perspectives on enjoyment and suffer-
ing. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Cantor, N., & Zirkel, S. (1990). Personality, cognition, and purposive behavior. In L. A.
Pervin (Ed.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 135164). New
York: Guilford Press.
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on
subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 38, 668678.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredomand anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (1988). Optimal experience: Psycho-
logical studies of flow in consciousness. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Deci, E. L., &Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social
Indicators Research, 31, 103157.
Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and
self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 653663.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., &Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life
Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 7175.
Diener, E., & Larsen, R. J. (1984). Temporal stability and cross-situational consistency
of affective, behavioral, and cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 47, 871883.
Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Pavot, W., & Fujita, F. (1992). Extraversion and subjective
well-being in a U.S. national probability sample. Journal of Research in Personality,
26, 205215.
Diener, E., Smith, H., & Fujita, F. (1995). The personality structure of affect. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 130141.
Diener, E., Suh, E., Lucas, R., &Smith, H. (1997). Subjective well-being: Three decades
of progress1967 to 1997. Manuscript in preparation, University of Illinois, Urbana-
Champaign.
180 Oishi et al.
Emmons, R. A. (1991). Personal strivings, daily life events, and psychological and
physical well-being. Journal of Personality, 59, 453472.
Emmons, R. A., & Diener, E. (1985). Personality correlates of subjective well-being.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 8997.
Feather, N. T. (1996). Values, deservingness, and attitudes toward high achievers:
Research on tall poppies. In C. Seligman, J. M. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The
psychology of values: The Ontarion Symposium (Vol. 8, pp. 215251). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Harlow, R. E., & Cantor, N. (1996). Still participating after all these years: A study of
life task participation in later life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71,
12351249.
Headey, B. W., & Wearing, A. J. (1989). Personality, life events, and subjective well-
being: Toward a dynamic equilibrium model. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 57, 731739.
Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience.
In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic
principles (pp. 133168). New York: Guilford Press.
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). A dark side of the American Dream: Correlates of
financial success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 65, 410422.
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American Dream: Differential
correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
22, 280287.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1991). Adding liebe und arbeit: The full five-factor
model and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 227232.
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality:
Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality
structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246268.
Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 1019.
Nakamura, J. (1988). Optimal experience and the uses of talent. In M. Csikszentmihalyi
&I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in
consciousness (pp. 319326). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Oishi, S., Schimmack, U., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1998). The measurement of values and
individualism-collectivism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24,
11771189.
Pavot, W., &Diener, E. (1993). Reviewof the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Psychological
Assessment, 5, 164172.
Ryan, R. M., Sheldon, K. M., Kasser, T., &Deci, E. L. (1996). All goals were not created
equal: The relation of goal content and regulatory styles to mental health. In J. A.
Bargh & P. M. Gollwitzer (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and
motivation to behavior (pp. 726). New York: Guilford Press.
Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (1995). Value priorities and readiness for out-group social
contact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 437448.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical
advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in
experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 165). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Values and SWB 181
Schwartz, S. H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identifying culture-specifics in the content and
structure of values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 92116.
Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (In press). Pursuing personal goals: Skills enable progress,
but not all progress is beneficial. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R., &Reis, H. T. (1996). What makes for a good day? Competence
and autonomy in the day and in the person. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 22, 12701279.
Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., &Wright, J. C. (1994). Intra-individual stability in the organiza-
tion and patterning of behavior: Incorporating psychological situations into the
idiographic analysis of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67,
674687.
Strack, F., Martin, L. L., & Schwarz, N. (1988). Priming and communication: Social
determinants of information use in judgments of life satisfaction. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 18, 429442.
Suh, E., Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Triandis, H. C. (1998). The shifting basis of life
satisfaction judgment across cultures: Emotions versus norms. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 74, 482493.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Triandis, H. C., McCusker, C., &Hui, C. H. (1990). Multimethod probes of individualism
and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 10061020.
182 Oishi et al.
Appendix A
Principal Axis Factor Analysis of the Satisfying Activity Scale With
Varimax Rotation
Items F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
Benevolence/Conformity ( = .74)
Showing that you care about others .65 .11 .23 .07 .10
Following rules set by a group you
belong to .65 .12 .08 .18 .23
Agreeing and following others
suggestion/opinion .64 .03 .16 .03 .01
Caring about friends and family .59 .13 .20 .04 .20
Doing what parents want you to do .45 .19 .06 .10 .03
Forgiving others mistake .44 .07 .25 .08 .02
Achievement ( = .79)
Making a long-term plan .32 .69 .08 .13 .04
Making a conscious effort to
achieve your goals .01 .68 .18 .09 .06
Deciding what you want to do in
the future .38 .64 .06 .02 .07
Choosing your own goals .00 .57 .12 .09 .05
Studying to get good grades .32 .56 .15 .12 .24
Universalism ( = .77)
Attending a rally to support
conservation of nature .09 .00 .74 .03 .02
Participating in a fund-raising for
people and families with AIDS .09 .05 .73 .05 .01
Recycling bottles, old newspapers,
and office papers .29 .08 .60 .01 .11
Doing a volunteer work .23 .22 .57 .01 .10
Power ( = .65)
Buying expensive clothes .13 .19 .04 .75 .18
Making a lot of money .01 .04 .09 .62 .01
Cleaning your room and keeping
everything in order .08 .13 .16 .47 .11
Hedonism/Stimulation ( = .59)
Doing homework instead of going
out for fun (R) .05 .23 .03 .07 .64
Going to a loud party .12 .04 .02 .24 .62
Avoiding high-risk activities (R) .17 .06 .01 .25 .44
Doing different things every
weekend .06 .00 .31 .30 .42
Eigenvalue 4.27 1.90 1.53 1.18 1.00
Percent of variance explained 19.4 8.6 6.9 5.4 4.5
Cumulative percent of variance
explained 19.4 28.0 35.0 40.4 45.0
Values and SWB 183
Appendix B
Schwartz and Sagivs (1995) Structure of 10 Value Types
184 Oishi et al.

You might also like