The news is filled with stories about a new study published today in Science Magazine ranking states by how happy people are. The study is based on huge national survey that asks “In general, how satisfied are you with your life? Subjects can answer very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied, creating a 4 point scale. The researchers controlled for personal factors, such as income, age, marital status, race, and employment status to identify which states had the highest regression-adjusted self-reported happiness.
The study also references earlier research by Gabriel, et al (2003) that develops an objective measure of happiness (or more accurately — quality of life). They identified a long list of amenities that might be appealing to people, including weather, access to ocean or inland coast, state or national parks, crime, pollution, cost of living, commute times, etc… They then predicted housing prices based on all of those variables. This would allow them to know, for example, how much more people would be willing to pay for a house (all else equal) for each sunny day on average per year. Essentially, these researchers can empirically derive the price for each of the long list of amenities they identified. The average aggregate price of all of those amenities in each state allows them to develop an objective measure of happiness for each state.
Interestingly, states with higher median household income tend to be less happy. However, it is important to note that the regression with dummies for each state shows positive coefficients for income, so money does contribute to happiness as long as it is only more money relative to my neighbors and not relative to the national average.
It is also interesting that blue states seem to be especially unhappy. I calculated that there is a correlation of .48 between the percentage of voters in a state that voted for Bush in 2000 and the state’s happiness rank, using the objective measure. The objective and subjective measure are also strongly correlated to each other, which is reassuring.
I would also note that Matt and I seem to live in happy states, while poor Greg is in a relatively unhappy state. And pity Marcus and all of those other New Yorkers, with NY ranking at the bottom in terms of happiness on both measures.
| Obj. | Sub. | |
| AL | 26 | |
| AK | 23 | 12 |
| AZ | 20 | 6 |
| AR | 3 | 17 |
| CA | 42 | 45 |
| CO | 34 | 2 |
| CT | 32 | 49 |
| DE | 30 | 22 |
| DC | N/A | 36 |
| FL | 10 | 4 |
| GA | 36 | 19 |
| HI | 38 | 3 |
| ID | 5 | 16 |
| IL | 48 | 44 |
| IN | 44 | 47 |
| IA | 15 | 30 |
| KS | 19 | 31 |
| KY | 24 | 34 |
| LA | 8 | 1 |
| ME | 9 | 10 |
| MD | 45 | 39 |
| MA | 27 | 43 |
| MI | 49 | 48 |
| MN | 46 | 25 |
| MS | 7 | 9 |
| MO | 40 | 37 |
| MT | 4 | 8 |
| NE | 16 | 33 |
| NV | 29 | 38 |
| NH | 43 | 26 |
| NJ | 47 | 46 |
| NM | 14 | 23 |
| NY | 50 | 50 |
| NC | 17 | 13 |
| ND | 6 | 24 |
| OH | 33 | 42 |
| OK | 21 | 21 |
| OR | 22 | 29 |
| PA | 35 | 40 |
| RI | 12 | 41 |
| SC | 18 | 7 |
| SD | 2 | 14 |
| TN | 28 | 5 |
| TX | 25 | 15 |
| UT | 39 | 20 |
| VT | 13 | 18 |
| VA | 31 | 27 |
| WA | 41 | 35 |
| WV | 11 | 32 |
| WI | 37 | 28 |
| WY | 1 | 11 |
Jay P. Greene's Blog 
On this topic check out Arthur Brooks’s Gross National Happiness.
Some tidbits I’ve gleaned from that book and Arthur’s other work:
1) Eighty percent of a person’s happiness level is congenital. People are just naturally grumpy, naturally sunny, or naturally somewhere in between.
2) In the twenty percent that varies, happiness is associated with three major factors: work hard, get married, and worship regularly.
3) Increases in wealth not arising from earned success (e.g. welfare, lottery, inheritance) produce about a six-month increase in happiness followed by a dramatic drop, leveling off below the original happiness level.
4) Increases in wealth arising from earned success, on the other hand, are a major driver of happiness – hence the advice to “work hard.”
This all sounds right, Greg, but why is there this variation in happiness across states? Do New Yorkers not work hard, get married, or worship regularly?
I think I have an explanation on NY.
In Ghostbusters II, the mayor of NYC exclaims “It is every New Yorkers God-given right to be miserable, and treat other people like dirt!”
A friend of mine saw GBII in NYC, and he said the crowd jumped out of their chairs and screamed with approval.
Apparently the study did not control for a general condition of drunkenness.
This explains why Louisiana placed so well.
My home state Illinois ranks as either the 7th and 3rd least happiest state, which ticks me off.
Louisiana seems to provide its folks with a serious dose of happiness, which might relate to this Mercatus paper on my weekend reading list (http://tinyurl.com/yjeo62g). Come to think of it, I’ve visited Louisiana seven times in the last five years.
Jay, the answer to your question is “no, they don’t; obviously no, they don’t; and – duh.”
Coefficient of correlation (happiness index, duration of compulsory schooling)=___?
Hi,
Interesting thoughts. I completely agree. However I think, happiness is still a tricky word. I had a shot at trying to define it in a more “scientific” or “objective” way, despite it being a subjective feeeling: What is happiness?
I would love to hear your thoughts! Thank you, Nick
Well, the research I cited relies on asking people if they’re very happy, happy, unhappy, or very unhappy. The advantage of this method is that you don’t have to define happiness in order to measure it. You can’t objectify the subjective; ultimately any sensible definition of “happiness” will have to appeal to a certain kind of subjective experience – which we all recognize because we’ve all had it, but we can’t give it an objective definition because it’s a subjective experience. But that doesn’t mean you can’t measure it – if people think they’re happy, they are! Most subjective states are actually easier to measure than objective ones, not harder, because all you have to do is ask.