Disability, participation, and subjective wellbeing among older couples

Social Science and Medicine

Volumn 74, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 588-596

  Freedman, Vicki A ^a   Stafford, Frank ^a   Schwarz, Norbert ^a   Conrad, Frederick ^a   Cornman, Jennifer C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b Independent Research Consultant   (United States)

Author keywords

Disability; Older people; Panel study; Participation; Time use; United States; Wellbeing

Indexed keywords

DISABILITY; ELDERLY CARE; ELDERLY POPULATION; HEALTH STATUS; PANEL DATA; QUALITY OF LIFE;

ADULT; AGED; AGING; ARTICLE; DISABILITY; DISEASE SEVERITY; EMOTION; FATIGUE; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; LIFE SATISFACTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MARRIAGE; PAIN; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; UNITED STATES; WELLBEING;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HAPPINESS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; SPOUSES; UNITED STATES;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84856406426     PISSN: 02779536     EISSN: 18735347     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.10.018     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Albrecht G.L., Devlieger P.J. The disability paradox: high quality of life against all odds. Social Science & Medicine 1999, 48(8):977-988.
2. Blanchflower D.G., Oswald A.J. Is well-being u-shaped over the life cycle?. Social Science & Medicine 2008, 66(8):1733-1749.
3. Brickman P., Campbell D.T. Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. Adaptation-level theory: A symposium 1971, 287-302. Academic Press, New York. M.H. Apley (Ed.).
4. Cornman, J. C., Freedman, V. A., & Stafford, F. P. (2011). Comparing estimates of time use in the PSID's supplement on disability and use of time and the American time use survey panel study of Income Dynamics Technical Series Paper #11-01. Accessed December 8, 2011. http://psidonline.isr.umich.edu/Publications/Papers/tsp/2011-01_Estimates%20of%20Time%20Use_DUST.pdf%23page%3D1.
5. Diener E., Lucas R.E., Scollon C.N. Beyond the hedonic treadmill: revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist 2006, 61(4):305-314.
6. Diener E., Suh M.E. Subjective wellbeing and age: an international analysis. 1997: Focus on emotional adult development 1997, Vol. 17:304-324. Springer Publishing Company, New York. K.W. Schaie, M.P. Lawton (Eds.).
7. Diener E., Suh E.M., Lucas R.E., Smith H.L. Subjective well-being: three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin 1999, 125(2):276-302.
8. Easterlin R.A. Life cycle happiness and its sources: intersections of psychology, economics and demography. Journal of Economic Psychology 2006, 27(4):463-482.
9. George L. Still happy after all these years. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences 2010, 65B(3):331-339.
10. Headey B. The set point theory of well-being has serious flaws: on the eve of a scientific revolution. Social Indicators Research 2010, 97(1):7-21.
11. Hill M. The panel study of income dynamics: A user's guide 1992, Sage Publications, Inc, Newbury CA.
12. Institute of Medicine The future of disability in America 2006, National Academies Press, Washington DC.
13. Kahneman D., Krueger A.B., Schkade D., Schwarz N., Stone A.A. Asurvey method for characterizing daily life experience: the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM). Science 2004, 306(5702):1776-1780.
14. Kahneman D., Krueger A.B., Schkade D., Schwarz N., Stone A.A. Would you be happier if you were richer? A focusing illusion. Science 2006, 312(5782):1908-1910.
15. Krueger A. Are we having more fun yet? Categorizing and evaluating changes in time allocation. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2007, 2:193-215.
16. Krueger A.B., Stone A.A. Assessment of pain: a community-based diary survey in the USA. The Lancet 2008, 371(9623):1519-1525.
17. Lucas R.E. Long-term disability is associated with lasting changes in subjective wellbeing: evidence from two nationally representative longitudinal studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2007, 92(4):717-730.
18. Lucas R.E. Adaptation and the set-point model of subjective well-being. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2007, 16(2):75-79.
19. Pinquart M., Sorensen S. Influences of socioeconomic status, social network, and competence on subjective well-being in later life: a meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging 2000, 15(2):187-224.
20. Schwarz N., Kahneman D., Xu J. Global and episodic reports of hedonic experience. Calendar and time diary methods in life course research 2008, 157-174. Sage Publications, Washington, DC. R.F. Belli, F.P. Stafford, D.F. Alwin (Eds.).
21. StataCorp Stata: Release 11. Statistical software 2009, StataCorp LP, College Station, TX.
22. Weathers R. Aguide to disability statistics from the American community survey 2005, Employment and Disability Institute, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
23. Whalen H.R., Lachman M.E. Social support and strain from partner, family and friends: costs and benefits for men and women in adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 2000, 17(1):5-30.
24. Whiteneck G. Conceptual models of disability: past, present, and future. Appendix B. Workshop on disability in America: A new look - Summary and background papers 2006, 50-66. National Academies Press, Washington DC. M. Field, A. Jette, L. Martin (Eds.).
25. World Health Organization Towards a common language for functioning, disability, and health: International classification of functioning, disability and health 2002, World Health Organization, Geneva.
26. Yang Y. Social inequalities in happiness in the United States 1972-2004: an age-period-cohort analysis. American Sociologic Review 2008, 73(2):204-226.