↓ Skip to main content

Longitudinal Evidence for a Midlife Nadir in Human Well‐Being: Results from Four Data Sets

Overview of attention for article published in Economic Journal, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 2,098)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
18 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
32 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Longitudinal Evidence for a Midlife Nadir in Human Well‐Being: Results from Four Data Sets
Published in
Economic Journal, October 2015
DOI 10.1111/ecoj.12256
Pubmed ID
Authors

Terence C. Cheng, Nattavudh Powdthavee, Andrew J. Oswald

Abstract

There is a large amount of cross-sectional evidence for a midlife low in the life cycle of human happiness and well-being (a 'U shape'). Yet no genuinely longitudinal inquiry has uncovered evidence for a U-shaped pattern. Thus, some researchers believe the U is a statistical artefact. We re-examine this fundamental cross-disciplinary question. We suggest a new test. Drawing on four data sets, and only within-person changes in well-being, we document powerful support for a U shape in longitudinal data (without the need for formal regression equations). The article's methodological contribution is to use the first-derivative properties of a well-being equation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Unknown 74 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 19%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Researcher 9 12%
Professor 8 10%
Student > Master 8 10%
Other 18 23%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 20 26%
Psychology 20 26%
Social Sciences 11 14%
Philosophy 3 4%
Neuroscience 1 1%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 13 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 180. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 June 2020.
All research outputs
#100,426
of 15,527,070 outputs
Outputs from Economic Journal
#14
of 2,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,766
of 219,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Economic Journal
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,527,070 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,098 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 219,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.