The questionnaire, diagnosing the index of life satisfaction, reflects the general psychological state of a person, the degree of his psychological comfort and socio-psychological adaptation.

The test “Life Satisfaction Index” can be used for a differentiated assessment of life style features, needs, motives, attitudes, value orientations of a person in order to determine which ones positively affect his general psychological state and which negatively.

The Life Satisfaction Index test (Neugarten A.O.), developed by a group of American scientists dealing with the socio-psychological problems of gerontopsychology, was first published in 1961 and soon became widespread. The technique was translated and adapted by N.V. Panina in 1993. The IZHU questionnaire consists of 20 questions, the results of the answers of which are reduced to 5 scales characterizing various aspects of the general psychological state of a person and his satisfaction with life. Estimated test time 5-10 minutes.

Test life satisfaction index (IJU), adaptation by N. V. Panina (Questionnaire of the general psychological state of a person):

Test material.

1. With age, much seems to me better than I expected before.

2. Life has brought me more frustration than most people I know.

3. Now is the darkest period in my life.

4. My life could be happier than it is.

5. Now I am almost as happy as when I was younger.

6. Most of the things I have to do are boring and uninteresting.

7. Now I am experiencing the best years of my life.

8. I believe that in the future interesting and pleasant things await me.

9. I am as interested in my business and activities as before.

10. With age, I feel more and more tired.

11. The feeling of age does not bother me.

12. When I look back at my life, I feel a sense of satisfaction.

13. I would not change my past life, even if I had such an opportunity.

14. Compared to other people of my age, I have done a lot of stupid things in my life.

15. I look better than most other people of my age.

16. I have some plans that I intend to implement in the near future.

17. Looking back at the past, I can say that I have missed a lot in my life.

18. Too often, compared to other people, I am in a depressed mood.

19. I got quite a lot of what I expected from life.

20. No matter what they say, with age, most people get worse, not better.

The key to the IJU test.

Processing the results.

The index of overall life satisfaction is determined by the accrual of points for the key.

Interpretation of the results.

The test measures the most general psychological state of a person, determined by his personality characteristics, the system of relations to various aspects of his life. Life Satisfaction Index - an integrative indicator that includes the emotional component as the main carrier. Holders of a high index value are characterized by a low level of emotional tension, high emotional stability, low levels of anxiety, psychological comfort, a high level of satisfaction with the situation and their role in it.

• interest in life as the opposite of apathy;
• determination, determination, consistency in achieving life goals;
• consistency between goals set and real goals achieved;
• a positive assessment of one's own qualities and actions;
• general mood background.

The maximum life satisfaction index is 40 points. Average life satisfaction is 25-30 points. Scores less than 25 points are considered low.

As additional information about which specific areas of life bring satisfaction or dissatisfaction, you can calculate the number of points on the scales (the maximum number of points on each scale is 8).

Decoding of scales.

1. Interest in life.Judgments No. 1, 6, 9, 11.   The scale reflects the degree of enthusiasm, a keen attitude to ordinary everyday life.

2.  Consistency in achieving goals.  Judgments No. 8, 13, 16, 17.   High indicators on this scale reflect such features of attitude towards life as determination, perseverance aimed at achieving goals. A low rating on this scale reflects a passive reconciliation with life failures, a humble acceptance of everything that brings life.

3. Consistency between set and achieved goals.  Judgments No. 2, 4, 5, 19.   High indicators reflect a person’s conviction that he has achieved or is able to achieve those goals that he considers important for himself.

4.  A positive assessment of yourself and your own actions.  Judgments No. 12, 14, 15, 20.   This includes a person’s assessment of their external and internal qualities. A high score reflects high self-esteem.

5.  The general background of the mood.  Judgments № 3, 7, 10, 18.   The scale shows the degree of optimism, pleasure from life.

The results of this test provide an opportunity to quickly get information about the general emotional state of a person, about areas of life that are possibly “problematic” for him and take steps to correct the latter.

Test life satisfaction index (IJU), adaptation by N.V. Panina (Questionnaire of the general psychological state of a person - Neugarten A.O.).

The concept of life satisfaction is complex and multi-layered. Is it possible to define it somehow more specifically? Is it possible to quantify and evaluate it? If so, what are the results for the Russian population? What worries Russians the most?

One of the traditional areas of sociological research is the study of the role and significance of various aspects of human life. For many years, large-scale work of this kind has been carried out by both Russian and Western sociologists. Another equally important research area is the problem of measuring the population’s satisfaction with their life. Such work is carried out on a regular basis, in particular, by sociologists of the countries participating in the Common Economic Space. However, despite the internal unity of these areas of research, their methodological integration has not yet been implemented. Meanwhile, the need for operational monitoring of the social well-being of the population requires a solution to this problem. In this article, we propose one of the possible approaches to its solution based on the construction of an integral index of life satisfaction.

1. Typology of factors of life satisfaction.  Life satisfaction is a complex, complex concept that accumulates many factors and aspects, each of which is largely an independent phenomenon. In this regard, in order to quantitatively measure the degree of life satisfaction, in our opinion, it is advisable to adhere to the following computational algorithm:

• to form the most complete set of factors affecting life satisfaction;
• assess the level of population satisfaction with each of these factors (i.e., calculate factorial satisfaction indices);
• assess the importance level of each factor (i.e., calculate factor significance indices, based on which factor significance factors can be determined);
• calculate the generalized index of satisfaction with life, consisting of the sum of factorial indices of satisfaction, adjusted for the factor coefficient of significance.

Let us consider in more detail the first stage of this algorithm.

The construction of an index of satisfaction with life involves the fulfillment of four indispensable conditions.

First, the factors of life satisfaction should be determined in such a way as to cover all aspects of human life, without missing a single essential aspect of the individual’s social being. Otherwise, the completeness of the specified index will be lost and it will turn into a kind of private social indicator.

Secondly, in the final construction of the index of satisfaction with life, the number of factors should not be too large (no more than 15), since in this case the analyticity of the scheme will be lost, the index itself will become opaque, and the interpretation of quantitative results will turn into a laborious procedure. Here we go contrary to some research traditions that are focused on building the most complete and detailed lists of basic values, including up to 38 items.

Thirdly, every particular factor, in spite of everything, should be an aggregated phenomenon in which the primary “collapse”, the compression of social information, has already been made. Although highly detailed indicators are characterized by high dynamics and sensitivity, their merging into a universal indicator degenerates into an illogical and eclectic procedure.

Fourth, all factors of life satisfaction should represent some basic values, in relation to which measurements can be made regarding their importance for the respondents and the level of satisfaction with them. At the same time, these values \u200b\u200bby default assume their antipodes or the so-called “antivalues”.

In this regard, a specific set of factors can be represented as follows:

1. Personal and family security (lack of rampant crime, criminalization of life and the arbitrariness of the authorities, minimization of technological disasters with a risk to life and health);
2. Material well-being (the availability of normal housing, clothing, food, the ability to provide for himself and his family with education and medical care);
3. Family well-being (harmonious relations with family members, mutual love and respect);
4. Achievement of goals (the presence of social and political freedom, the availability of real opportunities for realizing the potential of social mobility);
5. Creative self-realization (the possibility of self-expression at work and out of work, including in public life);
6. The presence of good, fruitful leisure (the availability of free time and methods for its effective use, including recreation during holidays and travel, access to cultural property, etc.);
7. Good climate and good weather (lack of natural disasters, prolonged rains, sudden changes in temperature and pressure, the weather matches the current season, a sufficient number of sunny days, etc.).
8. Decent social status (respected profession, solid position, presence of qualification degrees, ranks, ranks, awards, etc.).
9. The presence of effective informal social contacts (friendship, communication, mutual understanding, sex, etc.);
10. Social stability, confidence in the future (lack of social and political upheaval, lack of poorly thought out and unprepared economic reforms, moderate inflation, unemployment, etc.);
11. Comfortable living environment (good ecology, developed social infrastructure, etc.);
12. Good health (absence of chronic diseases, serious and fatal injuries).

Of course, in addition to these factors, there are always some unaccounted aspects of social life, but their influence, as a rule, can be neglected without losing meaningful conclusions. In further applied research, the 11th factor is divided into two independent aspects of life: a positive environmental situation; developed social infrastructure.

In our opinion, the basis of the proposed typology of factors of satisfaction with life is the undeniable position that the stability of the socio-economic system is due to the homeostasis of society achieved in the process of satisfying basic human instincts - self-preservation, self-reproduction (procreation) and self-realization (self-expression). It is easy to verify that the set of factors proposed above with a sufficient degree of completeness covers all three basic instincts.

Of course, there are other classifications of basic human values. For example, in the psychological tradition of Sufis there are five fundamental benefits that a person gravitates to: life, power, happiness, knowledge and peace. It is easy to see that these values \u200b\u200bcorrelate quite definitely with the three basic instincts. In any case, the proposed 12 groups of factors of satisfaction with life equally cover both three basic instincts and five Sufi basic values. Thus, the 12 factors of life satisfaction with sufficient completeness reflect the entire diversity of social being.

2. Methodology for assessing the generalized index of satisfaction with life. Consider the remaining three stages of the algorithm for assessing the generalized index of life satisfaction proposed in the previous section. For this, first of all, it is necessary to assess the level of population satisfaction with each of 13 factors. This task involves calculating factor satisfaction indices Dj. The initial information is the question: how satisfied are you with the j-th factor of life? The following standard format of possible answers is used:

1. Quite satisfied;
2. Rather satisfied than not satisfied;
3. More likely not satisfied than satisfied;
4. Absolutely not satisfied;
5. Difficult to answer.

Then, the index of satisfaction with the jth factor of vital activity should be calculated using the following formula, which is the most appropriate tool for diagnosing a social situation:

where j is the index of the factor of life satisfaction; i is the index of the variant of the respondents' answer to the question regarding satisfaction with the jth factor; n is the total number of envisaged options for answering the question (in our case, 5); x ji - percentage of respondents who indicated the i-th answer option for the j-th factor of life satisfaction; a i  - weight coefficient of the i-th answer option (for all vital factors, a unified scale of weight coefficients is used; 0≤ a i≤1); k is the normalizing coefficient, the value of which is determined in the course of computational experiments.

In relation to our problem, the system of weights for all factors is the same and has the following structure: a 1=1,0; a 2=0,6; a 3=0,4; a 4\u003d 0. Sometimes, in applied research, in addition to the group of people who found it difficult to answer, the group of people who did not give any answer at all is taken into account. When calculating the private (factorial) indices of life satisfaction, both of these groups can be combined and considered as a cumulative “risk factor” that can be transferred to any of the four main groups of respondents.

Obtaining a vector of values \u200b\u200bof factorial indices of life satisfaction implies their further aggregation into a final indicator using the traditional weighing procedure. In this case, the weighting factors should reflect the relative importance of the factors. To implement this procedure, it is necessary to carry out two operations: calculate factor significance indices W j, on the basis of which weighting factors of significance b j are then determined for all factors. The following question design serves as the initial information for determining the degree of importance of each factor of satisfaction with life: how important is the jth factor of vital activity for you? The format of the possible answers is identical to that used in assessing the level of satisfaction with various factors of life:

1. Important enough;
2. Rather important than not important;
3. Rather not important than important;
4. Not at all important;
5. Difficult to answer.

Then the importance index of each factor is calculated by a formula similar to (1):

where, as in formula (1), j is the index of the factor of life satisfaction; i is the index of the variant of the respondents' answer to the question regarding the importance of the j-th factor; n is the total number of envisaged options for answering the question (in our case, 5); y ji - percentage of respondents who indicated the i-th answer option for the j-th vital factor; a i  - weight coefficient of the ith answer option (for all factors, a single scale of weighting factors is used; 0≤ a i≤1); k is the normalizing coefficient, the value of which is determined in the course of computational experiments. For indicator (2), as well as for indicator (1), the system of weights for all factors is the same and has the following structure: a 1=1,0; a 2=0,6; a 3=0,4; a 4=0.

The identification of indices (2) allows us to establish a hierarchy of factors of vital activity, however, for the subsequent “merging” of all factors into an aggregate index of life satisfaction, it is necessary to move from the values \u200b\u200b(2) to the weight coefficients of importance of each factor, which are calculated by a simple formula:

where m is the total number of factors of life satisfaction (in our case 13).

Procedure (3) allows you to normalize all factors in such a way that the classical balance condition is satisfied:

Having estimates of the values \u200b\u200bof factorial satisfaction indices D j and factorial importance coefficients b j, the generalized life satisfaction index D is easily calculated by the formula:

The social indicator (5) is the sought-after assessment with the help of which it is possible to carry out operational diagnostics of the level of social well-being of the population. At the same time, the aggregate form of construction (5) brings important positive aspects to the practice of monitoring and analysis of the social climate.

Firstly, any changes in the generalized index of satisfaction with life can be meaningfully interpreted due to the “disclosure” of its composition. The point is that the analyst can clearly identify due to what particular factor of vital activity the observed increase or decrease in the generalized index of life satisfaction occurred. This fact allows us to almost automatically identify “bottlenecks” in the social well-being of the population, which in turn can be of great practical importance in the development of state social policy.

Secondly, it becomes possible to conduct an in-depth factor analysis, “splitting” the shifts taking place in the population’s mood into three components: due to changes in the social environment; due to changes in the value system of people; due to joint shifts in mood and in the value system of the population. From a formal point of view, such an analytical scheme corresponds to the dynamization of relation (5) by the following decomposition:

The first component of the right-hand side of equation (6) reflects the shifts in the generalized index of life satisfaction due to changes in the social environment (ΔD j), the second component - due to changes in the people's value system (Δb j), the third component - due to joint shifts in mood and in the population value system (ΔD j and Δb j).

Thus, correlations (5) and (6) make it possible to interconnect issues related to elucidating the role and significance of various aspects of human life and issues related to measuring life satisfaction.

Running a little ahead, we point out that the introduced indices (1), (2) and (5) are designed in such a way that their sensitivity decreases slightly compared to traditional indicators. This means that even minor shifts in their size should be perceived as significant social changes. At first glance, it may seem that the reduced sensitivity of the proposed analytical constructions is their methodological disadvantage. However, a closer examination of the problem suggests that this is not so. The fact is that too “malleable” indicators often pick up random social changes, a kind of “white noise”, which only disorients the analyst. Indices (1), (2) and (5) are free from this drawback, since they are not so susceptible to social white noise and are not subject to excessively strong random fluctuations in the mood of the population.

Separate mention deserves another aspect of the proposed methodology. The fact is that in the generalized index of satisfaction with life many factors are “sewn up” between which stable connections can arise. For example, an increase in satisfaction with a material situation is usually accompanied by an increase in creative self-realization. There can be quite a few such combinations in the framework of the 13-factor model of the generalized index. Consequently, the generalized index changes not only as a result of bursts in any of the particular factors, but as a result of their synchronous and interdependent change. Note that the effect of “wired interdependence” of particular factors in its essence resembles the effect of multicollinearity in regression analysis. However, it should be emphasized here that this is not a minus of our computational scheme and does not contradict the logic and purity of social analysis. Indeed, the model of the generalized index of satisfaction with life, being a complex factorial construction, is nevertheless not an econometric dependence, and therefore the limitations that are inherent in statistical models do not apply to it.

3. An empirical assessment of life satisfaction. The methodology developed in the previous sections for assessing the generalized index of satisfaction with life was tested on the data of a survey conducted by VTsIOM in July 2005. The results of calculations for individual factors are given in Table 1. The value of the normalizing coefficient in the calculations was k \u003d 0.001 (a similar parameter was used in). In addition to the indicators indicated in the previous sections, Table 1 shows the contribution of V j of each factor to the formation of the final value of the generalized index of life satisfaction: V j \u003d b j D j / D. The total value of the generalized index of life satisfaction was 53.1%.

How to classify the received figures?

First, we systematize the conclusions of the general plan.

Table 1. Components of a generalized index of life satisfaction.

1. The resulting estimate of the generalized life satisfaction index of 53.1% as a whole lies in the realm of real values \u200b\u200band is confirmed by previous sociological studies. For example, VTsIOM research on a simplified survey scheme, when the level of satisfaction with life was determined immediately (without splitting into individual factors with their subsequent summation), for Russia 2004-2005. give figures from 45.6 to 47.8%. Thus, these estimates are single-order, which indicates the continuity of both approaches. At the same time, our estimate is somewhat overestimated in comparison with the previous ones, which can be caused by two reasons. Either the typology of factors used in the generalized index of life satisfaction is not complete and some factors that are “bottlenecks” of life fall out of it, or when responding to the aggregated question about life satisfaction, respondents do not take into account some positive aspects of life that are reflected in our typology of factors . Given the fact that most people have a psychological tendency to over-dramatize everyday life, the second reason should be recognized as more likely. If this is so, then a small adjustment to the index of satisfaction with life towards its increase in itself is an important result.

2. The calculations show that the factor indices of life satisfaction are more mobile than the factor indices of importance. For example, the absolute polarization for the factor indices of life satisfaction (the difference between the maximum and minimum values) is 39.1 pp, and for factor indices of importance - 29.1 pp (table 1). The relative polarization (the ratio of absolute polarization to the minimum value) is even higher: for factor indices of life satisfaction, it is 108%, and for factor indices of importance, it is 44%. Thus, differences in the social environment are more significant than differences in the degree of importance of individual aspects of people's lives. This result is quite logical and indicates that the analytical design of the generalized index of life satisfaction (5) correctly reflects the existing social imperatives.

3. The data in Table 1 show that the values \u200b\u200bof factor significance indices are shifted to the right border of the scale, that is, to 100%. This leads to the fact that the weighting coefficients of different factors bj do not differ as much as one might expect. At first glance, this result seems strange. However, from a methodological point of view, this is quite normal, since all the factors themselves are largely aggregated and, therefore, at a qualitative level, are almost equally important (without any of them, life can be said to lose its meaning). In addition, in many studies on the measurement of various aspects of economic activity and social life, the same values \u200b\u200bof factorial weights are used. In this sense, the technique we use allows us to perform a more accurate calibration of weight coefficients and to reconstruct the hierarchy of various aspects of human life.

4. The value of the generalized index of satisfaction with life in 53.1% lies in the so-called “zone of uncertainty”. The index mark of 50% serves as the natural boundary of the dichotomy of the social well-being of the population: if the index is more than 50%, the population is more likely satisfied with their life than not satisfied; if the index is less than 50%, then the population is more likely not satisfied with life than satisfied. In this sense, the index value of 53.1% indicates that the population of Russia gravitates toward a “zone of satisfaction” rather than a “zone of dissatisfaction”. However, given the possible statistical errors, such a positive trend with an advantage of 3 pp It looks so weak that it would be more correct to assess the well-being of Russians as borderline - “50x50”. It will be possible to speak of a clear predominance of a positive trend only when the generalized index of life satisfaction exceeds a 60 percent mark. It should be noted that the aggregate index of 53% is in good agreement with the current state of the Russian economy, characterized by complete uncertainty of the future and an approximate parity of achievements and defeats of 15-year reforms.

Thus, if we summarize the quantitative identification of the generalized index of satisfaction with life, we can state the following: Russia is in a borderline state when it decides whether the trend in the social well-being of the population will prevail - positive or negative. Expressed in modern language, the country is at a bifurcation point, when the very direction of the further development of domestic society is determined. Such conditions, when society turns into the so-called bifurcation boiler, are extremely dangerous, since any, even minor negative influences can upset the unstable balance and cause a protracted crisis.

4. The hierarchy of factors of satisfaction with life.  Factor indices of satisfaction with various aspects of life are designed in such a way that they have at least three “tips”: 40, 50 and 60%. If the index value is less than (more) 50%, then this means a generally unsatisfactory (satisfactory) situation in the social well-being of the population. If the value of the satisfaction index falls below 40%, then this indicates an extremely poor social climate; if the satisfaction index is more than 60%, then this indicates a clear prevalence of positive assessments of current life among the population. Based on such simple quantitative criteria, we can draw a picture of the state of affairs in the life of the Russian population by July 2005. “Pain” factors form a group with satisfaction index values \u200b\u200bof less than 40%; “Prosperous” factors have a value of the indicated index of more than 60%; other factors can be considered more or less neutral.

Two factors fall into the number of “painful” ones: the economic and political situation in the country (36.2%); financial situation of the family (39.8%). Both of these factors to a certain extent depend on the actions of the authorities, the current economic situation and are little dependent on individuals. The impossibility of actively influencing the current situation with the simultaneous recognition of its impasse leads to the formation of pessimistic sentiments regarding these two factors.

On the opposite side of the social hierarchy are such “prosperous” factors of life satisfaction as: family relations (75.3%); friendship, communication (72.1%); climate, weather (61.6%). Here a completely different pattern is seen, namely: family relations and positive social contacts are almost entirely dependent on the person himself, which allows them to be structured in such a way as to increase the level of satisfaction with these aspects of life. Climate and weather, on the contrary, are natural phenomena that depend neither on the individual nor on the authorities. Accordingly, people adapt to them in the first place, often from the very moment of their birth, which makes it possible to more or less effectively resist this factor and forms a quite acceptable level of satisfaction with it.

On the whole, the existing dichotomy in factorial satisfaction indices is in favor of a favorable development of events: out of 13 factors, only 4 have values \u200b\u200bbelow 50%. Meanwhile, one cannot ignore the fact that a low level of satisfaction with most aspects of life provokes Russians to a closed existence in narrow social groups (family and friends). The long-term development of this trend leads to a decrease in the political, business and creative activity of people, which in turn preserves the negative social environment even more. If in the near future there will be no turning point in the level of satisfaction with the environment (44.2%) and social infrastructure (42.8%), then the natural conditions for the manifestation of such a basic human instinct as self-expression will disappear.

The conclusion made about the destructive impact of the current social environment on the creative qualities of Russians is confirmed by the hierarchical configuration of factor indices of significance. So, among 13 studied factors, the factor of creative self-realization (66.8%) turned out to be in last place in importance (Table 1). This means that the Russian population pushes the thirst for creativity into the background and focuses on the problems of primitive life support. We can say that the instincts of self-preservation and procreation largely suppressed manifestations of the instinct of self-expression. From an economic point of view, such an imbalance in the value system of Russians is fraught with the gradual destruction of national human capital, a decline in the quality of the workforce and a decrease in the country's competitiveness on the world stage.

5. Differentiation of life satisfaction by social groups. The general picture drawn in the previous sections regarding the satisfaction of Russians with their lives needs to be detailed in terms of the social strata that make up Russian society. First of all, we focus on more universal patterns. At the same time, we will use a simplified analysis technique: for all social groups we will compare only one characteristic - the proportion of respondents who are completely satisfied with the corresponding vital activity factor. We will cultivate a similar approach when analyzing the relative importance of the studied life factors.

1. The data obtained convincingly show that life satisfaction in men is on average higher than in women. For all investigated factors of life satisfaction, the proportion of respondents who are quite satisfied with the state of affairs is higher for men than for women. The only exception is the factor of communication with friends, where the indicated shares are almost equal with an insignificant advantage in the direction of women of 0.1 percentage points. The conclusion seems to be quite logical, since the male part of the population is traditionally less whimsical and less scrupulous with regard to even key standards of life support, not to mention the "minor" joys of life. Perhaps the only unexpected thing is the absence of any exceptions to this rule.

2. The distribution of life support factors by importance level among men and women shows a rather interesting difference: for women it is more important than for men factors directly aimed at life support, and for men - factors that are somehow related to creative self-realization. Thus, in comparison with men, women pay more attention to personal safety, financial situation, family relations, weather and climate conditions of life, ecology, social infrastructure and health status. Men pay higher attention to the possibility of achieving their goals, having effective leisure, creative self-realization, social status, communicating with friends, and the economic and political situation in the country. In other words, the value system of women is noticeably biased towards the instincts of self-preservation and procreation, while for men - towards the instinct of creative self-realization. This pattern generally confirms the functional differences of the population by gender. However, it should be noted right away that all the noted distortions are very insignificant, so that we can talk about a fundamentally different value system for men and women.

3. One of the stabilizing forces of society is a group of wealthy people. As a rule, with the growth of human well-being, the level of importance of all factors of vital activity increases. For example, for the group of “poor” people who are barely making ends meet, the proportion of people who note the importance of the factor of creative self-realization is 26.9%, while for the group of “rich” who are able to acquire apartments, cottages and other expensive life benefits, it reaches 72.7%. Thus, the following regularity takes place: the greater the income (wealth) of a person, the more significant all his life values \u200b\u200bare for him. Accordingly, it is the class of wealthy people who is interested in preserving and strengthening the basic values. And, on the contrary, as a person becomes impoverished, his social lumpenization, the role and importance of most values \u200b\u200bfor him more and more turn into fiction. In addition, a more “convex” value system of highly profitable social groups is supported by a higher level of satisfaction with life. Thus, the proportion of people who note complete satisfaction with their financial situation among the "poor" is 2.4%, and among the "rich" - 45.5%. With regard to family relations, these figures are 39.2 and 63.4%, respectively, to the opportunities to achieve their goals - 4.7 and 45.5%, to the presence of effective leisure - 7.6 and 54.6%, to creative self-realization - 7.7 and 24.8%, health - 9.9 and 54.6%, weather - 21.9 and 36.4%, ecology - 7.6 and 13.6%, etc. In other words, the general conclusion about the need to increase the living standards of the population in order to reduce social tension in the country is fully confirmed by the data obtained.

4. Another stabilizing force in society is youth. Opinion polls show that as a person ages, the importance of all factors of life decreases for him. For example, for a group of people aged 18-24 years, the proportion of respondents who note the importance of the factor of achieving their goals is 66.1%, while for people over 60 years old - 31.5%. In other words, with age, the person’s value system becomes less “convex,” and the level of indifference to basic life values \u200b\u200bincreases. This fact corresponds to the theory of instincts, according to which basic instincts are suppressed with age. Simply put, by the time of retirement, a person had lived long enough not to worry too much for his life (that is, he had “worked out” his self-preservation instinct sufficiently), not to be burdened with taking care of children who had already grown up by that time (ie, “fulfilled” the instinct of reproduction) and not be tormented by the lack of creative successes that either already exist (ie, he “worked out” the instinct of self-realization), or they will not exist anyway. Such a liberation from basic instincts undermines a person’s social activity, which is confirmed by the polls.

5. Large metropolitan areas, such as Moscow and St. Petersburg, have a devastating effect on all aspects of human life satisfaction. And vice versa, large urban settlements with a population of more than 0.5 million people have a beneficial effect. Unfortunately, the structure of the questionnaire is such that it is impossible to determine the line between a prosperous large city and a socially unfavorable metropolis. However, this pattern is not subject to discussion. For example: the proportion of people who note complete satisfaction with the level of personal security for residents of Russian megacities (Moscow and St. Petersburg) is 6.8%, while for residents of large cities (more than half a million people) - 30.3%. For other factors of satisfaction with life, the scatter between these indicators is also large: financial situation - 6.1 versus 14.3%; family relations - 42.9 against 58.2%; the ability to achieve goals - 9.2% against 19.2%; the availability of effective leisure - 12.9 against 23.0%; creative self-realization - 7.9 against 21.9%; climate and weather - 18.4 against 29.4%; economic and political situation - 2.5 against 10.1%, etc. As a rule, among all types of settlements, these estimates are minimum for megacities, and maximum for large cities. The revealed effect is clear: good living conditions are created mainly in large cities with a population of more than 0.5 million people; excessive overaccumulation of people in giant megacities destroys the positive achievements of a large city.

6. When examining the differences in life satisfaction between different social groups, very interesting “age shocks” are revealed, which are sharp mood swings between nearby age groups. So, the proportion of people who note complete satisfaction with their friends is 52.1% for a group of 18-24 years old; in the next age group of 25-44 years, this indicator drops by about 10 pp, after which it decreases by another 10 pp for people aged 45-59. Apparently, this effect is associated with a decrease in the level of “contact” of people as they age and an increase in the requirements for such contacts. No less interesting effect is observed in the dynamics of the share of respondents who note complete satisfaction with the environment: for the group of 18-24 years old it is 17.4%, then in the next age group of 25-44 years old it decreases by almost 10 percentage points, after which it grows slowly. Such effects are observed quite often and, apparently, are associated with the replacement of youthful euphoria with a sober assessment of the situation during the transition to an independent life.

7. Differences in life satisfaction between different social groups make it possible to speak of the effect of “professional advantages” when representatives of some professions receive an extremely large advantage over representatives of others. For example, only 13.9% of the unemployed showed full satisfaction with the factor of personal security compared to the “security officials” (that is, employees of law enforcement agencies) - 36.0%. In the study of the factor of effective leisure, the similar indicator for housewives was 10.6%, and for “siloviki” - 32.0%. Full satisfaction with the social status was shown only by 22.8% of entrepreneurs against 32.0% of the “siloviki”. In this case, there is a traditionally privileged position in Russia of representatives of power structures. An analysis of family relations shows that complete satisfaction with this factor is characteristic only for 38.0% of unskilled workers against a background of 63.4% for enterprise managers and chief specialists. Apparently, professional management skills acquired at work are quite successfully transplanted into the family, which contributes to streamlining family relationships, which explains the differences.

Summing up, it should be emphasized that the inter-factor differences in the degree of importance of various factors of vital activity, and in the level of satisfaction with them, as a rule, are much less than the intrafact distortions between different social groups.

The approach developed in this article to a comprehensive assessment of life satisfaction has so far gone through only the very initial stage of testing. The indicative and analytical capabilities inherent in the generalized index of satisfaction with life can be fully manifested only with the accumulation of spatio-temporal arrays of reported data. However, now we can formulate a program for using the new social indicator.

It is advisable to monitor the generalized index of satisfaction with life in the mode of monthly observations. Moreover, ideally, each month it is necessary to recalculate both factor indices of life satisfaction and factor indices of significance. If this is not possible, then a truncated scheme can be used where factor significance indices are re-evaluated only once a quarter, and factor indices of life satisfaction every month. Inside the quarter, factor significance indices are assumed to be unchanged. Based on monthly (or quarterly) estimates of the generalized index of life satisfaction, it is necessary to derive its average annual value. The formation of the “history” of this indicator will subsequently allow it to be integrated into more general macroeconomic studies.

Literature

1. Rukavishnikov V., Halman L., Esther P.   Political cultures and social changes. International comparisons. M.: MATCH, 1998.
2. Petukhov V.V.   Russia, Belarus, Ukraine: what brings us together and what separates us? // “Monitoring of public opinion”, No. 2, 2004.
3. Balatsky E.V.   Social heterogeneity of the Common Economic Space // "Monitoring of public opinion", No. 2, 2005.
4. The basic values \u200b\u200bof Russians: Social attitudes. Life strategies. Symbols Myths M .: House of intellectual books. 2003.
5. Ivleva G.Yu.   Transformation of the economic system: a review of the concepts and contours of the general theory // "Society and Economics", No. 10, 2003.
6. Hazrat Inayat Khan.   Alchemy of happiness. M .: Sphere. 2003.
7. Balatsky E.V.   Diagnostic methods of social well-being of the population // "Monitoring of public opinion", No. 3, 2005.

The monograph presents the results of a sociological study of the quality of life of the population of the Vologda Oblast according to the main subjective indicators - a feeling of happiness and satisfaction with life. Particular attention is paid to the study of the value-needs sphere and life plans of the population of the Vologda Oblast, their impact on the subjective quality of life. The analysis of factors of satisfaction with life is carried out, according to its results differentiated data on social groups are presented. The influence of subjective well-being on the perception of the socio-economic and political situation is evaluated. The book is intended for researchers, teachers of higher educational institutions, students, as well as a wide range of readers interested in the problems of quality of life. The research materials can be used by local authorities for information management purposes.

* * *

The given introductory fragment of the book Life satisfaction and the level of happiness: the opinion of a sociologist (E.O. Smoleva, 2016)  provided by our book partner - LitRes company.

Chapter 1. Theoretical and methodological aspects of the subjective assessment of the quality of life

§ 1.1. On the quality of life and its subjective assessment

The transition in the 60s of the XX century to a post-industrial society was marked by two interconnected processes: a decrease in the severity of the problems of physical survival, satisfaction of basic necessities of life, and increased attention to intangible aspects of life. From this moment, satisfaction with life and human happiness are put forward as the goals of the development of society and positive social transformations. The criterion of "standard of living", reflecting mainly the material capabilities of people, is complemented by assessments of other aspects of life. The category “quality of life” is introduced into scientific circulation, which is initially broader than the characteristic of material security. But so far, the content issues of this construct are debatable.

Analysis of the existing definitions of “quality of life” allows us to conclude that this category reflects both the objective conditions for the existence of the individual and society as a whole, and the subjective assessments of these conditions. So, by quality of life is meant a concept that includes a certain set of necessary parameters and living conditions of an individual and an assessment or degree of satisfaction with their real state among individuals and society, or denoting the quantitative level and variety of those material and spiritual needs that a person can satisfy under certain conditions society.

Thus, most researchers define the quality of life as an individual or aggregated assessment of the satisfaction of a person’s material, cultural and spiritual needs. But on the whole, on the content and structure of the “quality of life” category, representatives of various fields of science did not come to a consensus. Some interpret it, starting from the concepts of level or lifestyle, defining the quality of life as a socio-economic category, representing a generalization of the concept of "standard of living" and including not only the level of consumption of material goods and services, but also the satisfaction of spiritual needs, health, duration life, environmental conditions, human environment, moral and psychological climate, mental comfort. Others contrast the quality of life and the standard of living as mutually exclusive concepts (that is, the higher the standard of living, the more intense the rhythm of life becomes, the lower the quality of life).

The most complete, from our point of view, is the definition of L.A. Belyaeva. It implies by the quality of life “... a comprehensive description of the living conditions of the population, which is expressed in objective indicators and subjective assessments of the satisfaction of material, social and cultural needs and is associated with people's perception of their position depending on cultural characteristics, value systems and social standards existing in society ".

Along with a meaningful approach to determining the quality of life, the operational approach was most widely used among researchers. If the first reveals the very meaning of the concept on the basis of various philosophical, economic, and sociological concepts, then the second specifies a way of assessing the quality of life, that is, a procedure for comparing the actual level of satisfaction of needs with the base using a specific set of indicators. The grounds for comparison are external objective assessments and subjective self-esteem.

Initially, the category of quality of life in the works of scientists included the following indicators: provision of jobs, the relative amount of income guaranteeing a certain level of well-being, the quality of social services (medical services, education, etc.). In further studies, it received a broader interpretation, which entailed the addition of indicators reflecting environmental problems, issues of physical health and psychological well-being of people, various factors of social life (the opportunity for all members of society to be socially active, participate in vital decisions and use social, economic and political freedoms and other social issues).

Currently, the most common approach in which the quality of life is considered through the parameters of the objective conditions of life. Within the framework of the objective paradigm, various options for determining indicators of quality of life can be distinguished: human development index developed by the staff of the United Nations Development Program; indicators of the UNESCO Commission on Population and Quality of Life. The integrated indicators of life quality developed by Russian scientists include a wide range of indicators in several groups: financial and economic indicators; environmental health indicators; indicators of material well-being; indicators of spiritual well-being; accessibility and quality of education; state of social environment; demographic and security indicators; well-being; development of sports and physical education; transformation of the quality of working life; quality of the environment (ecology). In the method of S.A. Ayvazyan’s integrated indicator of quality of life covers the main criteria that reflect the conditions for the flow of processes to meet the biological and social needs of a person.

But "by nature, the quality of life is an objective-subjective characteristic of the living conditions of a person, which depends on the development of the needs of the person himself and his subjective ideas and assessments of his life." Therefore, along with an “objective” approach to the definition of this category based on the use of statistical indicators, a “subjective” approach is widely used, focusing on subjective well-being, life satisfaction, the importance of individual life spheres for a person, as well as subjective feelings of happiness or unhappiness . The reason for expanding the boundaries of the use of the subjective approach was the fact that official statistics do not give a complete picture of the development of society. "For example, numerous studies prove that macroeconomic indicators do not always fully reflect the real picture of the development of the state, a high level of income does not always guarantee satisfaction with life, and the growth of wealth is not always accompanied by signs of increasing happiness." This is a worldwide practice. "In Russia, and especially at the present stage of social development, the role of the" subjective factor "and, correspondingly, sociological knowledge reflecting its essence, increases many times." It is the subjective attitude of a person to life, its conflicts and changes that determines mental and moral satisfaction with one’s own life, even when objective characteristics indicate the opposite.

Subjective well-being is understood as “a wide category of phenomena consisting in the emotional reaction of people, their satisfaction with certain areas of life, as well as in their judgments about the quality of life in general”.

According to P.M. Shamionova, subjective well-being - a concept that expresses "a person’s own attitude to his personality, life and processes, which are important for the person in terms of assimilated normative ideas about the external and internal environment and characterized by a sense of satisfaction."

This estimated value can reflect both direct judgments about the perception of life, and the personal ratio of positive and negative in the perception of things in general (which is the basis for dividing people into pessimists and optimists). In general, subjective well-being differs from indicators such as “mood” or “emotional state” in its relative stability over time. In the early stages of the study of the affective component of subjective well-being, special attention was paid to problematic emotional states, in particular depression and anxiety. In further studies, the emphasis shifted to the positive state of people.

The main theoretical approaches to the study of the cognitive component of subjective well-being are associated with the value-normative and motivational-need areas of the individual. At the same time, the focus of researchers is on the needs and values, awareness of them, their behavior and the result of activities to satisfy them, causing a certain state (satisfaction, happiness, positive emotions). According to supporters of the value approach, the basis of subjective well-being lies in the possibility of realizing a certain value attitude to various aspects of life. The target approach connects subjective well-being with orientation towards the final goal. The theory of multiple discrepancies is based on the idea of \u200b\u200ba person’s subjective well-being dependent on the gap between what he wants and what he has. The author of the theory of adaptation A. Campbell suggests that people evaluate their well-being in relation to the standard of living to which they are accustomed: if the standard of living becomes higher than the former, then the person experiences an increase in the level of satisfaction. As you get used to a new standard of living, the experience of satisfaction with the actual life situation decreases.

The psychological concepts of subjective well-being are based on the correspondence of actual (actualized) needs to the subjective abilities of a person to satisfy them. It is assumed that with a high level of needs (claims), but a low level of ability to satisfy needs, subjective ill-being occurs. At the same time, not an external assessment of the possibility is given, but a self-assessment.

Thus, the level of well-being will correspond to meeting the needs of different levels:

- vital (biological) needs;

- social needs (the desire to belong to a social group (community) and occupy a certain place in this group, to use the affection and attention of others, to be the object of their respect and love);

- ideal needs (knowledge of the world and its place in it, the meaning of life).

In studies of representatives of various branches of science — psychologists, sociologists, and philosophers — three components of subjective well-being are usually distinguished: physical (physical well-being, bodily comfort, sense of health, etc.), social (satisfaction with social status, state of society to which belongs individual, interpersonal relationships, etc.), spiritual (the opportunity to join the riches of spiritual culture, awareness and experience of the meaning of one’s life, the presence of faith, etc.). First, the three levels of needs discussed earlier correspond to the three components of subjective well-being. This kind of separation is consistent with the psychological theories of personality, highlighting in its structure "I-physical", "I-social" and "I-spiritual." In some cases, researchers expand the list of types of subjective well-being. In the concept of L.V. Kulikov, in addition to the above, considers psychological well-being (coherence of mental processes and functions, personal harmony, a sense of integrity and internal balance) and material well-being (satisfaction with the material side of one’s existence, the stability of material wealth). At the same time, in the study of subjective well-being it is impossible to separate the various components of the "I" from each other.

Secondly, the concept of “subjective well-being” is a complex construct. According to Andrews and Whitie, it contains three components: life satisfaction, positive emotions and negative emotions. Subjective well-being is the higher, the more positive emotions a person has, the less negative emotions and the more satisfied his own life, which is not a purely emotional assessment, but includes a moment of cognitive judgment.

The views of Russian and American scientists on this issue coincide. According to L.V. Kulikova, subjective well-being consists of two main components - cognitive (assessment of various aspects of life) and emotional (dominant emotional coloring of attitude to these aspects). I.A. Jidaryan and E.V. Antonov is distinguished in the concept of “well-being” by the reflex core, which consists of cognitive, evaluative processes, thoughts and judgments of people about their own lives, and emotional background.

Based on the theoretical analysis of G.L. Puchkova revealed the following structural components of subjective well-being: cognitive, including ideas about subjective well-being, about the future; emotional and evaluative (optimism, satisfaction with the present and the past, hopes for the future, positive attitude towards others, independence, self-acceptance and authenticity, positive self-esteem of health); motivational and behavioral, which includes control over circumstances, the presence of goals in life, personal growth.

How are objective conditions and subjective well-being related? Empirical studies reflect a very complex, and sometimes conflicting, relationship between them. For example, money and a sense of well-being are not really connected as explicitly as people think. At a certain level, income growth does not have a significant effect on life satisfaction; the wealthy are not at all happier than those whose incomes do not exceed the average level. The least happy are those who are most concerned about monetary matters. Despite the fact that at present people in Western countries have become 4 times better off than 40 years ago, the level of their subjective well-being has not changed, and 37% of very rich Americans have even lower average happiness rates. Such a weak relationship is explained by the fact that satisfaction and other aspects of subjective well-being depend not only on the objective state of the world, but also on human expectations and various cognitive processes.

In those countries where an individualistic attitude is expressed (such as Great Britain and the USA), the population’s satisfaction with their position largely depends on the perception of their own successes, in collectivist type cultures, both on the state of the person himself and on the state of other members of society.

Often in the scientific literature, when it comes to “well-being” in general as a certain level or meaning, without highlighting each separate layer of elements, the terms “life satisfaction” and “happiness” appear. If by the subjective quality of life we \u200b\u200bmean the correspondence of its real parameters and conditions to the expectations of a person, then the concept “satisfaction with life” is closest to it in meaning.

In foreign psychology, the concept developed by E. Diener and his colleagues in the context of studies of subjective well-being of a person, according to which life satisfaction is considered as a cognitive component of subjective well-being that does not mix with affective components, gained wide recognition. Satisfaction is defined as a global assessment of real life through the prism of subjective standards of “good life”, which are constructed independently or assimilated in a finished form from the social environment. The overall level of satisfaction at any given time indicates the degree of discrepancy between life reality and personal standards of a “good life”.

G.V. Osipov defines satisfaction as the degree of the gap between a person’s expectations and his real situation. The formation of a sense of satisfaction is influenced by the objective characteristics of a social position, the subjective characteristics of the perception of this position, and evaluative characteristics. According to A. Campbell, the assessment is based on the level of aspirations (what a person wants to achieve), the level of expectations (the position that a person hopes to achieve in the near future), the level of equality (the position that a person considers himself worthy), level the reference group (with which he identifies himself), personal needs (estimated remuneration).

A person is satisfied when there is almost no gap between the existing situation and what seems to him to be an ideal situation or one that he deserves. Dissatisfaction, in turn, is the result of a significant gap between givenness and ideal, and may also result from comparing oneself with other people.

Therefore, according to the theory of social comparisons, the average satisfaction indicator should tend to the average value. However, further studies showed that in practice the situation is different - in almost all developed industrial countries, the proportion of people satisfied with life significantly exceeds the share of dissatisfied people (about three to one), and in the USA it is 85%. Moreover, it is proved that people with similar characteristics, living in different environments - more successful, better off, or, conversely, less secure - differ little in terms of life satisfaction, which would happen if the theory of social comparisons were true. The empirical evidence is more likely to indicate the validity of the model of constant change of objects for social comparisons: people specifically choose those with whom to compare themselves, and do not always compare themselves with the same group.

In the early 80s, scientists put forward the theory of goal achievement to explain the differences in people's subjective well-being. Its essence can be described as follows: satisfaction with life is determined by how far or close a person is from achieving his goals. Moreover, subjective well-being is achieved when these goals are achieved. D. Brunstein on longitudinal data showed that progress in achieving goals leads to positive changes in the level of subjective satisfaction with life, and vice versa.

The approach that defines “satisfaction with life” as “the degree of satisfaction of human needs” has been widely used. The needs of a person as part of their motivational-need sphere are considered in psychology as one of the main components of a person (A. Maslow, K. Levin, A.N. Leontiev, etc.). A. Maslow believed that the meaningful and significant life of people is made by the setting of personal goals, which are a reflection of actual needs, organized in a hierarchical system of domination. Only the satisfaction of the needs located at the bottom of the hierarchy (physiological needs; the needs of safety and protection; the needs of affiliation of love) makes it possible to recognize the needs located above (needs of self-esteem; needs of self-actualization). In connection with the infinity of movement from one need to the satisfaction of the next, we can assume the fundamental impossibility of subjective well-being. Answering this question, R.M. Shamionov notes: “Since well-being is more related not to a particular behavioral act, but to a generalized assessment of“ life in general, “to the satisfaction of those needs that are given special meaning in connection with the same values \u200b\u200band attitudes, well-being is possible.”

Another indicator of the quality of life is happiness (M. Argyll, E. Diener, R.A. Emmons, I.A. Dzhidaryan). In turn, it is interconnected with the concept of “life satisfaction”. So, M. Argyle believed that happiness is determined by the state of satisfaction with everyday life, a general assessment of satisfaction with the past and present, the frequency and duration of positive emotions. According to I.A. Jidaryan, in the ordinary consciousness of people, happiness is associated with constant, complete and justified satisfaction with their life, its conditions, the disclosure of human capabilities. People's ideas about happiness are based on personal values \u200b\u200bthat are formed in the process of internalizing the values \u200b\u200bof society. According to their value system and understanding of happiness, people build their entire life strategy. Achieving precisely personally significant goals most noticeably affects the emergence of a sense of happiness.

A common basic definition of happiness in social and economic research is provided by Dutch scientist Ruut Weenhoven, head of the World Database of Happiness, founder of the Journal of Happiness Studies. He describes this phenomenon as "the degree to which an individual evaluates the general state of his life as positive."

The concepts of happiness, for all their differences, are based on one basis: as a criterion of happiness / unhappiness, satisfaction of needs or assessment of the possibility of achieving a goal is selected.

The paradigm of achieving happiness through maintaining a balance of pain and enjoyment in a person’s life is based on the assumption that any need of an individual is caused by a lack of something. Accordingly, the higher the general dissatisfaction with life, the more happiness the satisfaction of needs compensates. In another approach - the theory of activity - happiness is defined as a state concomitant with human activity. At the same time, M. Chiksentmihaii notes that satisfaction from an activity is achieved only if individual abilities correspond to the abilities necessary for performing this activity. A feeling of happiness arises precisely when the business that a person is engaged in is not too difficult and not too simple for him, when he finds it fascinating and interesting.

According to the concept of relativity, a person’s level of happiness depends not on objective well-being, but on a comparative subjective position in relation to other people. As R. Veenhoven notes, despite the fact that each of us improves our life situation in order to become happier, on a generalized, collective level, people still need the state and expect from it guarantees of legal and social security, economic well-being, in order to maximize your own comfort and make your own life more satisfying.

It follows from the above that, within the framework of this approach, the assessment of the level of happiness consists of two components: directly the level of the subjective feeling of well-being / satisfaction with life and correlation of oneself with various parameters and accepted assessments of success, well-being, and wealth. The affective component (the hedonic level of happiness) is the positive experience of a person - everything that brings him pleasure; as cognitive, a feeling of how much his achievements and accomplishments are evaluated by others, as he himself considers them, how they are ranked in the society around him.

How do the concepts of subjective well-being, happiness, and life satisfaction relate to each other? Some scientists believe that the term “happiness” is directly equivalent to the term “subjective well-being”. In other words, happiness characterizes a person’s attitude to his own life, its subjective perception.

Another fundamental approach that distinguishes between happiness and subjective well-being is presented in the work of D. Haybron, "The pursuit of unhappiness: The elusive psychology of well-being." The author notes that happiness cannot be associated with pleasure, since the latter is too ghostly and vague in its psychological effects. Satisfaction with life also does not fully correspond to the concept of happiness, since it refers to the assessment of life as a whole. In addition, happiness, of course, is a long-term state, and people evaluate their lives most often at this particular moment, and these estimates are extremely susceptible to the influence of situational factors. Happiness, in the opinion of D. Heibron, is determined by the general emotional state of a person over a certain period of life. On the one hand, a high level of happiness seems to be a fairly reliable indicator of a person’s prosperous life, on the other hand, the true value of happiness is manifested in its significant contribution to the self-fulfillment of the emotional part of human life. However, it can act as a form of filling life only if it does not depend on the values \u200b\u200binstilled in a person during third-party manipulations, false beliefs and affective states, otherwise it does not reflect the real essence of a person, his aspirations and feelings, although brings some pleasure.

Another serious attempt to make a conceptual distinction between the concepts of "happiness" and "well-being" is made in one of the works of Jason Rabley. The author focuses on the division of happiness into episodic and attributive. It is possible to fix episodic happiness physiologically - at the level of measuring hormonal and neurological indicators. It is precisely about him that is spoken of in the theory of “objective happiness” by Cannemann, the works of Davis, Sumner, and others. This kind of happiness is extremely dependent on time and event fluctuations. Attributive happiness is more stable and much less susceptible to operationalization and measurement.

D. Rabley notes that philosophers are much more uniform in their point of view regarding the concept of subjective well-being: a high level of subjective well-being is observed precisely when life goes well in a certain way for a particular person. Moreover, there is a fundamental difference between the assessment of life in terms of its well-being and its emotional assessment. The latter is necessary because, no matter how highly assessed the quality of life of a person from the outside, such a life for him can be unbearable.

For a long time, researchers were interested in the question: are life satisfaction and people's assessment of how happy they are, in essence, the same indicators, or do they measure different aspects of people's attitude to life. Both indicators were often used in large trending multi-country comparative studies. According to their results, it was found that the correlation coefficient of satisfaction with life and the level of happiness does not exceed 0.5-0.6. As the data of the large longitudinal study RUSSET, conducted in Russia in the 90s of the last century, show, the correlation between these indicators is quite far from 1 (0.64). This suggests that life satisfaction and happiness, although closely related to each other, are not identical concepts. The hypothesis that the indicator of happiness mainly measures feelings, and satisfaction, a cognitive assessment of events in life, has not been confirmed either.

Based on the foregoing, the following conclusion can be made: subjective well-being contains three components - cognitive, emotional, connotative (behavioral) - and is characterized by subjectivity, positivity and global dimension. Understanding of subjective well-being varies significantly among individuals with different claims and self-esteem. Obviously, the higher the level of claims and the less opportunities for their implementation, the lower the index of subjective well-being, and on the contrary, the more opportunities for their implementation, the higher the index of well-being. The phenomenon of subjective well-being is primarily associated not so much with needs and their implementation, as with the subjective attitude of the individual towards the possibility of their satisfaction, life events and oneself.

Studies of subjective well-being have shown that it depends little on demographic and economic factors; it is necessary to look for deeper and more complex explanations of the differences between people in assessing their own lives. Positive and negative emotions are partly independent of each other, so distress, negative emotions, depression or anxiety (more precisely, the absence of all these indicators) is better considered as one component of subjective well-being.

Satisfaction with life is the cognitive side of subjective well-being, complemented by the affective side - positive and negative emotions experienced by a person in a certain period of time.

Happiness reflects an assessment of the social side of people's lives (this indicator of happiness is most closely associated with family life, social connections, etc.), and life satisfaction is an integral indicator of the assessment of the external side of people's life (position in the social structure, material situation, other achievement factors ) Based on this approach, it is satisfaction with life that depends to the greatest degree on societal conditions and changes in the political, economic, and social spheres of a country's life. For Russia in recent decades, one of the highest priorities is to assess the impact of these changes on people's lives. Therefore, we chose both indicators - happiness and life satisfaction - for further analysis.

§ 1.2. Methodological and methodological aspects of assessing subjective well-being

In applied research on subjective well-being, scientists face a number of methodological problems.

First of all, a legitimate question arises about the possibilities of objective measurements of happiness and life satisfaction using questionnaires. The difference between the methods of empirical research used in the social sciences and the methods of natural sciences is due to the fact that the real perception of life is only partially reflected in the social behavior of a person. For example, observation in this case is not a reliable measurement method, because the outwardly fixed attributes of happiness (joyful appearance) are found in both happy people and unfortunate people.

The main method in studies of subjective well-being is self-assessment of the level of personal happiness or life satisfaction by the respondent, expressed in various kinds of answers to questions - both direct and indirect - during anonymous questionnaires or personal interviews.

But do respondents really have an idea of \u200b\u200ba certain level of satisfaction with their own life, and are their answers to the question an adequate reflection of this idea? N. Panina notes a significant share of subjectivity in the results. Studying the quality of life on the basis of self-reports, the scientist in reality does not investigate life, but the respondent himself, his self-identity, the system of significant personal relationships, including self-relation. In other words, such a construct as “perception by individuals of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live, in accordance with their goals, expectations, standards and concerns” reflects not so much the quality of life as a certain quality of state or properties personalities in real life conditions. A fairly common stereotype is that people present themselves as happier than they actually are, but they do not receive confirmation in practice.

An important methodological and methodological problem in the sociological approach to the study of quality of life using subjective indicators of the level of happiness and satisfaction with life is the uncertainty of the subject of assessment. The answers to the question “what exactly satisfies or does not satisfy a person?” Are ambiguous. They depend on how the integral assessment of one’s life is constructed, which to a greater extent affects different people (external circumstances or personal achievements and prospects, one or another sphere of life).

If we choose the feeling of happiness as the main indicator of the subjective well-being of people, a number of important conditions must be taken into account.

The basic assumption that allows us to talk about the validity of the data collected by the method of self-reporting is the idea that respondents share the same idea about the state of happiness. No matter how absurd this assumption may seem from the point of view of the layman, the results of research by psychologists confirm its legitimacy.

End of fact sheet.