Time, Money, and Subjective Wellbeing

Cassie  Mogilner; A.V.  Whillans; Michael I. Norton

Chapter | Handbook of Well-Being | 2018

Time, Money, and Subjective Wellbeing

by Cassie Mogilner, A.V. Whillans and Michael I. Norton

Abstract

Time and money are scarce and precious resources: people experience stress about having insufficient time and worry about having insufficient money. This chapter reviews research showing that the ways in which people spend their time and money, the tradeoffs that people make between having more time or having more money, and the extent to which people focus on each resource can have a significant impact on happiness. Considering subjective well-being (or “happiness”) as a combination of high positive affect, low negative affect, and high feelings of life satisfaction, we explore when, how, and why time and money impact peoples’ anticipated, momentary, and lasting happiness.

Keywords: Money; Time Management; Happiness; Satisfaction;

Format: Electronic

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

Mogilner, Cassie, A.V. Whillans, and Michael I. Norton. "Time, Money, and Subjective Wellbeing." In Handbook of Well-Being, edited by Ed Diener, Shigehiro Oishi, and Louis Tay. Noba Scholar Handbook Series. Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers, 2018. Electronic.

Time is a finite and precious resource, and the way that we value our time can critically shape happiness. In this article, we present a conceptual framework to explain when valuing time can enhance vs. undermine well-being. Specifically, we review the emotional benefits of valuing time more than money and discuss the emotional costs of valuing time like money. Lastly, we suggest directions for future research examining the causes and consequences of the value that people place on their time.

From “Chick Beer” to “Dryer sheets for Men,” identity-based labeling is frequently deployed to appeal to people who hold the targeted identity. However, five studies demonstrate that identity appeals can backfire, alienating the very individuals they aim to attract. We begin by demonstrating backlash against identity appeals in the field during the 2016 presidential election (Study 1) and in the lab (Study 2). This (in)effectiveness of identity appeals is driven by categorization threat—feeling unwillingly reduced to a single identity—which is induced when a) the identity deployed is that of a typically marginalized group (Studies 3-4) and b) the appeal evokes a stereotype about that identity (Study 5). Ironically, identity appeals often drive identity-holders away from options they would have preferred in the absence of that appeal.

Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

The Revision Bias

Ximena Garcia-Rada, Leslie John, Ed O’Brien and Michael I. Norton

Things change. Things also get changed—often. Why? The obvious reason is that revising things makes them better. In the current research, we document a less obvious reason: Revising things makes people think they are better, absent objective improvement. We refer to this phenomenon as the revision bias. Nine studies document this effect and provide insight into its psychological underpinnings. In Study 1, MBA students perceived their revised resumes to be of higher quality the more they differed from their original versions, but this perception was not justified: observers judged originals (inaccurately) labeled as revisions to be superior to revisions (inaccurately) labeled as originals. Study 2 pinpoints the direction of the effect: Revisions are appealing, as opposed to originals being unappealing. Moreover, the revision bias holds in a variety of settings in which the revision is devoid of objective improvement—when revisions are trivial (Study 3A), incidental (Study 3B), non-existent (Study 3C), and even objectively worse than the original (Study 3D). Study 4 directly tests the self-fulfilling nature of the revision bias, testing whether mere revision framing leads people to become less critical of the experience—in this study, less sensitive to possible bugs while playing an otherwise identical “revised” video game—and whether this mediates the effect of revision framing on positive evaluations. Studies 5A and 5B offer further support by testing whether the revision bias is accentuated when people engage in a holistic processing style, whether measured as an individual difference (Study 5A) or experimentally induced (Study 5B).

Keywords: Change; heuristics and biases; framing; sequences; judgment; Change; Perception;

Citation:

Garcia-Rada, Ximena, Leslie John, Ed O’Brien, and Michael I. Norton. "The Revision Bias." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-087, February 2019. View Details

Cite View Details SSRN Read Now

Faculty & Research

Time, Money, and Subjective Wellbeing

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors