Research Paper Zaahl 2014 corrections

Acknowledgements:

I would like to thank the University of Namibia for all the knowledge it has installed in our

minds to be able to do this research project. Secondly I would like to thank my supervisor Dr.

Mberira for all her patients and guidance throughout this project. And lastly I would like to

thank my family for their financial and emotional support, especially my sister Chireza.

1

Declaration:

Title of Research Paper: Does Social interaction increase the Subjective Well-being of

Undergraduate students at the University of Namibia?

Name of author: Charne Zaahl (200931695)

Address: Erf 13, Block A, Rehoboth, Namibia

Submitted for Bachelor of Arts: Clinical Psychology Honors course.

I, the above mentioned, hereby declare that the work contained in the said research paper is

my original contribution, and has not been published anywhere. I have mentioned the relevant

references within my knowledge.

XAuthor: C. P. Zaahl

XSupervisor: Dr. Mberira

2

List of tables:

Table 4.1: Distribution of participants within 7 items……………………………………..Page 24

Table 4.2: Correlation between Subjective Happiness Scale and Satisfaction with Life Scale

………………………………………Page 30

Table 4.3: Correlation between SHS & MSPSS……………………………………………….Page 32

3

List of figures:

Figure 4.1 Scatter plot graph for correlation between SWLS & MSPSS………………..Page 31

4

Does social interaction increase the subjective well-being of

undergraduate students at the University of Namibia?

Author:Charne ZaahlBachelor of Arts DegreeFaculty of Humanities and Social SciencesUniversity of Namibia

Supervisor:Dr. Mberira

5

Abstract:

This study examined whether social interactions and perceptions of social support increase

subjective well-being and whether this increase interactions with other social beings. The

sample consisted of undergraduate students at the University of Namibia.

Data was collected by means of self-report measures namely; the Sonja Lyubomirsky’s (1999)

Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), Ed Diener’s (1985) Satisfaction with Life Scale, and Gregory D.

Zimet, Nancy W. Dahlem, Sara G. Zimet & Gordon K. Farley’s (1988) Multidimensional Scale of

Perceived Social Support. These scales measured the participant’s subjective well-being, their

quality of life and their perceived social support respectively.

The results indicated a negative linear relationship between subjective happiness and perceived

social support. It also indicated a negative linear correlation between subjective happiness and

satisfaction with life. However there was a positive linear correlation between perceived social

support and satisfaction with life.

Limitations and further recommendations of the study are discussed.

6

Chapter 1

Introduction:

Orientation of the study

Human beings are considered to be social beings at heart. This is evident in the fact that so

many individuals are taking more time to interact with others, whether it’s by means of social

networking sites or by forming close attachments with other individuals that share mutual

interests. This indicates that there has to be some psychological benefits to interacting with

other human beings. Because of this various social networking sites have gained popularity

especially among university students. When we look at the increasing popularity of social

networking sites it becomes somewhat of a puzzle as to why people dedicate so much time to

these forms of social interaction. It has been reported that social networking sites provide users

with unique computer based platform where they are able to share their personal thoughts,

feelings and experiences within a circle of their peers. (Lee G., Lee J. & Kwon S., 2011) A study

done by Jeffres, Neuendorf, Brackin & Atkin (2008) on the influence of Cosmo politeness on the

quality of life perceptions indicated that more cosmopolitan people, those with more diverse

interests, those with stronger patterns of media use, and those with higher levels of community

knowledge hold stronger assessments of the quality of life available in their community. This

study therefore tries to determine whether or not social interactions does in fact increase

subjective well-being by looking at undergraduate students at the University of Namibia and

whether they perceive themselves to be subjectively happy and how this relates to their

interactions with other social beings.

7

Social interaction is said to be the ability of two or more social beings to come into contact,

communicate or acknowledge one another while each being is aware of the others and keeps

them in mind when performing any action. According to Scheinkman (2014) social interactions

are particular forms of externalities, in which the actions of an orientation group affect an

individual’s preferences. The orientation group depends on the context and is typically

considered to be an individual’s family, neighbors, friends and peers. The types of social

interactions investigated in this study include family and friends interaction as well as peer

interaction. “Social interaction occurs because through learning this ideal behavior, individual

influences each other”. (Aruka, 2004, pg. 42) The study looked at ways in which students

interact with friends and family using social media or social networking sites such as Facebook,

as well as through direct contact with other people. By looking at these social interactions the

study tries to establish a relationship between social interactions and subjective well-being.

Student’s perceptions on whether or not they receive any social support from friends and

family was used to try and establish the connection between these two factors (social

interaction and subjective well-being). Subjective well-being is multifaceted/multidimensional

concept and contains various components that all play a part in contributing to the subjective

well-being of individuals. (Hampton, 2007) One of these contributing factors is people’s

satisfaction with life. Rozin & Stellar (2009) use quality of life and life-time subjective well-being

interchangeably. They believed that that it was a retrospective measure and suffered from

distortions. For the purpose of the study participants’ satisfaction with life was measured and

assessed in order to establish how subjectively well they were.

8

Objectives of the study

Hongyu Ma, Yongyu Guo, Fuming Xu, Feng Yu, Zongkui Zhou (2014) stated a growing body of

empirical evidence has shown that although social support can predict subjective well-being,

the relationship between social support and subjective well-being is still unclear. Therefore the

key objectives for this study are to determine whether or not there is a positive association

between social interactions and the subjective well-being of undergraduate students at the

University of Namibia. Various research questions were addressed in this study. The key

research questions include; ‘Does social support directly contribute to the subjective well-being

of students?’; ‘Can social interaction be considered as an important variable when measuring

subjective well-being?’; ‘Does the number of friends students have on Facebook directly

correlate with their level of subjective well-being (high/low)?’; ‘Are there any differences in

findings between this study and previous studies, and if so why?’; and ‘ Are there any significant

differences between males and females regarding their results for subjective well-being and

social interaction?’.

Hypothesis

The hypothesis states; ‘There will be a positive correlation between social interaction and the

subjective well-being of undergraduate students’ as well as; ‘There will be a positive correlation

between satisfaction with life and perceived social support’.

9

Significance of the study

This study is significant because it provides a local perspective (Namibian) on the effects of

social interaction on subjective well-being. By determining whether or not social interaction

increases subjective well-being it can be established how important social interaction is when

looking at the subjective well-being of individuals. Previous studies focused only on a specific

form of social interaction such as social networking sites, whereas this study looked at social

interaction in general including through the use of social networking sites as well as other forms

of interaction and will therefore provide a broader perspective on the topic.

Limitations of the study

Limitations to the research project include that it only looks at university students, more

specifically students from the University of Namibia. This causes the results of the study not to

be generalizable to the broader public. Another limitation of the study includes the fact that it

does not take into consideration other external factors (extraneous variables) that effect or

influence the subjective well-being of the participants.

10

Chapter 2

Literature Review:

Since human beings are said to be social beings it seems logical that it would not be possible for

humans to live healthy lives, psychologically and physically, without any social interaction. We

interact with other social beings on a daily basis. These interactions directly and indirectly

affects our psychological well-being or rather our subjective well-being. Park (2004) considers

positive well-being important for optimal mental health. He considers subjective well-being to

be an important part in the good life, the good life being a life where people feel fulfilled and

contempt, and believes that it plays an adaptive role in human survival. And rightly so, human

beings have adapted their lives and state of mind to look for those things in life that make them

feel good, make them feel joy and happiness. People are motivated to participate in exploration

and to create ways and techniques to help them cope with life’s tragedies and stressors, if

people did not find ways to cope with life’s tragedies they would not be able to lead a happy

life. This is why it is so important to try to understand how social interaction affects the

subjective well-being of individuals as well as how perceived social support contributes to

subjective well-being. In Park’s study he found that the topic of well-being had been neglected

in light of this one can see how this study would contribute to the body of knowledge of well-

being. Park (2004) believed that mental health was not merely pathology but rather included

positive factors such as positive affect. He felt that positive indicators such as life satisfaction

had to be included in any assessment battery to capture what is meant by psychological well-

being. This is exactly what this study is trying to do by including the satisfaction with life scale in

its assessment of subjective well-being and social interactions.

11

Foregaerd, Jayawickreme, Kern and Seligman (2011) however believed that well-being was a

multifaceted phenomenon that could be assessed by measuring a wide selection of subjective

and objective constructs. They proposed the Well-being theory that states well-being can be

divided into five parts namely; positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning and

accomplishments. Positive emotion, similar to Park’s notion of positive affect, can be said to be

happiness whereas engagement refers to encounters or interactions with other social beings.

Through these interactions or encounters people bond and this in turn causes relationships to

develop. Relationships as products of social interaction thus contributes to the subjective well-

being of individuals in the sense that people tend to attach a lot of meaning to the relationships

they form. This proves the need for investigation into the kind of relationships individuals have

with their family and friends by enquiring into their social behavior and how they perceive the

type of support they receive from these people. How people perceive the support they receive

from family and friends tends to reflect into their subjective constructs of their personalities

and also can determine how they live their lives. Implying that the perception they have on the

support they get from their family and friends determines the state of their subjective well-

being. Foregaerd M. & et.al (2011) defined meaning as well as accomplishments as personal

aspects that refer to the individual’s meaning in life and achievements. This can be linked to

people’s satisfaction with life as it enquires into whether people believe their lives are close to

their ideal and if they have achieved all they wanted to achieve.

Zanin (2011), unlike Park and Foregaerd et. al, defines subjective well-being by using two terms

he considers measures of subjective well-being. These terms are happiness and life satisfaction.

12

He considered happiness to be a state of mind that is characterized by contentment, pleasure

or joy. On the other hand he defined life satisfaction as a measure of an overall assessment of

feelings and attitudes about an individual’s life at a particular point in time. Happiness and life

satisfaction goes hand in hand when considering their contributions to subjective well-being.

These two factors are both subjectively deterministic, that is determined by the individual

rather than the society. Therefore considering these two constructs subjective well-being can

be said to be the level of happiness and the general level of life fulfilment an individual

experiences at a specific point in time. In his study Zanin examines the relationship between

subjective well-being and satisfaction in various domains of life. Some of these domains include

the satisfaction of family life, this once again leads us to the point that it is important to look

into social interactions and the perceived social support of individuals from their family and

friends. In his study he found that satisfaction with family life was one of the most important

drivers of subjective well-being. This could be explained by the fact that family plays a big part

in an individual’s life as well as the importance people attach to the roles they attain within

their families as well as among peers. Zanin also stated that subjective well-being depends on

three latent variables, these include satisfaction with personal life; satisfaction with family and

social life and satisfaction with education and work. (Zanin, 2011) This once again brings the

significance of this study forth, since all three of these variables are included in the current

study. If well-being depends on these three latent variables then one would have to measure

these variables in order to determine any kind of relationship between subjective well-being

and another variable.

13

Park (2004) and Zanin (2011) are in agreement that subjective well-being includes an

individual’s satisfaction with life and can thus be used to determine how subjectively well a

person is. Whereas Zanin (2011) and Foregaerd et. al (2011) mention the importance of social

interactions when measuring subjective well-being.

Ed Diener (2013) suggested that there are three separable major components of subjective

well-being that needs to be considered. These include life satisfaction, positive experiences and

negative experiences. He also shares Zanin and Park’s notion on the importance of life

satisfaction in subjective well-being. According to Diener these components are independent

and influenced by different causes. Some of these causes could include the individual’s

satisfaction with their personal life, satisfaction with family and social life and satisfaction with

education and work. (Zanin, 2011) These constructs are not all subjectively deterministic,

indicating that subjective well-being is not always determined by the individual but also the

society and environment these individual’s find themselves in.

Lee, Lee and Kwon (2011) on the other hand defined subjective well-being as a person’s

cognitive and affective evaluations of his or her life. They did a study on social networking sites

and how self-disclosure impacts the subjective well-being of social networking sites users. Self-

disclosure means communicating personal information, thoughts, and feelings with other

people. (Lee, Lee & Kwon, 2011) They believed that, whether the experience was negative or

positive, sharing ones’ story with social ties provided a psychological benefit to people.

Therefore they predicted a positive relationship between self-disclosure and subjective well-

14

being and the results of their study proved them right. Self-disclosure is directly related to

social interaction and thus it is relevant to consider the results of this previous study when

analyzing the results of this current study.

Since personality dimensions are related to behavioral tendencies, especially social behavioral

tendencies, it seems appropriate to consider the effects of these personality domains and how

they contribute to subjective well-being. Looking at a similar study as Lee & et. al’s but this time

done in China, the study looked at the relationship between self-concealment (a form of self-

disclosure) and subjective well-being but this time the study tries to assess whether personality

traits act as mediators between the two. According to Wang, Qui and Cui (2014) self-

concealment is defined as a trait that inclines people to conceal distressing or negative personal

information such as thoughts, feelings, actions, or events from others. They believed that self-

concealment hampered psychological and physical well-being. Two hundred and ninety-one

undergraduates completed the Chinese versions of the Self Concealment Scale, NEO Five-Factor

Inventory, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, and General Well-Being Schedule. Their results

showed that both self-concealment and neuroticism (a type of personality trait) had negative

effects on subjective well-being, while extraversion (another type of personality trait) had a

positive effect on subjective well-being. Self-concealment affected subjective well-being

indirectly via personality traits. These findings suggested that self-concealment had both direct

and indirect effects on subjective well-being, and that personality traits were directly associated

with subjective well-being. This indicated that personality traits mediated the association

between self-concealment and subjective well-being. (Wang, Qui & Cui, 2014) In their study

15

they used a mediation model to determine the effect of self-concealment on subjective well-

being. They made use of the path model for analysis, this raises the issue of limiting validation

of causal relationships. The study contained self-report measures that made the study

vulnerable to certain errors or biases. Within this former study social interaction was once

again a determinant factor in the analysis of subjective well-being. Whether people revealed a

lot to others or concealed a great deal of personal information it still affected their subjective

well-being at the end of the day. This information proves relevant to the current study because

the study revealed a correlation to how people interact with one another and their subjective

well-being indirectly.

Kim and Lee (2011) did a study on how Facebook, used as a tool for social interaction, affected

the subjective well-being of Facebook users. They found that a positive correlation existed

between the number of Facebook friends and the subjective well-being of college Facebook

users but this association was not mediated by perceived social support. This suggests that

social interaction increases the level of subjective well-being of individuals but not necessarily

perceived social support. They also looked at how individuals represent themselves on

Facebook and whether this had an effect on the level of subjective well-being of these college

Facebook users. This is similar to the studies done by Lee & et. al as well as Wang & et. al with

self-disclosure and self-concealment. In the study of Kim and Lee (2011) they found that honest

self-representation may enhance happiness rooted in in social support provided by Facebook

friends. In their methodology they made use of a computer-based survey where a recruitment

message along with a hyperlink to the survey questionnaire were emailed to undergraduate

16

students registered at that particular university. This brings forth the problem of how accessible

was the survey since not all students have access to a computer as well as the fact that there is

no one (an interviewer or supervisor) to explain details of the survey if a student was to get

stuck on some elements of the survey. Kim & Lee’s study suggested that the number of

Facebook friends and positive self-representation may enhance users’ subjective well-being,

but this portion of happiness may not be included in perceived social support. They inferred

that the happiness associated with the number of Facebook friends may be due to visualization

of Facebook friends. By seeing the number of Facebook friends one has, users are reminded of

their social connections and subsequently their self-worth is enhanced. Kim and Lee looks at

Facebook friendships and consider them a meaningful source of social support, just as

traditional friendships. This is why they believed that there would be a positive correlation

between perceived social support and subjective well-being, however their study proved them

wrong. (Kim & Lee, 2011) The study contains some limitations including their use of the path

model that results in them being unable to demonstrate causality as well as the direction of

causal results. The research was done on college students only which creates a gap in research

since it does not cater to non-college-age samples. Also the fact that the study makes use of

self-report measures of subjective well-being it is subject to errors or biases. Some individuals

tend to present their most favorable image to others thus resulting in an assessment that does

not necessarily depict their precise or exact state of subjective well-being.

Another study was done in China to examine the relationship between social support and

subjective well-being among Chinese university students. Three hundred and ninety-one

university students from two different Chinese universities completed a questionnaire. The

17

questionnaire consisted of the social support scale, the self-esteem scale and the subjective

happiness scale. This current study consequently made use of two of these scales namely the

social support scale and the subjective happiness scale. In the study of Feng, Jingjing & Xuqun

(2013) students with high social support reported higher scores in life satisfaction and positive

affect than those with low social support. Positive affect and life satisfaction, in this instance,

are associated with subjective well-being as with so many of the previously reviewed studies.

This indicates that, in the case of this previous study, there was a positive correlation between

social support and subjective well-being. Their methodology consisted of the hierarchical

regression analysis.

‘Loneliness and Subjective Happiness as Mediators of the Effects of Core Self-evaluations on Life

Satisfaction’ was another study conducted among Chinese college students. The primary goal of

this study was to investigate the mediator effects of loneliness and subjective happiness on the

relationship between core self-evaluations and life satisfaction in Chinese college students. A

total of three hundred and one students participated in the study and were all attending three

different Chinese colleges at the time of the study. Data was collected by means of a

questionnaire consisting of the Core Self-evaluations Scale, UCLA Loneliness Scale, Subjective

Happiness Scale and Satisfaction with Life Scale. As previously mentioned our study will also

make use of the subjective happiness scale as well as the satisfaction with life scale. The study

revealed that subjective happiness acted as a go-between for core self-evaluations and life

satisfaction. Furthermore, the relationship between core self-evaluations and life satisfaction

was not mediated by loneliness. Subjective happiness however partially mediated the

18

relationship between core self-evaluations and loneliness. (Xiaofei, Jingkuan, Xia, Dan, 2013)

This indicates that there will be a good probability that our study will indicate which of our

variables (life satisfaction, perceived social support and subjective happiness) will act as a

mediator between the other two variables.

There is a clear gap in this research area since no research has been done from a local

perspective, from an African perspective. This is why this current study is so important to

provide that local perspective. Most of the studies done on subjective well-being involve a

population sample of students from universities and colleges. Also most of the definitions given

for subjective well-being in the literature include life satisfaction as one of the key elements.

There has also been a great deal of emphasis on social interactions whether in the form of

relationships with family and friends or by means of self-disclosure and self-concealment on

social networking sites. Most of the studies conducted did show a correlation between social

interaction, in its various forms, and subjective well-being. Majority of the studies conducted

used surveys that included various forms of self-reported scales that measure different aspects

of subjective well-being.

19

Chapter 3

Methodology:

Research Design

A quantitative research design was used because this design is most appropriate in looking at

relationships between two or more variables. Since this study examined the relationship

between social interaction and subjective well-being the quantitative research design was

deemed more appropriate.. Quantitative approaches to research also establishes cause and

effect relationships between variables. This is useful since the study tries to determine whether

there is a causal effect r between subjective well-being and social interaction.

Sample

The sampling technique that was used is non-probability sampling. The reason is because it is

easier, quicker and cheaper to use than probability sampling. More specifically the study uses

convenience sampling to select the participants. Convenience sampling involves relatively low

costs and does not take up too much time, it is very easy to carry out and does not involve a lot

of rules and regulations (elaborate what convenience sampling is/does). This simplifies the

research process a great deal.

Participants were randomly selected according to their proximity and ease of access to the

researcher. Data was collected by means of administering questionnaires to a sample

population of 110 undergraduate students at the University of Namibia. The researcher

therefore administered questionnaires to those individuals that were closest to him/her, such

20

as classmates and other University students. Questionnaires were administered during a free

period of the researcher and his/her classmates. Questionnaires were also randomly

administered to any voluntary undergraduate student that was available. The sample therefore

consisted of undergraduate students mainly. Of the 110 questionnaires that were administered

only 98 questionnaires were usable. The sample consisted of 41 males and 57 females, with an

average age of 1.12 which means 18-25 years and a standard deviation of 0.329. 86 of the

sample population were between the ages of 18 to 25 and only 12 were above the age of 25.

The males who were between the ages of 18 and 25 consisted of 33, while only 8 of them were

above 25 years old. Females between the ages of 18 and 25 were 53, whereas only 4 of them

were above 25 years of age.

Research Instrument

The questionnaire consisted of three scales that measured the participant’s subjective well-

being, their quality of life and their perceived social support respectively. The scales included

Sonja Lyubomirsky’s (1999) Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), Ed Diener’s (1985) Satisfaction

with Life Scale, and Gregory D. Zimet, Nancy W. Dahlem, Sara G. Zimet & Gordon K. Farley’s

(1988) Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support.

The Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS) measured the subjective well-being of the participants. It

is a four-point instrument that is based on a seven-point Likert-type scale. It was also used

successfully in the study of Kim and Lee (2011) to measure the subjective well-being of

Facebook users. An example of the questions in the scale are: ‘In general I consider myself

1“Not a very happy person” vs. 7“A very happy person”. “Test-retest and self-peer correlations

21

suggested good to excellent reliability, and construct validation studies of convergent and

discriminant validity confirmed the use of this scale to measure the construct of subjective

happiness.” (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1997, pg.137)

The Satisfaction with Life scale (SWLS) will measured how satisfied the participants were with

their lives. It is a five item instrument that is also based on a Likert-type scale. Participants had

to indicate how much they agree or disagree with each of the five items using a seven-point

scale that ranged from 7 strongly agree to 1 strongly disagree. An example of one of the five

items are: ‘In most ways my life is close to my ideal’. Since life satisfaction is closely related to

how subjectively well an individual is it seemed necessary to include this scale in the

questionnaire. (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) “Life satisfaction as assessed by the

SWLS shows a degree of temporal stability…” and “the scale shows discriminant validity”.

(Pavot & Diener, 1993, pg. 164)

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support measured the participant’s perception on

the social support they receive from family and friends. It is a twelve item instrument based on

a seven-point Likert-type scale. The scale ranged from 1 very strongly disagree to 7 very

strongly agree. One of the statements that participants needed to rate included: ‘There is a

special person who is around when I am in need’. (Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet & Farley, 1988) “The

research demonstrated that the MSPSS has good internal and test-retest reliability as well as

moderate construct validity.” (Zimet G., Dahlem, Zimet S. & Farley, 1998, pg.30)

22

Data analysis

The data collected was analyzed using the SPSS program. A bivariate analysis was used to

explore the association between two variables namely; social interaction and the subjective

well-being. In order to test the hypothesis stating there is a positive correlation between social

interaction and the subjective well-being of undergraduate students, Pearson’s product-

moment correlation coefficient was used. The reason for this is to measure the strength of the

linear association between the two variables; social interaction and subjective well-being.

23

Chapter 4

Results:

Frequency distributions:

As previously mentioned a sample population of 110 were used but only 98 of those 110

answered the questionnaire properly. So 12 of the questionnaires administered were

incomplete, therefore reducing the sample population to 98 participants. Table 4.1 shows a

description of the number of students (N) who responded to each respective question. It also

depicts the mean and standard deviation for each item.

Table 4.1 Distribution of participants within 7 items

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.

Deviation

Age 98 1 2 1.12 .329

Gender 98 1 2 1.58 .496

Do you have a facebook account 98 1 2 1.13 .341

How many friends do you have on facebook 85 1 2 1.88 .324

Total score for Subjective Happiness Scale 98 1 4 2.83 .626

Total score for Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social

Support

98 1 3 1.91 .719

Total score for Satisfaction With Life Scale 98 1 7 3.52 1.581

Valid N (list wise) 85

The study mainly consisted of individuals between the ages of 18 and 21, about 78% - 86

participants. Twelve of the participants were ages 25 and up, accounting for almost 11% of the

sample population. There were more female participants than male participants; 57 females

and 41 males. Total of 98 participants all in all. Since the females account for more than 50% of

the participants it is only fitting that most of the results for the females appeared greater than

the results for the males. Majority of the participants had a Facebook account; 77% of the

24

participants. Those who had a Facebook account totaled 85 and those that did not have a

Facebook account were 13. A lot of the participants who did have a Facebook account had over

100 Facebook friends, their total was 75, whereas only 10 had a hundred or less friends on

Facebook.

Looking at the results of the Subjective Happiness Scale; 57% of the participants were happy,

20% were unhappy, 1.8% were very unhappy and 9% were very happy. Majority of the results

tend not to go in the extreme direction, whether extremely positive (very happy) or extremely

negative (very unhappy).

Looking at the findings of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support 30

participants presented with high acuity. 21 participants presented with low acuity and majority

of the participants presented with moderate acuity, these were 47.

The Satisfaction with Life Scale indicated that almost 8% (8 participants) of the participants

were extremely satisfied with their lives. Majority of the participants were slightly dissatisfied,

this accounted for 28 of the participants. 24 were satisfied, 23 slightly satisfied, 7 dissatisfied,

and only 2 were extremely dissatisfied.

When comparing gender with the scores obtained from the subjective happiness scale its

evident that more females were happy than females. Two of the females were very unhappy

while none of the males were very unhappy. The same amount of males and females were very

25

happy, 5. Almost 40 of the females scored in the happy section, on the other hand only 24 of

the male participants were happy. Twelve of the males scored in the unhappy section and

eleven females were unhappy. In general majority of the participants in the study were happy.

Comparisons:

After running cross tabulations the following results were obtained:

The distribution of age for males and females showed that majority of the participants were

between the ages of 18 and 25. This accounted for 53 of the females and 33 of the males, more

females than males in this age group. On the other hand only 12 of the participants were older

than 25. More males than females were older than 25, 8 males and 4 females.

Looking at the amount of males and females scored in a particular category of the

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support it is evident that the majority of the

participants scored in the moderate acuity category; that is 16 males and 31 females. More

females had high acuity than males; 10 males and 20 females. However more males than

females had low acuity; 15 males and only 6 females.

The amount of males and females categorized in the Satisfaction with Life Scale showed that

most of the participants (both male and female) were slightly dissatisfied with their lives; 13

males and 15 females. It is evident that most of the females were satisfied with their lives (16),

whereas most of the males were slightly dissatisfied with their lives (13). Only males indicated

they were extremely dissatisfied with their lives (2). The same number of males and females (4)

26

were extremely satisfied, while more females (4) than males (2) were in a neutral position

about the satisfaction of their lives. More females than males were dissatisfied; 5 females and 2

males.

Considering how many females as well as males categorized according to the Subjective

Happiness Scale it was found that most of the females (39) were categorized as happy. Also

most of the males (24) were found to be happy. None of the males were categorized as very

unhappy, whereas 2 females were very unhappy. Less than ten of the males and females were

very happy, this is about 5 males and 5 females. More than 10 of the males as well as females

were unhappy; 12 males and 11 females.

Contrasting scores for the Subjective Happiness Scale and the Satisfaction with Life Scale it was

found that those participants who were categorized as satisfied with their lives were also

deemed as happy on the SHS (18). None of the participants who were very unhappy were also

categorized as extremely satisfied, satisfied, neutral, slightly dissatisfied and extremely

dissatisfied. Those participants who were very unhappy were also slightly satisfied (1) and

dissatisfied (1). Total number of participants who were unhappy was 23, where about 13 of

them were slightly dissatisfied, 1 satisfied, 3 slightly satisfied, 2 neutral, 4 dissatisfied and none

extremely satisfied as well as extremely dissatisfied. Majority of the participants were happy

(63); 5 of them were also extremely satisfied, 17 slightly satisfied, 4 were neutral, 15 slightly

dissatisfied, 2 dissatisfied and extremely satisfied. Only 10 participants were very happy; where

27

3 were extremely satisfied, 5 satisfied, 2 slightly satisfied, and none of these were neutral,

slightly dissatisfied, dissatisfied, and extremely dissatisfied.

Comparison between the results of two scales, namely Subjective Happiness Scale and

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support indicated that participants who were very

unhappy also had moderate acuity (1) as well as low acuity (1). Most of the participants with

moderate acuity were categorized as happy (30). Of the 30 participants who had high acuity

none of them were very unhappy, only 2 were unhappy, 22 were happy and 6 very happy. Of

the 21 participants with low acuity only one was very unhappy, 9 unhappy, 11 happy and none

very happy.

When a comparison between the number participants that are Facebook users and the total

score for the Subjective Happiness Scale was done most of the participants (56) that indicated

they had a facebook account were categorized as unhappy. Whereas 20 of the participants that

were facebook users were happy. Only a few participants (2) that used facebook were very

happy. Seven of the participants who did not use facebook were unhappy, while the same

number (3) of them were happy and very unhappy. None of them were very happy. However

with those that used facebook 7 were very unhappy.

A comparison was done between Facebook users and the total score of the Subjective

Happiness Scale. It was found that majority of Facebook users were happy (56) and only 7 of

those that did not use Facebook were happy. None of the participants that did not have a

28

Facebook account were very unhappy whereas 2 of those that did have a Facebook account

were very unhappy. 20 of those that used Facebook were unhappy and 3 of those that did not

use Facebook were unhappy. Seven of the participants that did have a Facebook account were

very happy and only three of those that did not have a Facebook account were very happy.

The happiness level of those participants that had a Facebook account were compared to the

number of friends they had on Facebook. None of the participants that had 0-100 friends on

Facebook were very happy, whereas most (49) of those that had 100+ friends on facebook were

unhappy. Of the 10 participants who had 0-100 friends; 2 were happy and 1 very unhappy. Of

the 75 participants that had 100+ friends, 2 were very happy, 18 happy and 6 very unhappy.

29

Correlations:

After running a bivariate correlation test-Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient test

on different variables the following results were obtained:

Table 4.2 Correlation between Subjective Happiness Scale and Satisfaction with Life Scale

Total score for

Subjective

Happiness

Scale

Total score for

Satisfaction With

Life Scale

Total score for Subjective Happiness Scale

Pearson Correlation 1 -.491**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 98 98

Total score for Satisfaction With Life Scale

Pearson Correlation -.491** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 98 98

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.2 depict the correlation between two variables namely subjective happiness and

satisfaction with life. The table shows that the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level. There

is also an indication that there is a negative linear relationship between subjective happiness

and satisfaction with life, Pearson’s r (98) = .49, p< .001.This is an indication of a small or weak

correlation.

30

Figure 4.1 Scatter plot graph for correlation between SWLS & MSPSS

Figure 4.1 shows the correlation between satisfaction with life and perceived social support.

The correlation is significant at a 0.01 level. There is a positive linear relationship between these

two variables as depicted in the graph, Pearson’s r (98) = .54, p < .001. This is an indication of a

small or weak correlation.

31

Table 4.3 Correlation between SHS & MSPSS

Total score for

Subjective Happiness

Scale

Total score for

Multidimensional Scale

of Perceived Social

Support

Total score for Subjective

Happiness Scale

Pearson Correlation 1 -.379**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 98 98

Total score for Multidimensional

Scale of Perceived Social Support

Pearson Correlation -.379** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

N 98 98

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.13 show the correlation between subjective happiness and perceived social support.

There is a negative linear relationship between subjective happiness and perceived social

support. The correlation is significant at a 0.01 level. Pearson’s r (98) = .38, p < .001 .This is an

indication of a small or weak correlation.

32

Chapter 5

Discussion:

As previously mentioned the objective of this study was to examine whether or not there is a

relationship between subjective well-being and social interaction. Subjective happiness along

with satisfaction with life are indicators of subjective well-being. Perceived social support on

the other hand gives a depiction of the benefits of social interaction. Therefore, the relationship

between subjective happiness and perceived social support can be compared to the

relationship between social interaction and subjective well being.

As indicated in the results section satisfaction with life did not play a significant role in

subjective happiness. These results contradict previous studies that proposed that subjective

well-being and satisfaction with life go hand in hand. In addition the results also indicated that

perceived social support did not play a significant role on subjective happiness. Again these

results do not support previous findings that whenever subjective happiness increases,

perceived social support increases. This proves the first hypothesis set out in chapter 1 wrong.

The hypothesis states that there will be a positive correlation between subjective well-being

and social interaction.

A positive correlation between satisfaction with life and perceived social support was

established. The results indicated that perceived social support had a positive impact on

satisfaction with life. This proves the second hypothesis set out in chapter 1 right.

33

In order to analyze the results better, the key research questions set out in chapter one of the

study needs to be answered. ‘Does social support directly contribute to the subjective well-

being of students?’ According to the findings the answer is unclear since no cause and effect

relationships were established. The only thing that is known for sure is the fact that social

support does affect subjective well-being, but in a negative way.

This study indicates that the more you interact with others the less well-off you are in terms of

subjective well-being. The next key research question states: ‘Can social interaction be

considered as an important variable when measuring satisfaction with life?’ Yes it can since the

results established a correlation between the two variables, social interaction does influence

satisfaction with life positively. If people perceive that their friends and family are supportive of

them they in turn will be more satisfied with their lives.

Another question is: ‘Does perceived social support directly contribute to the subjective well-

being of students?’ As indicated in the results section a negative correlation between these two

variables were found. This means that perceived social support did contribute to subjective

well-being but in a negative way. When comparisons were made between Facebook account

users and SHS score it was clearly visible that there was a negative correlation between these

two variables. Results of those participants who had more than 100 friends on Facebook

indicated that they were the ones who are unhappy. So even if participants believed that they

had a great deal of support from family, friends and a significant other they could not be seen

34

as subjectively well. The results of this study shows that no matter how much social support

you think you have it does not necessarily make you a happier person.

The next research question stated was; ‘Are there any differences in findings between this

study and previous studies, and if so why?’ In chapter 2 there was a study conducted by Kim &

Lee on how Facebook affects the subjective well-being of Facebook users, they found that a

positive association existed between the number of Facebook friends and subjective well-being.

However the results for this study disputes Kim & Lee’s results. This could be due to a variety of

factors such as the environment the study was done in, meaning this study was done in a

different cultural environment than that of Kim & Lee’s study. Also the studies were not exactly

the same, did not use the exact same measures to investigate the relationship between the

different variables and also did not measure the same variables.

The last research question as stated in chapter 1 was; ‘Are there any significant differences

between males and females regarding their results for subjective well-being and social

interaction?’ From the findings we have found that females were the ones that were happier

than males. Both males and females in the study scored highest in the happy category of the

subjective happiness scale. When looking at the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social

Support more females than males reported high acuity. But these findings can merely be the

result of there being more females than males who participated in the study.

35

As mentioned in chapter 1 the study had limitations, these can also be considered as the

weaknesses of the study. Since the study only looks at university students at the University of

Namibia, the findings are only appropriate for samples similar to the one used. Further research

needs to be done on this particular topic but this time participants from different universities

can be used and even the general public in order to make the findings more generalizable. Also

an in depth look at the ways in which people interact and with whom they interact could also

help to generate more detailed results.

36

Chapter 6:

References:

Aruka, A. (2004). How to measure Social Interaction via group selection. Journal of Economic

Behavior and Organization, 53, 41-47. doi: 10.1016/S0167-2681(03)00101-X

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life

Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. Retrieved from

http://www.fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/

SATISFACTION-SatisfactionWithLife.pdf

Diener, E. (2013). The Remarkable Changes in the Science of Subjective Well-Being. Journal of

the Association for Psychological Science, 8(6), 663–666. doi:

10.1177/1745691613507583

Feng, K., Jingjing, Z. & Xuqun, Y. (2013) Self-Esteem as Mediator and Moderator of the

Relationship between Social Support and Subjective Well-Being among Chinese

University Students. Social Indicators Research, 112(1), 151-161. doi: 03038300;

15730921

Foregaurd, M., Jayawickreme, E., Kern, M. & Seligman, M. (2011) Doing the right thing:

Measuring wellbeing for public policy. International Journal of Wellbeing, 1(1), 79-106.

doi:10.5502/ijw.v1i1.15

Hampton, N. (2007). The Affective aspect of Subjective Well-being among Chinese people with

and without Spinal Cord injuries. Retrieved from

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19230118

37

Jeffres, L., Neuendorf, K., Bracken, C. & Atkin, D. (2008). The influence of Communication and

the Cosmopoliteness on Quality of Life perceptions. The Open Communication Journal, 2,

17-22. Retrieved from

http://benthamopen.com/tocommj/articles/V002/17TOCOMMJ.pdf

Kim, J. & Lee, J. (2011). The Facebook paths to happiness: Effects of the number of Facebook

friends and Self-presentation on Subjective well-being. Journal of Cyberpsychology,

Behavior and Social Networking, 14(6), doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0374

Lee, G., Lee, J. & Kwon, S. (2011). Use of Social-Networking Sites and Subjective Well-Being: A

Study in South Korea. Journal of Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,

14(3), doi: 10.1089/cyber.2009.0382

Lyubomirsky, S. & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability

and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137-155. Retrieved from

http://www.fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/

SATISFACTION-SubjectiveHappiness.pdf

Ma, H., Guo, Y., Xu, F., Yu, F. & Zhou, Z. (2014). Positive Psychological Capital: A new approach

to Social Support and Subjective Well-being. Social Behavior and Personality, 42(1), 135-

144. doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.1.135

Park, N. (2004). The Role of Subjective Well-Being in Positive Youth Development. The ANNALS

of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2004 591: 25, doi:

10.1177/0002716203260078

38

Pavot, W. & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Psychological

Assessment, 5, 164-172. Retrieved from

http://www.logisens.com/resourceFiles/Satisfaction_with_Life_Scale_review11.pdf

Rozin, P. & Stellar, J. (2009). Posthumous events affect rated Quality and Happiness of lives.

Judgment and Decision Making, 4(4), 273-279. Retrieved from

http://journal.sjdm.org/9301/jdm9301.pdf

Scheinkman, J. A. (2014). Social interactions. Retrieved July 18, 2014 from

http://www.princeton.edu/~joses/wp/socialinteractions.pdf

Wang, J., Qui, L. & Cui, L. (2014). The Mediating effect of Personality Traits on The Relationship

between Self-concealment and Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Social Behavior and

Personality, 42(4), 695-704 Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.4.695

Zanin, L. (2011). Detecting Unobserved Heterogeneity in the Relationship between Subjective

well-being and Satisfaction in various Domains of Life using the REBUS-PLS Path Modeling

Approach: A case study. Journal of Springer Science and Business Media, doi:

10.1007/s11205-011-9931-5

Zimet, G.D., Dahlem, N.W., Zimet, S.G. & Farley, G.K. (1988). Psychometric characteristics of the

Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment,

55, 610-17. Retrieved from

http://www.afterdeployment.t2.health.mil/sites/default/files/pdfs/assessment-tools/

perceived-social-support-assessment.pdf

39

Zimet, G.D., Dahlem, N.W., Zimet, S.G. & Farley G.K. (1998). The Multidimensional Scale of

Perceived Social Support. Journal of Personality Assessment, 52(1), 30-41, doi:

10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2

40

Chapter 7:

Appendices:

Instrument: Questionnaire (Sample)

University of Namibia

I am doing a research project on how social interaction within the lives of students affect their

subjective well-being. Subjective well-being for the purpose of this study relates to how happy a

person is with his/her life at that current point in time. Please complete the following questions

as honestly as possible. All information gathered will be regarded as strictly confidential.

Please complete the following information first. Tick the appropriate box.

Age 18-25 25+

Gender Male Female

Do you have a Facebook

account?

(If yes move on to the next

question)

Yes No

How many friends do

41

you have on Facebook? 0-100 100+

Instructions: For each of the following statements and/or questions, please circle the point on

the scale that you feel is most appropriate in describing you.

1. In general, I consider myself:

not a very happy person 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a very happy person

2. Compared to most of my peers, I consider myself:

Less happy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 more happy

3. Some people are generally very happy. They enjoy life regardless of what is going on, getting

the most out of everything. To what extent does this characterization describe you?

not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a great deal

4. Some people are generally not very happy. Although they are not depressed, they never

seem as happy as they might be. To what extent does this characterization describe you?

not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a great deal

Instructions: We are interested in how you feel about the following statements. Read each

statement carefully. Indicate how you feel about each statement.

Circle the “1” if you Very Strongly Disagree

Circle the “2” if you Strongly Disagree

Circle the “3” if you Mildly Disagree

Circle the “4” if you are Neutral

Circle the “5” if you Mildly Agree

Circle the “6” if you Strongly Agree

Circle the “7” if you Very Strongly Agree

42

1. There is a special person around when I am in need

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2. There is a special person with whom I can share my joys and sorrows

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

3. My family really tries to help me1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4. I get the emotional help and support I need from my family1 2 3 4 5 6 7

5. I have a special person who is real source of comfort to me1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. My friends really try to help me1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. I can count on my friends when things go wrong1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8. I can talk about my problems with my family1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9. I have friends with whom I can share my joys and sorrows1 2 3 4 5 6 7

10. There is a special person in my life who cares about my feelings1 2 3 4 5 6 7

11. My family is willing to help me make decisions1 2 3 4 5 6 7

12. I can talk about my problems with my friends1 2 3 4 5 6 7

43

Below are five statements with which you may agree or disagree. Using the 1-7 scale below, indicate your agreement with each item by placing the appropriate number in the line preceding that item.

1 = Strongly Disagree2 = Disagree3 = Slightly Disagree4 = Neither Agree or Disagree5 = Slightly Agree6 = Agree7 = Strongly Agree

______1. In most ways my life is close to my ideal.

______2. The conditions of my life are excellent.

______3. I am satisfied with life.

______4. So far I have gotten the important things I want in life.

______5. If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing.

*Thank you for taking time to participate in this study. Hope you have learned a few things about yourself, and I wish you a fulfilled life.*

44