Understanding Individual Differences in Happiness Sources and Implications for Health Technology Design: Exploratory Analysis of an Open Dataset
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Psychologists have developed frameworks to understand many constructs, which have subsequently informed the design of digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) aimed at improving mental health outcomes. The science of happiness is one such domain that holds significant applied importance due to its links to well-being and evidence that happiness can be cultivated through interventions. However, as with many constructs, the unique ways in which individuals experience happiness present major challenges for designing personalized DMHIs. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to (1) present an analysis of how sex may interact with age, marital status, and parental status to predict individual differences in sources of happiness, and (2) to present a preliminary discussion of how open datasets may contribute to the process of designing health-related technology innovations. METHODS: The HappyDB is an open database of 100,535 statements of what people consider to have made them happy, with some people asking to consider the past 24 hours (49,831 statements) and some considering the last 3 months (50,704 statements). Demographic information is also provided. Binary logistic regression analyses are used to determine whether various groups differed in their likelihood of selecting or not selecting a category as a source of their happiness. RESULTS: Sex and age interacted to influence what was selected as sources of happiness, with patterns being less consistent among female individuals in comparison with male individuals. For marital status, differences in sources of happiness were predominantly between married individuals and those who are divorced or separated, but these were the same for both sexes. Married, single, and widowed individuals were all largely similar in their likelihood of selecting each of the categories as a source of their happiness. However, there were some anomalies, and sex appeared to be important in these anomalies. Sex and parental status also interacted to influence what was selected as sources of happiness. CONCLUSIONS: Sex interacts with age, marital status, and parental status in the likelihood of reporting affection, bonding, leisure, achievement, or enjoying the moment as sources of happiness. The contribution of an open dataset to understanding individual differences in sources of happiness is discussed in terms of its potential role in addressing the challenges of designing DMHIs that are ethical, responsible, evidence based, acceptable, engaging, inclusive, and effective for users. The discussion considers how the content design of DMHIs in general may benefit from exploring new methods informed by diverse data sources. It is proposed that examining the extent to which insights from nondigital settings can inform requirements gathering for DMHIs is warranted.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,035 | 0,119 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».