Ideas of Subjective Well-Being in Democratic and Nondemocratic Societies: A Comparative Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Being socially determined constructs, concepts of subjective well-being ( swb ) affect the motivation behind people’s behavior in every society. Usually, subjective well-being is measured using the survey questions about life satisfaction. Using multilevel modeling with individual and cross-national data from the World Values Survey on 65 countries for the 2005-2014 periods, this research confirms that life satisfaction determinants which constitute pivotal elements of subjective well-being differ significantly in democratic and nondemocratic social contexts. The effect of marital relations, participation in sports organizations and church attendance on life satisfaction is stronger in democratic social contexts than in nondemocratic ones. While the effect of income, educational level, participation in non-sports organizations and religiosity is stronger in a nondemocratic social context. These results contribute to a non-institutional measure of modern democracy, dispel some myths about modern democratic and nondemocratic values, and show the potency and applicability of a sociological approach in the field of swb studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it