1. ‘The social context of well- being’ By J. F. Helliwell & R. D. Putnam

2. Introduction  Subjective well-being: This is well-being defined by the individual, using self-rating questions about happiness & life satisfaction.  Studies have shown these measures of subjective well-being are reliable and valid.  Most powerful predictors of subjective well-being are genetic make-up, personality & physical health, but the focus here is social factors.

3. Social factors Social factors can be economic position or material well-being, this is measured by wealth, income and material possessions. Interestingly at higher levels material well-being has a modest effect on subjective well-being. Evidence claiming that it is relative income that is most important. Marital status (strongest correlation of happiness), race, education, employment, religious belief, and age.

4. Social Capital The close connection between subjective well- being and social capital is the main focus in this paper. Social capital: social networks can have a powerful effect on the level & efficiency of production & well- being. It is through bonds among family, friends, neighbours, work colleagues, in civic associations, & at church that make up ones social capital. The belief that others around you can be trusted is also a strong empirical index of social capital at the aggregate level.

5. Benefits of social capital Social network can be a powerful asset for both individuals and communities. Social connections, including marriage, are among the strongest correlates of subjective well-being. Research has shown the ‘happiness effects’ of social capital are larger than material ones. A US study showed being married was the happiness equivalent of quadrupling one’s annual income.

6. 4 Methodological Cautions 1.Spuriousness: Too often analysis of social correlates of well-being based on bivariate analysis or sample size has limited researchers. 2.Multi-level analysis: Relevant hypotheses need to be simultaneously tested at the individual and aggregate level. 3.Reverse causation & selection bias: A sunny disposition itself affects a persons location in the social structure, so correlations between social circumstances and subjective well-being might reflect the effects not causes of subjective well-being.

7. 4 Methodological Cautions 4. Adaptation & the ‘hedonic treadmill’: Conventional cross-sectional data used in the studies may overstate the permanency of social effects on happiness as levels of well-being quickly adjust to changed circumstances. The results reported in this article are based entirely on cross-sectional survey data.