The catalogue contains study descriptions in various languages. The system searches with your search terms from study descriptions available in the language you have selected. The catalogue does not have ‘All languages’ option as due to linguistic differences this would give incomplete results. See the User Guide for more detailed information.
PUMA Survey 3.1. Insights in societal changes in Austria
Creator
PUMA (Plattform für Umfragen, Methoden und empirische Analysen)
Study number / PID
doi:10.11587/QEM0JC (DOI)
Data access
Information not available
Series
PUMA Survey
PUMA (Plattform für Umfragen, Methoden und empirische Analysen) Surveys consist of separate modules designed and prepared by different principle investigators.
Abstract
Full edition for scientific use. PUMA Surveys consist of separate modules designed and prepared by different principle investigators. This PUMA Survey consists of three modules. Fieldwork was conducted by Statistics Austria.MODULE 1 (Ivo Ponocny, Eduard Brandstätter, Christian Weismayer).
Self-ratings of life satisfaction and happiness often tend to disclose some harm and mischief people actually experience in life (see Staudinger, 2000, “happiness paradox”, Cummins & Nistico, 2002, “positivity bias”, and Ponocny, Weismayer, Dressler, & Stross, 2017). Therefore, an alternative classification called “narrated well-being” (NWB) was developed by the latter authors which seems to more directly reflect the negative circumstances in people’s lives, as tested on the basis of 500 quality-of-life interviews. However, this rating scheme could only be applied to external ratings of life narratives, but not to self-ratings, a gap to be filled by the present report. Similarly, the assessment of the most influential well- and ill-being drivers via open-ended questions – leaving it to the citizens which aspects of life they want to tell about – was not assessed in a large-scale assessment framework with a representative sampling frame.
Furthermore, the question why in part drastic negative circumstance do not produce more negative self-ratings drew the attention on the role of obligation and burden, with the suspicion that persons with obligations tend to emphasize how well they cope with their challenges rather than evaluate based on their personal happiness. If this is true, then there is an ambiguity regarding the meaning of those self-ratings, with the potential for misinterpretation by researchers. These thoughts, if correct, will particularly apply to persons with responsibility for persons dependent on them, such as children and teenagers, and persons giving informal care.
Consequently, the research goals are to
i) determine the extent of burdensome circumstances,...
Terminology used is generally based on DDI controlled vocabularies: Time Method, Analysis Unit, Sampling Procedure and Mode of Collection, available at CESSDA Vocabulary Service.
Methodology
Data collection period
15/09/2017 - 31/10/2017
Country
Austria
Time dimension
Cross-section
Analysis unit
Individual
Universe
Resident population of Austria aged 16 to 74
Sampling procedure
Probability
Kind of data
Numeric
Data collection mode
Self-administered questionnaire: Paper
Self-administered questionnaire: Web-based
Funding information
Funder
BMBWF
Grant number
HRSM - PUMA
Access
Publisher
The Austrian Social Science Data Archive
Publication year
2018
Terms of data access
For more Information please visit AUSSDA's web page