Introduction

From Aristotle and the ancient Greek philosophers to those of the present day, happiness has been a subject of tremendous interest throughout the history of human thought (Lyubomirsky, 1997). However, for most of that time, because there have been no objective ways to measure happiness, our understanding of happiness has primarily remained speculative and uncertain. During the last few decades, though, survey research methods have promised to offer a breakthrough in our effort to measure happiness (Veenhoven, 1999). But survey results have turned out not to be reliable happiness indicators. Many of these surveys rank groups of people using average data from limited samples, which does provide a reliable assessment of happiness (Bond, 2014). In this essay, I will argue that while humans have devised various methods that claim to measure happiness, these methods are not reliable.  

Definition of Happiness

In order to measure happiness, it is first necessary to define it. Happiness has been defined as an overall evaluation of one’s contentedness in their life, not specific aspects of it (Veenhoven, 1999). This means a judgment of life in terms of positive well being in general, rather than a passing emotion based on momentary circumstance. For example, a life that is exciting is not necessarily happy, because excitement is a fleeting emotion that  doesn’t always carry over to the overall happiness of an individual. Similarly, a life that is boring is not necessarily sad. The overall evaluation of the happiness of a life factors in several different categories, including how good it feels, whether or not meets expectations, how desirable others deem it to be, etc.

Certain synonyms of happiness can be useful to understanding the term. According to Veenhoven (1999), happiness in the standard sense has the same meaning as the term life satisfaction and the two can be used interchangeably. This term has an advantage in that it emphasizes the subjective nature of happiness, as it relies on one’s own estimation of the satisfaction afforded by their life. Another synonym for happiness is subjective well being. While it shows the lack of objectivity regarding happiness, it does not make clear what the person in question is appraising. Thus, this term is not only used for satisfaction of life on a grand scale, but also for specific discomforts and passing moods. 

These synonyms make clear the inherently subjective, personal nature of happiness, which makes it very difficult to measure from an external perspective.

Methods of Measuring Happiness

Having established a definition of happiness — a person’s overall evaluation of their level of contentedness with their life — we can now understand and analyze methods of measuring happiness. 

Believe it or not, in the 1960s, happiness was measured by blood pressure (Moridis, 2011). When physical measurements were shown to be inaccurate and not dependable, however, measurements of happiness shifted from the physical to subjective. Now, the most standard method to evaluate a person’s happiness is by asking them questions, which can be presented in different ways. For example, the subject may be asked directly, indirectly, with single questions, multiple questions stringed together, etc. The most common happiness survey features single, direct questions. 

Every year, studies are conducted around the world to determine the happiest countries. These studies are conducted using single questions on the general public. The single question is formatted like so: Subjects are asked to rate their happiness on a 11-point scale, from 0 to 10. At intervals on the scale, indicators of what that number means. For example, 0 might be marked as “very unhappy” and 5 might be marked as “neutral.” An example of the single question is: "All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole nowadays? Please answer using this scale, where 0 means extremely dissatisfied and 10 means extremely satisfied” (Adler, 2013). 

There are other, more unconventional methods of measuring a person’s happiness as well. On a hedonic level, it is possible for others to rate someone’s happiness. For cases like children, who might not understand how to rate their own happiness on a scale, another person can analyze their behavior, such as humming, smiling, or skipping, and determine whether they are happy or not. This kind of external rating is usually performed by someone close to the subject, such as their parents and friends (Veenhoven, 1996). 

More recently, computers have been employed to analyze happiness based on facial expressions and other physical indicators (Economides, 2011). The modulation of voice and intonation is the main channel of human emotional expression. Many emotions, such as anger, joy, or fear, can produce physiological reactions, including increased cardiac vibrations and rapid breathing. Then, in turn, these reactions have significant impacts on pitch, timing, and voice quality. Computers are able to recognize these minute changes, and using this data they can analyze our emotions, and perhaps the subject’s happiness as well (Economides, 2011). 

Another possible way of measuring happiness is by looking at its consequences. Currently, there are no empirical investigations that focus on the outcomes of happiness. Nevertheless, some indication may be found in the results of longitudinal investigations on life satisfaction and experimental studies on mood. The results suggest that a positive appreciation of life tends to “broaden one's perception and encourage active living rather than induce apathy and to foster social contact rather than lead to selfish individualism” (Veenhoven, 1991). Those, care and concern for others may be interpreted as evidence of a happy life..

Many global happiness surveys have come to the conclusion that Finland is the happiest country in the world, with an average happiness rating of 8 out of 10. The average life expectancy in Finland is 82.13 years. This is in contrast to countries like Botswana and Zimbabwe, who have an average happiness rating of around 3. Their life expectancy is around 65 years. This suggests that there might be a connection between happiness and health and longevity. 

Inaccuracy of Methods

While there are multiple methods of attempting to measure happiness, as presented above, these methods do not produce objective results. First, physical behavior is not reliable. Veenhoven (1997) argues that “steady physiological correlations have not been discovered, and probably never will be.” Some actions are commonly observed in happy people, such as being active, outgoing, and friendly. However, these traits are found in people who claim to be unhappy as well, and these actions are often not found in people who claim to be happy, either. Blood pressure does not work as a measure of happiness, because blood pressure readings are affected by factors outside of happiness, such as age, family history and genetics, medications, sodium intake, and not having enough fruit and vegetables. Happiness cannot be measured through physical means, because it is not objective. Similarly, non-verbal body language is related to more than just happiness. This is evident in our everyday lives,  where it is often difficult to accurately interpret the emotions of others based on non-verbal cues.

Happiness scales, by far the most popular way of measuring happiness, are not reliable, either. It is impossible to rank groups by average happiness using survey data with limited available responses. When using a scale that has a small number of points, people place their happiness in a range. For instance, they describe themselves as “very unhappy” if their happiness drops below a specific value. However, when comparing two people, the specific values for which their states of happiness change are different. For example, person A might put “very happy” when their happiness crosses a 5, while person B might put “very happy” when their happiness crosses a 7. 

According to Veenhoven (1997), the validity of such self reports is “questionable at best.” Because answers to questions are ambiguous and happiness is different for everyone, the way a question is asked can have a serious impact on the answer provided (Veenhoven, 1997). 

Single questions are not reliable because happiness is different for everyone (Gajewski, 2020). 

In addition, a study conducted by Delsignore (2021) revealed that happiness cannot be measured as an objective fact, but rather as an experience. The measurement methods we have today are not trustworthy, as they do not account for the sociological aspects of happiness. To accurately measure happiness, a new method would have to be invented, one that deals with the complexity of human behavior, emotions, and values.

Furthermore, computer analyses of people’s emotions are not reliable. First, many different emotions cause similar physiological reactions. For example, fear produces a very similar reaction to surprise and boredom causes a similar reaction to sadness (Moridis, 2011). Thus, the computer’s analysis of emotions based on physical conditions cannot be trusted. Second, as I have previously defined, happiness, or subjective well being, is an overall evaluation of life, not a fleeting emotional state. The computer system, however, measures emotions.

Measuring happiness by looking at its consequences across the world does not yield accurate results, either. First, these surveys about happiness are not accurate. Different cultures from around the world have different norms and traditions to physically express happiness. For example, there is the smile, arguably the most iconic and common physical indicator of happiness. In western cultures, a big, toothy grin is a common way to smile. However, in many Asian cultures, this is considered disrespectful and rude. In these cultures, a closed mouthed, slight smile is most common. When the two smiles are compared side by side, it may seem that the Westerner is happier. In reality, however, both are equally happy; Asian cultures are simply more subdued in their expressions. In addition, this method is based on single questions and physical behavior, both of which are not consistent from person to person (Gajewski, 2020). Second, it is impossible to rank groups by average happiness using survey data with a few available responses. These categories are intervals along a continuous distribution. When estimated using large numbers, the implied cumulative distribution function of these distributions will almost always cross when estimated using large sample amounts, denoting that the measurement is not accurate (Bond, 2014). 

Second, the consequences attributed to happiness are not necessarily related to life satisfaction. Using the previous example, Finland has one of the highest happiness ratings, while Zimbabwe and Botswana have two of the lowest ratings. In addition, Finland has a higher life expectancy than Zimbabwe and Botswana. While at a glance, this may seem like a higher level of happiness leads to a longer life, that is not necessarily the case. On a world wide scale, Finland’s healthcare system and effectiveness is ranked at number five, while Botswana and Zimbabwe are ranked at 141 and 122 respectively. It can be inferred that the longevity of people from happier countries is not due to their happiness, but rather their access to healthcare. 

Conclusion

Happiness is a subjective emotion, unique to each individual. There are many methods of measuring happiness, such as physical measures, direct questions, and observation of happiness indicators. However, these methods are imperfect and cannot be seen as objective. Physical measures cannot accurately encapsulate a person’s happiness because there are many things that cause physical reactions. Direct questions with a scale to rate happiness are not reliable for individuals because the way the question is asked has a big impact on the answer, and in large scale studies the CDFs almost always cross. Consequences of happiness cannot be trusted to gain an understanding of an individual’s happiness, either, because similarly to physical measures, there are many factors that cause the consequences that may or may not be attributed to happiness. This is very significant to research on happiness because it demonstrates that collecting samples and data will be very difficult due to the lack of a reliable form of measurement. Thus, a new, reliable way to measure happiness is needed. Thus, I conclude that while there are methods to measure happiness, these methods are not accurate and cannot be wholly trusted. If happiness can be measured, it can only be measured within.