Whilst there is clearly some value in SWB metrics, Bond and Lang’s (2019) critique means there is value in identifying other easy-to-measure ways of establishing people’s wellbeing. In addition, the way unhappiness rises then falls in age tracks the same hump shape in anti-depressant medication, providing some further validation of SWB (Blanchflower and Oswald 2016, Blanchflower and Graham 2021, Blanchflower and Bryson 2021a). 2013 for a review), providing some validation of SWB as a metric capturing individual wellbeing. 2006), and improved cardiovascular health (see De Neve et al. Yet, SWB metrics have been causally linked to longevity (Diener and Chan 2011), wound healing (Christian et al. (2021), who argue the Bond and Lang critique does not hold if one focuses on ranking median happiness as opposed to mean happiness. This position has in turn been challenged by Chen et al. SWB has since been treated as a means of measuring individuals’ utility (Frey and Stutzer 2002) and has even been identified as a major goal of public policy (Layard 2005).īut the value of SWB data has been questioned recently by economists who argue that key empirical regularities in the wellbeing literature cannot be replicated using non-parametric identification techniques due to assumptions regarding the underlying functional form of the ordered responses which are usually elicited in survey questions about SWB (Bond and Lang 2019). For the first time, economists became interested in the potential that SWB might have in predicting economic behaviour. That changed when, in 1978, Richard Freeman showed that job satisfaction was a strong predictor of quits (Freeman 1978). For decades, economists eschewed the study of subjective wellbeing (SWB) and were dismissive of endeavours to understand its correlates or use wellbeing metrics in economic analysis.