Short reportLife satisfaction and age: Dealing with underidentification in age-period-cohort models
Highlights
► The widely documented U shaped relationship between life satisfaction and age depends on untestable assumptions. ► We exactly identify the assumptions needed to support this finding. ► These assumptions are: a negative linear time trend and the absence of a linear trend across birth cohorts. ► The widely documented U shaped relationship between life satisfaction and age should not be taken for a fact.
Introduction
An increasing body of literature documents for the USA and most European countries a U shaped relationship between life satisfaction and age [e.g., Clark, 2007, Blanchflower and Oswald, 2008 and Stone, Schwartz, Broderick, and Deaton (2010) among many others]. Life satisfaction is found to decrease to midlife and to increase subsequently towards retirement. This result is suggestive, because the elderly are generally less wealthy and less healthy than the middle aged.
Studying the relationship between life satisfaction and age is interesting in its own right, but it is of additional interest to economists. A baseline life cycle model predicts that consumption does not decrease after retirement. People correctly anticipate a drop in income upon retirement and would save enough to maintain a constant level of consumption. It is often observed however that consumption drops right after retirement, which suggests that people do not save enough [see e.g., Banks et al. (1998)]. A U shaped relationship between life satisfaction and age means that the drop in consumption is not accompanied by a drop in well-being. Instead, the evidence indicates that people become more satisfied when they retire. Maybe, the retirement – consumption puzzle is not much of a puzzle after all and people should have saved even less?
Many studies finding a U shaped relationship between life satisfaction and age use panel data and try to take into account age, period/time and cohort effects at the same time. These studies face the problem that it is in principle impossible to uniquely identify age, period and cohort effects from longitudinal data, without imposing arbitrary restrictions on the age, time and/or cohort profiles. An identification problem arises due to the equality year of birth + age = calender year. This identification problem has been a topic of debate in social science from the 1970s onwards [see for example Hall, 1971, Mason et al., 1973, Heckman and Robb, 1985, Deaton and Paxson, 1994, Attanasio, 1998 and McKenzie (2006). See also, e.g., Ferrer-i Carbonell and Frijters, 2004, Wunder et al., 2009 and Glenn (2009) for a discussion of the problem within the context of the relationship between life satisfaction and age]. Intuitively, it is impossible to observe the life satisfaction of a single person or cohort with the same age at two different points in time to isolate the time effect. Similarly, it is not possible to observe a single person or cohort with different ages at a single point in time to isolate the age effect.
It is important however to consider cohort (generation) and time effects when studying the relationship between satisfaction and age. In a cross section of households a U shape in age may be due to cohort effects that are not accounted for. In other words, the old in a cross section may be more satisfied than the middle aged, not because they are old, but because they belong to cohorts that have lived through rougher times (WWII for example) and have adjusted their point of reference. The availability of panel data allows to account for differences across cohorts by including cohort effects (or fixed effects, henceforth FE). Modeling cohort or fixed effects however does not solve the identification problem. The empirical strategy would immediately confound age and time effects, which was not the case in a cross section [see Ferrer-i Carbonell and Frijters (2004) for a discussion]. Time effects arise when a population as a whole becomes more or less satisfied. Economic growth or improvements in health care are likely to benefit all.
The simultaneous identification of age, period and cohort effects can be reached by imposing restrictions on either one of the three profiles. By doing so a second issue becomes important: how do imposing different assumptions matter for final inferences about the age profile? In this paper we show that imposing slightly different identifying assumptions has far reaching consequences on the substantive results. This point has been raised previously by e.g., Wunder et al. (2009), however, they subsequently place restrictions on the model themselves by modeling cohort effects with substantive variables, such as life expectancy of the birth cohort. Frijters and Beatton (2008) also demonstrate the sensitivity of the results to alternative identifying assumptions.
In this paper we take a different route. Instead of solving the identification problem, we report what can be identified, and hence what can be concluded from the data, without making assumptions. It has been shown that age, time and cohort profiles can be fully identified in deviation from a linear trend in age, time and year of birth respectively, whereas only two (out of three) of the respective linear trends (age, time, cohort) can be identified [see Heckman and Robb (1985) and McKenzie (2006) for example]. Consequently, without imposing arbitrary restrictions on the age, time and/or cohort profiles it is possible to test whether life satisfaction data is consistent with a U shape in age.
Using data from the German Socio Economic Panel (henceforth GSOEP) we find that life satisfaction is indeed consistent with a U shape over most of the life cycle. Like Wunder et al. (2009) and Gwozdz and Sousa-Poza (2010) we also observe an additional decrease in life satisfaction towards very old age. Whereas we find that the age profile is mainly U shaped around a linear trend in age, the linear trend itself cannot be uniquely inferred from the data. This has important implications. For example, we show that the data is also consistent with a generally negative relationship between life satisfaction in age.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the fact that age profiles are not identified without imposing assumptions on the cohort and time profiles. Furthermore, it shows how sensitive the age profiles are to making different kinds of assumptions. In Section 3 we discuss which elements of the age, cohort and time profiles can be identified without making assumptions. Section 4 discusses the GSOEP data and our empirical results. Finally, Section 5 concludes.
Section snippets
Cohort, year and age effects: fragile inference
In this paper we follow the recent literature and only consider the case where cohort, time and age effects are additive. The simplest additive model is the linear:where t denotes calendar year (), ait is age (in years) of individual i at year t (), and ci is year of birth of individual i ().1
Due to the exact collinearity between these three
Normalization and identification
McKenzie (2006), for example, shows that the “second differences” in age, period, and cohort effects can be identified “without any normalization restriction, providing information on the shape of the age, cohort and time effect profiles” [see also e.g., Heckman and Robb (1985) and Attanasio (1998) and Ferrer-i Carbonell and Frijters (2004)]. Complete knowledge of the second differences (or for the continuous case, the second derivatives) means complete knowledge of the shape of the age, cohort
Data and results
For estimating parameters we use data from the German Socio Economic Panel (GSOEP). GSOEP collects data on mostly labor related issues. Moreover, it contains satisfaction data on a variety of topics. Our data set covers the period 1986–2007. For the analysis a number of data selections has been applied. First, we only consider household heads and only those living in former Western Germany. Second, we exclude households of which the head was younger than 22 years, or older than 80. The excluded
Conclusions
This paper criticizes a literature that claims to find a U shape of life satisfaction over age. Such age profiles cannot be identified without making arbitrary assumptions about the existence and the strength of linear trends in age, time and year of birth. In this paper we instead report what can be identified without making such assumptions. Using data from the GSOEP we show that the data is indeed consistent with a U shape in age over most of the life cycle. However, we show that the data is
References (18)
- et al.
Is well-being u-shaped over the life cycle?
Social Science & Medicine
(2008) Cohort analysis of saving behavior by u.s. households
The Journal of Human Resources
(1998)- et al.
Is there a retirement-savings puzzle?
American Economic Review
(1998, Sep) - Clark, A. (2007). Born to be mild? cohort effects don’t (fully) explain why well-being is u-shaped in age....
- et al.
Studies in the Economics of aging, Chapter saving, growth, and aging in Taiwan
(1994) Nations and households in economic growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz, Chapter does Economic growth Improve the Human lot? Some empirical evidence
(1974)- et al.
How important is methodology for the estimates of the determinants of happiness?
The Economic Journal
(2004) - et al.
The mystery of the u-shaped relationship between happiness and age
(2008) Is the apparent u-shape of well-being over the life course a result of inappropriate use of control variables? a commentary on blanchflower and oswald
Social Science and Medicine
(2009)
Cited by (54)
The impact of high temperatures on performance in work-related activities
2024, Labour EconomicsAge moderates the effect of work-family conflict on life satisfaction among Chinese female employees: A propensity score matching method
2022, Personality and Individual DifferencesCitation Excerpt :Therefore, we aimed to reveal whether there is an actual association between work-family conflict and life satisfaction of Chinese female employees. Previous studies found that age is associated with life satisfaction (de Ree & Alessie, 2011; Huang et al., 2018). Since the source of work-family conflict and social connection may change because of the life course transitions (Hsu et al., 2016), the effect is hypothesized to differ among different age cohorts.
Are the negative effects of social networking a privilege of the rich? Social network usage and life satisfaction across European countries
2021, Computers in Human Behavior ReportsCitation Excerpt :A binary indicator of unemployment where 1 indicates unemployed and 0 indicates not unemployed is also used as employment status has been shown to influence levels of life satisfaction previous studies which examined life satisfaction and measurements of subjective well-being (Chen & Hou, 2019; Frasquilho, de Matos, Neville, Gaspar, & de Almeida, 2016; Shen & Kogan, 2020). Given that there is an observed relationship between age and levels of satisfaction and well-being (Adámek, 2018; An et al., 2020; De Ree & Alessie, 2011), an ordered age variable which increases in orders of decades, i.e., 20s, 30s, and so on, is used to control for the age of a respondent. Religious belief is frequently proven to be one of the most influential factors in determining life satisfaction in empirical studies (Desmond, Kraus, & Dugan, 2018; Krause & Ironson, 2019; Ngamaba & Soni, 2018); and as a result, this paper’s estimation uses a binary indicator to control for religious belief where 1 indicates the individual is religious and 0 indicates the individual is not religious.