Brittany White
Prof. Rob Frank
English 109
30 March 2009
Money Isn’t Everything:
The Correlation Between Money and Happiness
	The average citizen in the United States goes to work five days a week, eight hours a day, waiting until that Friday when he or she receives their paycheck. Many go to work to support a family and to make ends meet, and many times, that average worker wishes he made more money so he could have a better life for himself.  But if he actually did get that large raise he wanted, or got promoted to the CEO of the company, would he be any happier? Many people in this country think that money does indeed buy happiness. They work lengthy shifts at an undesirable job just because the pay is good. And when they get home late in the day, they are too exhausted to ask their spouses how their day was and too drained to tuck their children into bed. Yet, they still go back the next day, just to do it all over again. These people are under the impression that a high income can bring personal happiness, but as the research shows, money and happiness are largely un-correlated. 
	A person’s real income differs from a person’s relative income. A worker can be perfectly satisfied with his own income, but may become unhappy when he sees what others around him make. D’Amborosio, Conchita, and Frick concluded in their 2006 study that “relative deprivation” has a great impact on an individual’s evaluation of their own well-being. This German study took 24,000 individuals, all over 17 years of age, and followed them from 1990 to 2004. They calculated the participants' household income and then that of their neighbors and friends. The researchers then followed how the participants responded to certain questions regarding how they felt about themselves and their income. They were also asked to comment on how they felt about their peers' income. Overall, the research concluded that “a person’s happiness is all in what they see around them” (D’Amborosio, Conchita, and Frick 501). If a person who is already rich sees his peer and notices he has a greater income, the lower income worker will feel greatly dissatisfied with his life. This is especially true if he views himself as working just as hard as his competitor (D’Amborosio, Conchita, and Frick 498). This may be the reason why the worker then feels the need to “one-up” his neighbor or “beat-out” the competition to get the raise and earn the higher social status. According to Greene and Nelson, “status is important in determining the purchase of social goods.” Social goods would be defined as material objects a person would buy to earn a higher social status. With a higher relative income, a person may think he will have higher social status and be able to gain more friends or mates, ultimately leading to a happier lifestyle. But there is no evidence that having more money can attract more peers (Greene and Nelson 883). 
	Di Tilla, Haisken- De New, and MacCulloch found in their study that people adapt to their personal income and material goods. This certain study took 7,812 German people and followed them from 1984 to 2000, comparing the long term effects of materialism, income, and status. The researchers asked the participants how they felt about their work, especially during the time when they received a raise. Di Tilla, Haisken- De New and MacCulloch argue that if a person earns a raise at work, it is very satisfying at first, but after time, the worker starts to become just as displeased with his income as before he received it. He may see others around him making more but he is unable to propel himself high enough to earn the next raise, which causes frustration. (Di Tilla, Haisken- De New, and MacCulloch). The conclusion was that as a person may be earning more and more as the years pass, overall, his happiness level stays the same. In a study done by Roszkowski and Grable the same is shown to be true. Even though marketers promote that a consumer will be happier if they buy material goods, it is shown that these products do not have long term effects on the middle and upper class (Roszkowski and Grable 64). As they explain, “with each increase in income there is a progressively smaller return in happiness” (Roszkowski and Grable 64). 
	When a person is in a higher paying job, he is often working more hours and with more responsibility, resulting in less time for doing acts that would improve his own happiness. According to tabulations from the American Time Use Survey, people earning a higher income spend more time in such activities as commuting to and working at their job, doing compulsive behaviors, and even eating. Conversely, the lower income earner spent more time in leisure and “other” activities (American Time Use Survey). In a study done by Princeton University’s Kahneman, Krueger, Schkade, Schwarz, and Stone, blood pressure and self-reports of intensity in feelings were calculated from 374 workers during their entire workday. It was concluded that the correlation between personal income and happiness during the work day was at just .01 (Kahneman et al.). Income was, however, greatly associated with higher rankings of Anger/Hostility, Anxious/Tension, and Excitability (Kahneman et al.). Therefore, high income earners felt more intense negative emotions and greater arousal, but with almost no experienced happiness (Kahneman et al.) The high income earner’s blood pressure was also shown to be higher than the lower income earner (Kahneman et al.). Sometimes getting that raise is not worth all the stress that is associated with earning a higher income. 
	James Montier is a well-known global equity strategist who collected data from all over the world and published his findings on the psychology of true happiness. His first rule: “never equate money with happiness… since the long lasting benefits are essentially zero” (Montier). Montier advised what people should do to achieve a happier lifestyle. Some of these include exercise, meditate, devote time to close relationships, have sex, and look for a job you enjoy, just to name a few. Also in his research, he ranked four main contributors to happiness. Family life and friends came first, while satisfying work came in the middle, and income came last (Montier). Dr. Kent Swift is a professor in the College of Business Sciences at Zayed University and has published many articles on many different business topics. Swift, similar to Montier, states that “a happy person typically has many social confidants, and is successfully making progress toward valued goals.” In an published article entitled, “The Optimum Level of Well-Being”, professors, Sishi, Diener, and Lucas showed that the happiest individuals were earning moderate income, had strong ties in volunteer work, and strong political beliefs (Sishi, Diener, and Lucas). Also, contrary to the researcher’s hypothesis, the people most satisfied with their life did not have as much education or income as originally believed (Sishi, Diener, and Lucas). The same was shown in a report done by Robert Lane from Yale University. He explained that “The rich are no more likely to be happy than those with moderate incomes… For the majority of Americans, money, whatever else it does, does not bring happiness” (Lane 27). In addition, according to an article published by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences written by Robert H. Frank, if a person does have a high income, he should not buy material goods. Instead, he informs that he should spend their money wisely and on things that can be shared with others, like vacations for example. 
	Although the research has been clear that income is not related to happiness, this is only true for the upper, middle, and some of the lower class. Those living in poverty are the exception to these findings. A person living in poverty can benefit greatly from an increase in money. This poverty stricken person can spend his money on necessities like healthcare, shelter, and food. This may then lead to a rise in happiness because his basic needs are being met when before they were not (Lane 27). As Lane states, “Among the poor, money does buy happiness and a greater sense of well-being” (27). So, while some critics may say that all classes can benefit from being overly wealthy, only the poor seem to benefit from having more money. 
	The citizens of the United States are earning more and more as time goes on. But the average happiness of the country has not significantly changed. In fact, some may argue it has gotten worse (Speth). People are trying so hard to achieve the “American Dream” but that American Dream does not always have to be with a large income. There is so much in this world that could make a person happy. Obsessing over income and material goods puts a damper on a person’s own emotional stability and that of those around them. We should learn not to compete with our co-workers, but instead, praise them on a job well done and try to turn the competitor into a friend. As Swift suggests in his paper, instead of counting your money, count your friends, and that will tell how good your life is. Be thankful for all you have, and do something that makes you happy, because, in fact, money isn’t everything.  

Works Cited 
“American Time Use Survey.” United States Department of Labor.  27 Mar. 2009 <http://www.bls.gov/tus/#tables>.
D’Ambrosio, Conchita, and Joachim Frick. “ Income Satisfaction and Relative Deprivation: An Empirical Link.” Social Indicators Research 81.3 (2007): 497-520. ProQuest Research Library. ProQuest. Harford Community Coll., Bel Air, MD. 23 Feb. 2009 <http://proquest.umi.com/login>.
Frank, Robert H. “How to not buy happiness.” Daedalus 133.2 (Spring 2008): 69(11). Health Reference Center - Academic. Gale. Harford Community Coll., Bel Air, MD. 23 Feb. 2009 <http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itweb/?db=HRCA>.
Greene, Kenneth, and Phillip Nelson. “Is relative income of overriding importance for individuals?” International Journal of Social Economics 34.11 (2007): 883. ProQuest Research Library. ProQuest. Harford Community Coll., Bel Air, MD. 23 Feb. 2009 <http://proquest.umi.com/login>.
Kahneman, Daniel, et al. “Would You be Happier If You Were Richer?:A Focusing Illusion.” Princeton University Center for Economic Policy Studies. May 2006.  30 Mar. 2009 <http://www.princeton.edu/~ceps/workingpapers/125krueger.pdf>.
Lane, Robert. “Does money buy happiness: a new look at income and utility.” Current  (Feb. 1994): 27(5). Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Harford Community Coll., Bel Air, MD. 23 Feb. 2009 <http://infotrac.galegroup.com/itweb/?db=OVRC>.
Montier, James. “Global Equity Strategy: The psychology of happiness.” Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein.  27 Mar. 2009 <http://www.greenlightadvisor.com/documents/Montier_Happiness.pdf>.
Oishi, Sigehiro, Ed Diener, and Richard Lucas. “The Optimum Level of Well-Being. Can People Be Too Happy? .” Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2007.  3 Mar. 2009 <http://www.biopsychiatry.com/happiness/too-happy.pdf>.
Roszkowski, Michael J, and John Grable. “How Are Income and Net Worth Related to Happiness?” Journal of Financial Service Professionals 61.1 (2007): 64. ProQuest Platinum. ProQuest. Harford Community Coll., Bel Air, MD. 30 Mar. 2009 <http://proquest.umi.com/login>.
Speth, James Gustave. “Money Can’t Buy You Love, Or Happiness.” Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies. Spring 2008.  30 Mar. 2009 <http://environment.yale.edu/pubs/Money-Cant-Buy-You-Love/>.
Swift, Kent. “Financial Success and the Good Life: What have We Learned from Empirical Studies in Psychology?; Section: Philosophical Foundations.”  Journal of Business Ethics 75.2 (2007): 191(9). ProQuest Research Library. ProQuest. Harford Community Coll., Bel Air, MD. 23 Feb. 2009 <http://proquest.umi.com/login>.
Tella, Rafael Di, John Haisken-DeNew, and Robert MacCulloch. “Happiness adaptation to income and to status in an individual panel.” University of Notre Dame.  25 Mar. 2009 <http://www.nd.edu/~adutt/activities/documents/DiTellaAdaptation-July-10-06.pdf>.