Abstract
In a study of the relation between well-being and gene expression, Fredrickson et al. (2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 110 (33), 13684–13689) concluded that hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being have similar affective correlates but different gene transcriptional correlates in human immune cells. This comment addresses four statistical problems in Fredrickson et al.’s (2013) analyses. First, an idiosyncratic two-factor scoring rather than the documented and well-validated three-factor scoring was used for the instrument assessing well-being. Second, the analyses relating hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being to affect did not include the same variables as the analyses relating these two well-being variables to gene expression, invalidating any comparison between them. Third, hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being were highly correlated, resulting in untheorized and unrecognized suppression effects that accounted for their supposed differential relations with gene expression. Fourth, the method of computing p values for the one-sample t tests discarded information and violated the assumption of independence for those tests. These problems cast considerable doubt on the validity of Fredrickson et al.’s (2013) conclusions.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Nickerson, C. A. (2017). No evidence for differential relations of hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being to gene expression: A comment on statistical problems in fredrickson et al. (2013). Collabra: Psychology, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.81
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.