Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer? A Focusing Illusion

• p. 3 Body text, last paragraph

  predictions offered by the entire group (including individuals whose reports were included in the actual mood column)

• p. 9 Table 1, footnote 2

  Actual (n=82, 221), Predicted (n=85, 87)

• p. 3 Last paragraph

  predictions offered by the entire group (including individuals whose reports were included in the

• p. 9 Table 1, footnote 2

  Supervision at Work: Actual (n=75, 237), Predicted (n=84, 84)

Only the authors can say what is right here.

Judge's note: Read page 3 and Table 1 footnote 2 on page 9. Predicted n is 83, 83; 85, 87; 84, 84; 83, 85, while the two actual groups for one variable sum to 303, 312 and 307 (and those are restricted to respondents whose preceding day was a workday). The predicted n also differs between the two groups of a pair (85 vs 87, 83 vs 85), so each prediction item was evidently answered by a subsample. The paper does not describe that design anywhere; 'entire group' may mean 'not restricted to people in that circumstance', so this is a wording ambiguity for the authors.

Second check: another model agreed

• p. 5 Body text, last paragraph

  data we collected from 745 women in Columbus, Ohio in May 2005

• p. 11 Table 3 notes

  n = 745, Columbus, Ohio DRM sample

• p. 12 Table 4 notes

  a DRM survey of 810 women in Columbus, Ohio in May 2005

• p. 12 Table 4 notes

  DRM survey of 810 women in Columbus, Ohio in May 2005

Only the authors can say what is right here.

Judge's note: Read page 5, the Table 3 note and the Table 4 note. Searched the whole text for an exclusion or complete-data rule: none is given. 745 is plausibly the subset with the variables needed for Table 3 (e.g. income) and 810 the full survey, but the text says the data were 'collected from 745 women'. Only the authors can say which figure describes what.

Second check: another model agreed

• p. 6 Body text, second paragraph

  between personal income and the average happiness rating during the day was just 0.01 (p=0.84)

• p. 6 Body text, second paragraph

  while family income was significantly positively correlated with ratings of Anger/Hostile

Only the authors can say what is right here.

Judge's note: Read page 6. The happiness correlation is given for personal income and the anger, anxiety and excitement correlations for family income; the summary sentence treats them as one measure and nothing in the text or notes 17-18 explains the switch. Could be a deliberate choice or a slip in one label.

Second check: another model agreed

• p. 7 Last paragraph

  with greater income tend to devote relatively more of their time to work, compulsory non-work

• p. 12 Table 4, Women, Compulsory column

  35.6%

• p. 7 discussion of Table 4

  compulsory non-work activities (such as shopping and childcare)

Judge's note: Read Table 4 on the page image. Men: 20.8%, 21.8%, 23.6% (rises). Women: 35.6%, 34.3%, 35.9% (falls then returns, top bracket 0.3 points above the bottom). The claim holds for work, active leisure and passive leisure in both sexes, and for compulsory activities only for men. 'Tend to' is hedged, so this is a mild overstatement.

Second check: another model agreed

• p. 2 First paragraph

  “Taken all together, would you say that you are very

• p. 10 Table 2 stub header

  "Taken all together, how would you say things are these days--would you say that you are very

Judge's note: Read both pages. Both are set in quotation marks as the question asked; the introduction omits 'how would you say things are these days--' with no ellipsis. The introduction is probably a deliberate shortening, so this is a minor consistency point.

Second check: none (judge only)

• p. 4 Body text, last paragraph

  with life as whole (assigned an integer value) in national samples typically range from 0.15 to

• p. 4 paragraph beginning 'The correlation between household income'

  in national samples typically range from 0.15 to 0.30

Judge's note: Read on the page 4 image; both slips are as printed. Page 2 writes 'life as a whole'.

Second check: none (judge only)

• p. 8 paragraph beginning 'Despite the weak relationship'

  because they over predict the increase in happiness

Judge's note: Read on the page 8 image; printed as two words. Normally written 'overpredict'; a spelling variant with no effect on meaning.

Second check: none (judge only)

• p. 9 Table 1, footnote 1

  “Now we would like to know overall how you felt

• p. 11 Table 3 notes

  “We would like to know

• p. 10 Table 2 notes

  Notes: . Sample size is 1,173 individuals.

Judge's note: Read the full page images for pages 9, 10 and 11. Both quoted questionnaire items have an opening curly quotation mark and no closing mark before the authors' description resumes ("Bad mood reported here is..." on page 9, "A parallel question was asked..." on page 11). On page 10 the note reads "Notes: ." followed by the sample-size sentence. All three are in the page images, so they are not extraction artefacts. Cosmetic only.

Second check: none (judge only)

• p. 13 Reference 8

  Well-being. The foundations of hedonic psychology

• p. 13 Reference 8

  (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY,

• p. 14 References 26 and 27

  (Russell-Sage, New York, 1999)

• p. 14 Reference 29

  (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1999)

Judge's note: Read the reference list on the page 13 and 14 images. Reference 8 punctuates the title with a full stop, while references 26, 27 and 29 use a colon. The publisher is "Russell Sage Foundation" in references 8 and 29 and the hyphenated "Russell-Sage" in references 26 and 27. The inconsistency is visible within the list itself. Cosmetic.

Second check: none (judge only)

• p. 14 Reference 26

  S. Frederick & G. Lowenstein

• p. 14 Reference 27

  B. Van Praag & P. Frijter

• p. 14

  S. Frederick & G. Lowenstein, in Well-being

Only the authors can say what is right here.

Judge's note: Rests on outside knowledge: that the authors of these two chapters in the Kahneman, Diener and Schwarz volume are George Loewenstein and Paul Frijters. The page 14 image shows "Lowenstein" and "Frijter" as quoted. The correct spellings cannot be checked from the files provided. Spelling only.

Second check: none (judge only)