Max Herke1, Katharina Rathmann2, Matthias Richter1. 1. Institute for Medical Sociology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany. 2. Department of Nursing and Health Science, Fulda University of Applied Sciences, Fulda, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subjective well-being (SWB) is an important indicator of quality of life, but prior research mostly analyzed adolescents' subjective well-being in cross-sectional studies. There is a lack of studies examining changes in subjective well-being throughout adolescence using longitudinal panel data. This study examined trajectories of subjective well-being of adolescents in Germany throughout secondary education and differences by socioeconomic position, gender and family structure. METHODS: We use the German National Educational Panel Study and combine data from annual survey waves of two of its cohorts. These were first surveyed in 2010 and cover 5th to 10th and 9th to 12th grade level. Using growth curve modelling based on multilevel models, differences in levels and trajectories of subjective well-being overall and differentiated by school type, parental education, household income, gender and family structure were identified. The analyses include 34 504 observations of 12 564 students. RESULTS: Subjective well-being decreased from 5th to 12th grade. Students attending lower track schools showed lower subjective well-being, but also a lesser decrease over time. Students living in low-income households or in single-parent or step-families showed lower subjective well-being. Female students showed higher subjective well-being than males in 5th grade, but also a higher decrease over time, leading to lower subjective well-being than males by 12th grade. CONCLUSION: This study provides a comprehensive picture of subjective well-being throughout secondary education. Adolescents' subjective well-being is linked to social factors regarding family and living conditions as well as school features. Overall, disadvantaged adolescents experience longer periods of lower subjective well-being, thus accumulating the effects of worse psychosocial health opportunities over time.
BACKGROUND: Subjective well-being (SWB) is an important indicator of quality of life, but prior research mostly analyzed adolescents' subjective well-being in cross-sectional studies. There is a lack of studies examining changes in subjective well-being throughout adolescence using longitudinal panel data. This study examined trajectories of subjective well-being of adolescents in Germany throughout secondary education and differences by socioeconomic position, gender and family structure. METHODS: We use the German National Educational Panel Study and combine data from annual survey waves of two of its cohorts. These were first surveyed in 2010 and cover 5th to 10th and 9th to 12th grade level. Using growth curve modelling based on multilevel models, differences in levels and trajectories of subjective well-being overall and differentiated by school type, parental education, household income, gender and family structure were identified. The analyses include 34 504 observations of 12 564 students. RESULTS: Subjective well-being decreased from 5th to 12th grade. Students attending lower track schools showed lower subjective well-being, but also a lesser decrease over time. Students living in low-income households or in single-parent or step-families showed lower subjective well-being. Female students showed higher subjective well-being than males in 5th grade, but also a higher decrease over time, leading to lower subjective well-being than males by 12th grade. CONCLUSION: This study provides a comprehensive picture of subjective well-being throughout secondary education. Adolescents' subjective well-being is linked to social factors regarding family and living conditions as well as school features. Overall, disadvantaged adolescents experience longer periods of lower subjective well-being, thus accumulating the effects of worse psychosocial health opportunities over time.
Authors: Mats Granlund; Christine Imms; Gillian King; Anna Karin Andersson; Lilly Augustine; Rob Brooks; Henrik Danielsson; Jennifer Gothilander; Magnus Ivarsson; Lars-Olov Lundqvist; Frida Lygnegård; Lena Almqvist Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-09 Impact factor: 3.390