The Relationship of Sex, Year Level, and Family Relationship on Life Satisfaction

In partial fulfillment of the requirements in Behavioral Statistics

September 2016
 Introduction

Life satisfaction is a complex term and is sometimes used interchangeably with the emotion

of happiness, but they are two separate concepts. Life satisfaction is defined as one’s evaluation

of life as a whole, whereas happiness is in-the-moment experience of feelings and emotions.

Measuring feelings can be very subjective, but is nonetheless a useful complement to more

objective data when comparing quality of life. Subjective data can provide a personal evaluation

of an individual’s happiness in the bigger picture. Surveys, in particular, are used to measure life

satisfaction and happiness. To measure their life satisfaction, the researcher used Satisfaction With

Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmnos, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). The SWLS was developed as a

measure of the judgmental component of subjective well-being (SWB). Two studies designed to

validate further the SWLS are reported. Peer reports, a memory measure, and clinical ratings are

used as external criteria for validation. Evidence for the reliability and predictive validity of the

SWLS is presented, and its performance is compared to other related scales. The SWLS is shown

to be a valid and reliable measure of life satisfaction, suited for use with a wide range of age groups

and applications, which makes possible the savings of interview time and resources compared to

many measures of life satisfaction.

In addition, the high convergence of self- and peer-reported measures of subjective well-

being and life satisfaction provide strong evidence that subjective well-being is a relatively global

and stable phenomenon, not simply a momentary judgment based on fleeting influences.
Research Questions

This research aims to know the life satisfaction of Saint Mary’s University college

students. Specifically this study aims to answer the following questions.

1. Is there a significant difference in life satisfaction for males and females?

2. Is there a significant difference in life satisfaction when grouped by year level?

3. Is there a correlation between life satisfaction and family relationship?

Alternative Hypothesis

1. There is no significant difference in life satisfaction for males and females.

2. There is no significant difference in life satisfaction when grouped by year level.

3. There is a correlation between life satisfaction and family relationship.

Research Hypothesis

1. There is a significant difference in life satisfaction for males and females.

2. There is a significant difference in life satisfaction when grouped by year level.

3. There is a correlation between life satisfaction and family relationship.

Research Framework

Sex
4. o Male
5. o Female
Life satisfaction
6.
o Extremely satisfied
Year
7. Level
nd o Satisfied
8. o 2 Year o Slightly satisfied
rd
9. o 3 Year o Neutral
th
10.o 4 Year o Slightly dissatisfied
11. o Dissatisfied
Family Relationship
Distant 1—2—3—4—5—6 Close o Extremely dissatisfied
 METHOD

Research Design

The researcher used a descriptive-comparative and descriptive-correlational to investigate

the life satisfaction of Marian students.

Participants

The respondents consisted of forty (40) students who were purposively selected based on

their sex (20 males, 20 females), year level (14 second year students, 14 third year students, 12

fourth year students) and economic status (15 are those who belong to high income family, 13 are

those who belong to average income family and 12 are those who belong to low income family).

Instrument

The research instrument used in the study is the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS;

Diener, Emmnos, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985), it is a 5-item scale designed to measure global

cognitive judgments of one’s life satisfaction. Participants indicated how much they agree or

disagree with each of the 5 items using a 7-point scale that ranges from 7 strongly agree to 1

strongly disagree. The instrument also asked for demographics such sex, year level, course, and

economic status. Informed consent form was also included in the questionnaire (see Appendix A).
Procedure
Step 1: The researcher roamed around SMU Campus to look purposively for the said

participants.

Step 2: The researcher asked them if they have time to participate in the study, if they said

yes the researcher will give them a copy of the questionnaire for them to answer.

Step3: After answering the researcher collected the questionnaire and thanked them for

participating.

Statistics

The data was gathered, tabulated, analyzed and interpreted to determine the life satisfaction

of Marian students according to respondents profile variables. The researcher used various

statistical test such as t-test, one-way ANOVA, and correlation. Statistical Package for Social

Science (SPSS) version 21 was the main software in doing so.

 Results

Section 1: Profile of the respondents

Table 1. Tabulation of respondent’s sex.

Sex

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Male 20 50.0 50.0 50.0

Valid Female 20 50.0 50.0 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Table 1 shows that there is an equal frequency of males and females in the total of forty
participants.

Table 2. Tabulation of respondent’s year level.

Year Level

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

2nd year 14 35.0 35.0 35.0

3rd Year 14 35.0 35.0 70.0

Valid
4th Year 12 30.0 30.0 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Table 2 shows that there’s an equal frequency of 2nd year students and 3rd years third year

students, while 4th year students are lower in frequency by two.

Table 3. Respondent’s tabulation according to level of life satisfaction.

Life Satisfaction

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Extremely Satisfied 4 10.0 10.0 10.0

Satisfied 17 42.5 42.5 52.5

Slightly Satisfied 12 30.0 30.0 82.5

Neutral 1 2.5 2.5 85.0

Valid
Slightly Dissatisfied 4 10.0 10.0 95.0

Dissatisfied 1 2.5 2.5 97.5

Extremely Dissatisfied 1 2.5 2.5 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0
 Table 3 shows the frequency of respondent’s level of life satisfaction by group. Having

satisfied as the highest. While neutral, dissatisfied, and extremely dissatisfied as the lowest in

frequency.

Table 4. Tabulation of respondent’s economic status.

Economic Status

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

High Income 15 37.5 37.5 37.5

Average Income 13 32.5 32.5 70.0

Valid
Low Income 12 30.0 30.0 100.0

Total 40 100.0 100.0

Table 4 shows the number of respondents who belong to different economic class, namely

high income (whose family has sufficient income and can save money) as the highest in frequency,

average income (whose family has sufficient income but can hardly save money) as the second

highest, and low income (family has little income which is sometimes insufficient) as the lowest

in frequency.

Section 2: Difference in life satisfaction for males and females.

Table 5. Means and SD of life satisfaction for males and females.

Sex N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

Male 20 24.2000 5.05340 1.12997

LifeSatScore
Female 20 24.7000 6.76757 1.51327
The mean and standard deviation for males as shown in the table are M=24.20, SD=5.05,

and for females M=24.700, SD=6.77 which are slightly higher than males.
Preliminary analysis
Figure 1. Histogram for total Life Satisfaction score.

Figure 1 shows that the scores are reasonably normally distributed, with most scores

occurring in the center, tapering out towards the extremes.

Table 6. Test of normality for life satisfaction and respondent’s sex.

Tests of Normality

Sex Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Male .118 20 .200* .952 20 .406

LifeSatScore
Female .176 20 .105 .915 20 .079
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Table 6 shows the normality of the distribution of scores of life satisfaction and sex of the

respondents. The significance value given in the Shapiro-Wilk for males is .41 and for females is

.08 which is both higher than the Sig. value of .05, suggesting that there is no violation of the

assumption of normality.
Table 7. Test of homogeneity of variances for life satisfaction and respondent’s sex.
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

F Sig.

Equal variances assumed 2.142 .151

LifeSatScore
Equal variances not assumed
Table 7 shows the significance value for Levene's Test for Equality of Variances, the sig.

given is .15. As this is greater than .05, which suggest that the assumption of homogeneity of

variance is not violated.

The assumption of normality and homogeneity have not been violated which means it is

good to use the parametric test, which is Independents-Samples t-test to compare the means of life

satisfaction for males and females.

Table 8. Independents samples t-test of life satisfaction total scores by respondent’s sex.

Group Statistics

Sex N Mean Std. Std. Error t df Sig. (2-

Deviation Mean tailed)

20 24.2000 5.05340 1.12997

Male
LifeSatScore -.265 38 .793

Female 20 24.7000 6.76757 1.51327

An independent samples t-test was conducted to compare the life satisfaction scores for

males and females. Preliminary analyses were performed to ensure no violation of the assumptions

of normality and homogeneity. There was no significant difference in scores for males (M=24.20,

SD 5.05), and females [M=24.70, SD=6.77; t(38)= -.27, p=.79]. The magnitude of differences in

the means is very small (eta squared=-0.03)

Section 3: Difference in life satisfaction when grouped by year level.
Table 9. Means and SD of life satisfaction by year level.
Descriptives
LifeSatScore

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval for Minimum Maximum
Mean

Lower Bound Upper Bound

2nd year 14 25.9286 3.42983 .91666 23.9482 27.9089 21.00 32.00

3rd Year 14 22.6429 7.54073 2.01535 18.2890 26.9967 9.00 35.00
4th Year 12 24.8333 5.93653 1.71373 21.0614 28.6052 15.00 33.00
Total 40 24.4500 5.90067 .93298 22.5629 26.3371 9.00 35.00
The mean and standard deviation for second year students as shown in the table are

M=25.93, SD=3.43, which is the highest among the three variables. For third year students

M=22.64, SD=7.54, and for fourth year students M=24.83, SD=5.94.

Preliminary analysis

Table 10. Test of normality for life satisfaction and respondent’s year level.
Tests of Normality

Year Level Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

2nd year .161 14 .200* .934 14 .344

LifeSatScore 3rd Year .194 14 .160 .953 14 .607

4th Year .241 12 .053 .916 12 .258

*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.

a. Lilliefors Significance Correction

Table 10 shows the normality of the distribution of scores. The significance value given in

the Shapiro-Wilk for 2nd year is .34, for 3rd year is .61 and for 4th year is .26 which is all higher

than the Sig. value of .05, suggesting that there is no violation of the assumption of normality.
Table 11. Test of homogeneity for life satisfaction and respondent’s year level.
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
LifeSatScore

Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

4.626 2 37 .016

Table 11 shows the significance value for Levene's test for equality of variances, the

significance value given is .02. It is smaller than .05, which suggest that the assumption of

homogeneity of variance have been violated.

Because the assumption of homogeneity of variance was violated, instead of using the

parametric test (One-Way ANOVA) the researcher used the non-parametric test which is Kruskall

Wallis to compare the means of the three groups (2nd years, 3rd years, and 4th years).

Table 12. Kruskal-Wallis Test for Life Satisfaction and respondent’s Year Level.
Test Statisticsa,b

LifeSatScore

Chi-Square 1.559
df 2
Asymp. Sig. .459

a. Kruskal Wallis Test

b. Grouping Variable: Year Level

Kruskal-Wallis Test was conducted to compare the life satisfaction scores for second year

students, third year students and fourth year students. There was no significant difference in scores

by year level (p=.46).

Section 4: Correlation of Family Relationship and Life Satisfaction.
Table 13. Means and SD of family relationship and total life satisfaction scores.

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Family Relationship 4.7000 1.18105 40

LifeSatScore 24.4500 5.90067 40
The mean and SD of family relationship as shown in the table is M=4.70, SD=1.18 and

for life satisfaction score is M=24.45, SD=5.90.

Figure 2. Scatterplot for level of life satisfaction and family.

There is no indication of a curvilinear relationship, so it would be appropriate to calculate

a Pearson product-moment correlation for these two variables.

Table 14. Person product-moment correlation for family relationship and life satisfaction.

Correlations

Family Relationship LifeSatScore

Pearson Correlation 1 .693**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Family Relationship
Sum of Squares and Cross-products 54.400 188.400
Covariance 1.395 4.831
 N 40 40
Pearson Correlation .693** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

LifeSatScore Sum of Squares and Cross-products 188.400 1357.900

Covariance 4.831 34.818

N 40 40

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The relationship between family relationship and life satisfaction (as measured by the

SWLS) was investigated using the Person product-moment correlation. Preliminary analyses were

performed to ensure no violation of normality, linearity and homoscedasticity. There was a large,

positive correlation between the two variables [r=.69, n=40,p>.05], Marian students who have

closer family relationship have higher life satisfaction. Account of variance explained .48.

Conclusion

1. There was no significant difference in the level of life satisfaction for male and female.

2. There was no significant difference in in the level of life satisfaction among second

year, third year and fourth year students.

3. There is a correlation between family relationship and level of life satisfaction.

Recommendations
For the future researcher/s:
1. A larger number of respondents should be considered.

2. Make sure to explain to the participants on how to answer the questionnaire correctly.

3. Before collecting the research instrument, the researcher should make sure that all of

the questions are answered.

 Appendix A
Informed Consent Form and Instrument
Hello,

You are invited to participate in a study about life satisfaction. I hope to learn the level of satisfaction
among students. You were selected as a possible participant in this study.

Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you will
remain confidential and will not be disclosed. If you decide to participate, you are free to discontinue
participation at any time without prejudice. Your return of this survey is implied consent. If you have any
questions, please ask. Thank you for your time.

Signature over printed name

Instructions: Below are five statements that you may agree or disagree with. Using the 1 - 7 scale
below, indicate your agreement with each item by placing the appropriate number on the line
preceding that item. Please be open and honest in your responses.

Name: ______________________ Sex: ____ Course: _________Year Level __2nd __3rd __4 th

Economic Status __ My family has sufficient income and can save money

__ My family has sufficient income but can hardly save money

__ My family has little income which is sometimes insufficient

7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Strongly agree Agree Slightly agree Neither Slightly disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
agree

nor disagree
____1. In most ways my life is close to my ideal.

____2. The conditions of my life are excellent.

____3. I am satisfied with my life.

____4. So far I have gotten the important things I want in life.

____5. If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing.

Family Relationship (Please encircle)

Distant 1 --- 2 --- 3 --- 4 --- 5 --- 6 Close

 Appendix B
SPSS Variable and Data View
Appendix C
SPSS Output
References

Chime, C. (2015). Positive Psychology. Retrieved from

https://positivepsychologyprogram.com/life- satisfaction/

Pavot, W. G., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further validation of the

Satisfaction with Life Scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well- being

measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 149-161.

Pavot, W. G., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Psychological

Assessment, 5, 164-172.