alt Hacker NewsThe World Happiness Report is beset with methodological problems
Comments
I have lived in Finland for the past four years, having emigrated from the US like the other poster here, and the WHR is a common punching bag topic amongst locals here.
The odd thing however is that when I ask them whether they think the average Finn is happy, they say absolutely not, but when I ask them whether they themselves are happy, most of the time I get a "oh this place is actually pretty great for weirdos like me, I just mean like, normal people would hate it here". But that's the thing: No one normal chooses to live in Finland!
As a US person, I have lived in Finland for 3 years, and I can assure you that the Finns are the most content people you can imagine! They can go months without talking to anyone and still consider themselves "happy", but the correct word in English is "content".
That report is correct, it just they advertise with the wrong word in the headline, I guess because it is more click-bate title than having it as "The most content country"
The only problem the author points out is that he doesn't like the Cantril Ladder question.
I get it if you feel like that question falls short of representing your own personal concept of happiness, but that question is the standard in positive psychology research for measuring self reported subjective well being, and hardly enough to say the report is "beset with methodological problems".
> “Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from zero at the bottom to ten at the top. Suppose we say that the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. If the top step is 10 and the bottom step is 0, on which step of the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time?”
My immediate problem with this is the lower bound of responses in a given country would be determined by your perception of the safety nets available to you. Someone in a Scandinavian country where there are virtually no unsheltered homeless people probably doesn't index their zero to "dying of exposure on the sidewalk due to untreated mental illness," while an American who sees that regularly would.
>At a minimum, you would expect the happiest countries in the world to have some of the lowest incidences of adverse mental health outcomes. But it turns out that the residents of the same Scandinavian countries that the press dutifully celebrates for their supposed happiness are especially likely to take antidepressants or even to commit suicide.
"Ecological fallacy! Ecological fallacy!," I screamed, flapping my arms pointlessly at my laptop.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_fallacy#Individual_...
I've just had this topic with friends. How can finland and the nordics be further up than, say, spain? Have they ever been? Sure, materialistic safety is better up there. But the way of living, at least in my experience, is way higher. Look at suicide rates and alcoholism and such.
I'll spoil it: - Finland 38 - Norway 71 - Spain 137
(fun fact: USA is 31)
ranked by suicide. If you visit it, and the vibes and feelings you have don't match the statistics, the statistics are shit I'd say. And maybe cities and rural areas destroy this statistic. But what do I know (but the article agrees with me)
The Substack post takes a rather childish approach by confusing happiness with smiling and laughter.
Personal safety, good health, financial stability, access to education, job security, low stress, and strong family and social ties do not necessarily make people smile or laugh. They create a sense of contentment. That is precisely where Scandinavian countries excel.
As a Swede, I've always been confused by these results. The self image of Swedes is that we're fairly miserable on average, and don't know how to enjoy life as much as some people in warmer climates.
That said, note that both things mentioned in here will raise average happiness:
> But it turns out that the residents of the same Scandinavian countries that the press dutifully celebrates for their supposed happiness are especially likely to take antidepressants or even to commit suicide.
A Finn here. And just as many other finns, I'm confused to why Finland ranks at the top. Yet, this seems like a case of someone looking to disprove a theory and thus finds the arguments. For example; Health metrics isn't a good measure, considering that Scandinavia has free health care, and this leads to more cases of mental health issues are recorded. Suicides aren't a great metric either, considering that Swedes and Finns have fairly high level of access to guns. I do agree that happiness is a term that is difficult to define, and that "happiness" is a bit misleading. "Content" is a better description.
Also, I think it's easy to misunderstand the Finns from the surface of us. We don't exhibit happiness, and we don't express happiness in a way that is easily observed. Finland ranks at the top of trust in other people, and being one of the least corrupt countries in the world. Those two metrics are a hint into how we Finns relate to other people. Also, it's difficult to get to know Finns, and for this reason it's difficult for outsiders to understand the Finns and the mentality.
On the anecdotal side, earlier this year I solo-traveled the US for 4 weeks, and out of those I got into deeper conversations, I was struck by how sad people were. That made me more convinced that I live a very happy life, in a happy place.
Edit: Some references: Weapons per capita: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g... Corruption index: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2024 Trust in others: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-where-people-trust-e...
There are no material conditions that would convince me to live in a cold, dark and culturally introverted place. Anecdotally, my tropical peers agree with this opinion. Seasonal affective disorder plays an outsized role in my ability to like a place. On the flip side, I've heard many people describe living in warm & humid weather as torture.
My point is, aggregating factors for happiness to find the best country is like aggregating people's favorite colors to find the best color. Each individual's needs and circumstances are unique, and what will make them happy will vary widely as those needs and circumstances vary.
Some interesting (suspect?) findings from the quoted 2023 paper: (2008 - 2017 data)
* Somaliland had the 4th least worries
* Russians were the 7th least angry
* Chinese were the 8th best rested
* Icelanders did great on every metric, but felt very tired (rank 190)
* Venezuelans smiled the 12th most (Panama, Paraguay, Costa Rica did even better)
* Laotians smile the 3rd most, but are also among the angriest (202) !!?
Same issue I have... The Nordic countries have high rates of alcoholism and depression (partly due to low sunlight in winter). They do or did have some things right, but it is questionable whether those still exist. Why are they continually claimed as happy?
> At a minimum, you would expect the happiest countries in the world to have some of the lowest incidences of adverse mental health outcomes. But it turns out that the residents of the same Scandinavian countries that the press dutifully celebrates for their supposed happiness are especially likely to take antidepressants or even to commit suicide.
Exactly. WHR is a wonderful tool to study how policy institutes and media work together to build a narrative over the years.
> “Please imagine a ladder with steps numbered from zero at the bottom to ten at the top. Suppose we say that the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you. If the top step is 10 and the bottom step is 0, on which step of the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time?”
One issue identified in the article that in some countries that really isn't taken to mean happiness, it's taken to mean "wealth". My take is simple that someone locked in a cage for the rest of their life without a chance to escape can still confidently put a 10 down. The cage may very well be golden, so it doesn't say much about their absolute happiness or suffering so to speak. Another situation is a person who sees more achievable opportunity - "if I can do x, y, z, I'll be higher on the ladder". Then they'd report themselves low, because they see a path to reach higher. But in the report they'll just look like the saddest person ever.
There is an old saying that you are as happy as you choose to be. While some people have experienced very challenging circumstances and have trouble feeling happy; most miserable people are that way because they let little things get in the way of their happiness.
There are rich, healthy, popular people who feel awful. They might feel like a failure because they are constantly comparing themselves with more successful people (or at least believe all the wonderful posts on social media). They might immerse themselves in negative thoughts about the world and their own immediate surroundings.
But if you are always counting your blessings and trying to serve people who are less fortunate; you might realize that 'It's a Wonderful Life'.
This comprehensive response/rebuttal [1] buried in the article’s comments, by one of the authors of the World Happiness Report, is worth reading. One of the most interesting points is how subjective well-being indicators predict people’s voting behavior: “…in 2016 US presidential elections, subjective well-being indicators - especially Cantril Ladder now and expected Cantril Ladder in five years - measured on a county level predicted voting for Trump better than any county-level economic indicator.” The unhappier people were, the more likely they voted for Trump.
Also, it links to a report on why Nordic countries tend to perform so well on life evaluation indicators: “ the most prominent explanations include factors related to the quality of institutions, such as reliable and extensive welfare benefits, low corruption, and well-functioning democracy and state institutions. Furthermore, Nordic citizens experience a high sense of autonomy and freedom, as well as high levels of social trust towards each other, which play an important role in determining life satisfaction. On the other hand, we show that a few popular explanations for Nordic happiness such as the small population and homogeneity of the Nordic countries, and a few counterarguments against Nordic happiness such as the cold weather and the suicide rates, actually don’t seem to have much to do with Nordic happiness.”
[1] https://open.substack.com/pub/yaschamounk/p/the-world-happin...
The World Happiness Report extensively discusses positive and negative affect in Chapter 2 and the relatively high suicide/death of despair rates of the Nordic countries in Chapter 6. These seem to be totally ignored in TFA.
https://www.worldhappiness.report/ed/2025/caring-and-sharing...
https://www.worldhappiness.report/ed/2025/supporting-others-...
Related. Others?
U.S. hits new low in World Happiness Report - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45378896 - Sept 2025 (277 comments)
U.S. No Longer Ranks Among 20 Happiest Countries - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39763595 - March 2024 (92 comments)
The Finnish Secret to Happiness? Knowing When You Have Enough - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35411641 - April 2023 (19 comments)
World Happiness Report 2023 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35230812 - March 2023 (2 comments)
World Happiness Report, 2019 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19615776 - April 2019 (60 comments)
Why Denmark dominates the World Happiness Report rankings year after year - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16720551 - March 2018 (3 comments)
Happiness report: Norway is the happiest place on earth - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13913145 - March 2017 (158 comments)
World Happiness Report 2015 [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10793969 - Dec 2015 (22 comments)
Denmark 'happiest' country in the world - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=234018 - July 2008 (1 comment)
---
Bonus highlight: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5152494 (Feb 2013)
I can't stand the conflation of "satisfied" and "happy." It's insane. There is more happiness in one Zimbabwean (country "happiness" rank: 143) than in one hundred Icelanders (country "happiness" rank: 2, worldwide antidepressant consumption rank: 1.) Go stand in a crowd of people and count the fucking smiles and the fucking laughter.
It is all part of this broader wave of newspeak. If you can quite literally redefine happiness, you can redefine anything. Nothing has meaning anymore. You will live alone, you will consume antidepressants, you will be protected from the sunlight, you will not smile, you will not laugh, and you will be happy.
Unless it includes Sentinel islands, I'm not going to spend any reading minutes on those reports.
No kidding. I lived in Finland for a few years and no way are they some of the happiest people.
> ..the top of the ladder represents the best possible life for you and the bottom of the ladder represents the worst possible life for you... on which step of the ladder do you feel you personally stand at the present time?
10, I'm living my best possible life. It's conceivable that my "best possible life" may not be as happy as the lifes of other people, but I have achieved the maximum that's possible for me.
Any other "possible life" would require some combination of different genes, being in a different place and living at a different time.
As Garrison Keillor said about the Nordics: "We Lutherans are an optimistic people—our glass is half empty and we're grateful for it."
I just can't feel confident in any form of self report. In a world where people have difficulty getting their spouses and children to talk honestly about their feelings, how well do we think a survey can do?
It varies wildly by culture, but we're all conditioned somewhat to falsely report our feelings. I don't expect an honest answer if I greet someone with "How are you doing?".
From the provided question by WHR I can definitely see how Scandinavian countries rank so high. Being Danish myself my answer would immediately go into long term thinking and whether I would have a better life elsewhere and to me the answer is a clear no. Not financially, socially or politically. So yes, Denmark scores really high, but is it really measuring happiness. I dont know. That said I dont think measuring how often we laugh as a better metric amongst other thing, I can be perfectly "happy" without being outwardly joyous, maybe contentment is a better word. Or well being. But it isn't as catchy i guess
The author would do well to educate themselves on the difference between Scandinavia and the Nordics.
Normalizing for language and culture seem like the hardest parts of any global survey. How are the translations done of that one question and are there any cultural implications?
> To put it bluntly, it is a sham
I suspect there may be a pattern, every time I hear on the radio that it's "World $x Day" I'm afraid I start wondering who's actually behind that specific press release and/or what funding and incentives are really in play...
Does anybody take the World Happiness Report that serious? I think it's a neat and funny thing that probably has some footing in reality, but I never thought of it as hard science.
I guess kudos for doing a deep dive into this, but was it necessary?
Aren't all of these types of things (unhappiest day of the year, best day to be born on, age that we're happiest etc) clearly pseudo-scientific/scientistic babble - and brands can then just use them to sell the Scandi (or whatever) lifestyle. Nobody who believes this is going to be swayed by your anaylsis. :)
>The happiest countries in the world are in Scandinavia; this year, Finland is followed by Denmark, Iceland and Sweden.
Finland and Iceland are not in Scandinavia. Iceland is in fact an island quite far removed from the peninsula.
I read this critique when it came out, although you can really stop at the part where he claims that it's flawed because it's self-reported. This just totally, fundamentally, misses the point, and value, of the study. Do you think you should decide how good your life is? Or do you think I should decide how good your life is? Mounk appears to think he should be the one deciding. This is the deeper, and fatal, problem with his complaints.
But that just means the Cantril ladder is a good outcome variable — the WHR is in fact profoundly flawed, but the important flaws are in the predictors they use to “explain” (their word) the outcomes. They’re hand-picked, they’re over a decade old which is well before the majority of their own data was collected, they’re not even consistent with the report itself, and when they talk about them in public (I was at the 2025 launch party), they don’t even take them seriously, as if they know it’s not meaningful — and yet they continue to be the single largest data product of the report, every single year.
And this is critical. Who’s #1 is always in the headlines but Why is far more important than Rank. We don’t really care who has the best life — we want to know how we can get a better life. Yet most of the predictable conversation — here, but also literally on stage at Gallup — is just total speculation about the real answer, while sitting in front of 20 years of data. This is insane.
Which is why I’ve spent three years building a better model, starting from a base of 180x more variables, and using objective methods of computational variable selection instead of just deciding what I think should make people happy — because that’s self-evidently just inexcusably bad science. The result is measurably more accurate than the WHR. White paper is here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5655570
Tl:dr; Basic Needs, (Local and Global) Social Support, and (Local and Global) Self-Determination describe almost all of the findings, but many of the specific variables that emerge as the strongest predictors are things like LGBTQ+ social acceptance, women in white collar jobs, and meaningful, democratically accessible political power. Which just aren’t in the WHR model. The lessons to take, and the direction it points, are just in a profoundly different direction.
This is the real flaw of the WHR — it doesn’t actually show us how to make the world better.
Footnote: The Cantril ladder has now been used for literally 60 years, and new major studies continue to choose it as their outcome measure, because 60 years of research have demonstrated it is stable, meaningful, intuitive, and consistently understood across languages, cultures, and geographies. Plus it’s 1. self-reported, 2. all-encompassing, 3. single-scale, and 4. quantitative, all of which are unavoidable properties of a usable outcome, so even if the wording changes somewhat, any worthwhile question is going to look, basically, like it. And yes the tangled use of “happiness” vs “satisfaction” is stupid, misleading, and inconsistent, but when you just accept that one is the correct version and one is the PR version, you eventually get over it.
The WHR is in fact profoundly flawed — but for a completely different reason.
I read this critique when it came out, although you can really stop at the part where he claims that it's flawed because it's self-reported. This just totally, fundamentally, misses the point, and value, of the study. Do you think you should decide how good your life is? Or do you think I should decide how good your life is? Mounk appears to think he should be the one deciding (which is what you’re doing when you manufacture an “objective” version, rather than believing the provided answer). This is the deeper, and fatal, problem with his complaints. (The critique of the Ladder as being biased towards fame and fortune sounds important, until you actually model satisfaction and find that those variables just aren’t the dominant predictors.)
But that just means the Cantril ladder is a good outcome variable — the WHR is in fact profoundly flawed, but the important flaws are in the predictors they use to “explain” (their word) the outcomes. They’re hand-picked, they’re over a decade old which is well before the majority of their own data was collected, they’re not even consistent with the report itself, and when they talk about them in public (I was at the 2025 launch party), they don’t even take them seriously, as if they know it’s not meaningful — and yet they continue to be the single largest data product of the report, every single year.
And this is critical. Who’s #1 is always in the headlines but Why is far more important than Rank. We don’t really care who has the best life — we want to know how we can get a better life. Yet most of the predictable conversation — here, but also literally on stage at Gallup — is just total speculation about the real answer, while sitting in front of over 20 years of data. This is insane.
Which is why I’ve spent three years building a better model, starting from a base of 180x more variables, and using error-driven methods of computational variable selection instead of just deciding what I think should make people happy — because that’s self-evidently just inexcusably bad science. The result is measurably more accurate than the WHR. White paper is here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5655570
Tl:dr; Basic Needs, (Local and Global) Social Support, and (Local and Global) Self-Determination describe almost all of the findings, but many of the specific variables that emerge as the strongest predictors are things like LGBTQ+ social acceptance, women in white collar jobs, and meaningful, democratically accessible political power. Which just aren’t in the WHR model. The lessons to take, and the direction it points, are just in a profoundly different direction.
This is the real flaw of the WHR — it doesn’t actually show us how to make the world better.
Footnote, based on the conversation: The Cantril ladder has now been used for literally 60 years, and new major studies continue to choose it as their outcome measure, because 60 years of research have demonstrated it is stable, meaningful, intuitive, and consistently understood across languages, cultures, and geographies. Plus it’s 1. self-reported, 2. all-encompassing, 3. single-scale, and 4. quantitative, all of which are unavoidable properties of a usable outcome, so even if the wording changes somewhat, any worthwhile question is going to look, basically, like it. And yes the tangled use of “happiness” vs “satisfaction” is stupid, misleading, and inconsistent, but when you just accept that one is the correct version and one is the PR version, you eventually get over it.
[dead]
[dead]
I don't understand why anyone thinks self-reported happiness scores mean anything at all. I don't see how they possibly could. If someone says he's a 10 on his personal scale I guess that means he can't imagine being much happier, but I don't see how that means he's particularly happy.
Happiness is a purely subjective thing. It's plainly obvious that any attempt at such comparisons will be doomed to be of limited utility. There are plenty of other ways you could try to go about getting something more useful, but none of them will be perfect.
The good news is that we don't need a perfect happiness report to think about the things various countries are either doing very well or very poorly and how our own lives might be changed if the place where we live did things differently. The World Happiness Reports gets attention year after year because it prompts that kind of thinking and there is value in that.
I don't know. The World Happiness Report relies on one simple question, which is easy to criticise but at least it applies a clear and consistent method. The paper referred to does not. It uses a special US dataset for states and a much smaller global dataset for every other country, then treats the results as if they measure the same thing. This setup almost guarantees that US states look unusually good. The authors present this as evidence, but it mostly reflects differences in survey design rather than real differences in wellbeing. In that sense the methodological problems here are more serious than the ones they point to in the World Happiness Report.