Wow! Asia Happiness Index Says Singaporeans Are Asia’s Happiest People!

When I first saw the article, ‘Singaporeans among Asia’s happiest, says social media survey’ in the Today newspaper, I did not know which part of the article to pick on, because every part could be easily refuted. I can just imagine how Amanda Lee must have felt when she was told that she had to write this article based on a survey that is so weak in its basis.

So, according to Today, “a survey based on what people are saying on social media claims that Singaporeans are among Asia’s happiest people”. Today also reported that, “The survey is conducted by Eden Strategy Institute (ESI), a consultancy on social innovation.”

It was also reported that when “asked how this survey gels with previous ones, such as the Gallup poll, Mr Chu said he felt that it was “more scientific” and “looks at the drivers of happiness on a much wider population”.”

As a reminder, the Gallup survey, “measured positive emotions in 148 countries and areas in 2011 using five questions. These questions ask people whether they experienced a lot of enjoyment the day before the survey and whether they felt respected, well-rested, laughed and smiled a lot, and did or learned something interesting … Singaporeans, Armenians, and Iraqis are least likely worldwide to report feeling positive emotions.”

In contrast, the Asia Happiness Index was conducted “in five countries, namely Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, India and Indonesia. It calculates the Happiness Index score by taking into account the social media population in each country and the number of hits generated by a search engine when the researchers key in the predetermined words.”

So, according to Mr Chu, the Asia Happiness Index is “more scientific” and “looks at the drivers of happiness on a much wider population”. Let’s look at a quick comparison between the two surveys.

What Is The Methodology?

The Gallup survey was actually done in 148 countries whereas the Asia Happiness Index is done only in 5 countries.

Also, if you look at the Gallup survey’s description of its methodology, it says that, “Results are based on telephone and face-to-face interviews with 1,000 adults, aged 15 and older, conducted in 2011 in 148 countries and areas. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error ranged from ±3.4 percentage points to ±3.9 percentage points. The margin of error reflects the influence of data weighting. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.”

ESI claims on their website that, “The Asia Happiness Index is backed by scientifically-reviewed principles of true happiness, powered by an online intelligence tracking engine, and comprehensively covers over 200 million social media accounts in our initial set of five countries.” In their press release, they took great pains to discredit the methodologies of the other survey instruments by saying that, “Traditionally, Happiness studies have relied on the self-reporting method, yet the accuracy of self-reporting methods is known to be limited by memory bias, central tendency bias, acquiescence bias, and social desirability bias. It can further be misrepresented by the way survey questions are framed by the researchers.” Yet I wasn’t able to find out further how ESI had developed the index’s methodology or what their methodology was, other than what they had stated that the index “is backed by scientifically-reviewed principles of true happiness, powered by an online intelligence tracking engine, and comprehensively covers over 200 million social media accounts in our initial set of five countries.” This doesn’t say much.

On top of that, for the Gallup survey, you are able to download a “more complete methodology and specific survey dates” at the Gallup’s Country Data Set details.

Who Is This Company – Eden Strategy Institute?

Finally, and most importantly, do you know that the Eden Strategy Institute is actually based in Singapore. You can see their address here.

So, what we know by now is that a Singapore-based company has created a happiness index which they surveyed in only 5 countries where they ranked Singapore as the happiest country in Asia. In contrast, Gallup which is based in the United States surveyed 148 countries and ranked the United States down at 35th on the list.

Unanswered Questions

  1. First, only 5 countries were surveyed in this index and they are all in the South and Southeast Asian region.
  2. Second, the countries selected are of different socio-economic strata. It is hardly possible to have an accurate comparison as to how the socio-economic status of the country has an effect on the index scores.
  3. Third, the methodology doesn’t describe or compare the usage patterns of the different populations in these countries – how do their patterns of usage affect their terminology use?
  4. Fourth, does the methodology also discern the amount of usage and population size of the country to distill a more representative picture of the countries?

Finally, does ESI understand what the implications of using a broad survey of online social media tools are? According to a study conducted by The University of Gothenburg in Sweden which “surveyed 1011 Swedish Facebook users with our questionnaires, measuring respondents’ Facebook usage patterns, well-being and self-esteem,” the researchers found that “people on Facebook are likely to only report the events that are worthy of reporting. If everyone would report only those events that are worthy of reporting, the end result would be an illusion of people in general being more happy and successful than may be the case. When we then compare our own lives with others’ seemingly more successful careers and happy relationships, we may feel that our own lives are less successful in comparison.”

The study also says that, “because Facebook users often don’t have access to a full range of information about a person, they may erroneously infer that if a person is happy on virtually every picture, this person must be a very happy person … The correspondence bias is closely related to the fundamental attribution error – our tendency to ascribe a certain trait (e.g. happiness) to an individuals’ personality (happy kind of person), rather than to external circumstances (the party caused the happiness). Thus, on Facebook, it is easy to disregard that nearly all pictures are taken under happy circumstances (parties, vacations, interaction with friends and family) and thus erroneously conclude that other people are more happy than they may be … If Facebook users overestimate the happiness of their peers (which seem to be high and consistent), they may fall into the trap of comparing their own happiness (which consists of highs and lows and is constantly fluctuating) and consequently end up feeling less happy.” You can read more about the study here.

Does ESI know this? ESI’s Mr Chu had said that, ““Singaporeans love to send funny pictures or pictures of food, as a means of reaching out and sharing.” Well, there you have it, Mr Chu. Are Singaporeans really that happy? Your survey tool and methodology is hardly the scientific that you call it that it can adequately measure the happiness of Singaporeans. As to claim that other happiness studies are “limited by memory bias, central tendency bias, acquiescence bias, and social desirability bias,” ESI’s very own Asia Happiness Index are mired in these same biases as well. Now that we have concluded that ESI’s remarks are simply a matter of the pot calling the kettle black, if there are at least 3 different happiness studies which rank Singapore much lowly on our levels of happiness and each of these studies have a much wider country comparison, surely that should come to something?

The Gallup survey in 2012 ranked Singapore last out of 148 countries. The Happy Planet Index in 2012 ranks Singapore 90th out of 151 countries. The World Happiness Report in 2012 ranks Singapore 33rd out of more than 150 countries.

And in two of these (Gallup and the Happy Planet Index), Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia and India were all ranked higher than Singapore. Let me give ESI a tip – in future, if you want to come out with a new happiness tool, even if it’s just for show, at least come out with a stronger methodology or make it much harder to dissect. The Ministry of Finance does a fantastic job at that, so you should learn from them.

If you remember, this smacks of what happened when the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (Asia Competitiveness Institute) developed a new ranking of world cities last year – the Global Liveable Cities Index – which ranked Singapore 3rd, as compared to all other indexes which Singapore wasn’t even ranked in the top 10 in. I had previously written an article about this. You can read it here.

Clearly, the Singapore government is desperate to counter any surveys which present Singapore in a negative light. But instead of ensuring that the concerns of the people are met, so that this will reflect more positively in the surveys, the government’s strategy is to release their own surveys which rank Singapore highly to counter the countless surveys that are already in existence!

Wouldn’t it be more sustainable, and actually logical, that the government look into why Singaporeans are unhappy and find ways to promote the happiness within them, rather than to push out a survey to lie to the people, hoping that this PR move would sufficiently placate the people? Singaporeans are unhappy. Period. No survey which marks up how happy Singaporeans are will be able to pretend that away.

So, instead of fulminate the truth, perhaps the government needs to have the boldness to start looking at these issues with immediate attention to resolve them, well, with resolve.


  1. butan

    Let us not forget about Khaw’s nonsense on issue of happiness on Bhutan . Why did the survey did not include Bhutan as the survey too ? Could it be that these Bhutan people are happy people who may not afford to go online ? No wonder the surveys are rubbish.

    Going by such poor standard and insult-your-intelligence survey , even the worst corrupted country can be the best uncorrupted country in the world by just focusing on some unrelated metrics.

    these kind of arrogant surveys surely deteriorates relationship between SinCity and surrounding countries.

  2. Pingback: Singaporeans Happiest in Asia? How about Richest and Greediest too? Baloney! | Jentrified Citizen
  3. Roger White

    Writing from Scotland, although with *some* knowledge of Singapore, I hesitate to get involved in the big question of how ‘happy’ Singaporeans are, and would anyhow prefer to use the more internationally accepted term ‘wellbeing’ than ‘happiness.’

    However, I think your analysis of the limitations of this survey by ESi is spot on. The world is full of consultants carrying out allegedly scientific surveys that are far from that. They do it to get publicity for their business and their methodology is unclear. You demonstrate that in your analysis. I would add the further point that because they do not set out fully what that methodology is, you cannot tell what the scores on their index mean. Singapore has a score of 518, India 11. What do the numbers mean? Is Singaporeans 47 times happier than Indians? Who knows? Certainly not ESI on the basis of their press release.

    Perhaps all you need to know about ESI is what looks like their vision statement on the home page of their web site – ‘Eden helps leading global corporations, governments, and non-profit organizations profitably achieve sustained impact by aligning their growth platforms, operations, products, and services with market forces and developmental opportunities.’ That, as we would say in my country, is as clear as mud. It certainly has nothing to do with serious social research.

    • My Right to Love

      Hi Roger,

      Thanks for the comment.

      You put it very succinctly – that their vision statement is “as clear as mud”.

      It is a huge pity that we do not have enough organisations or think tanks which are willing or actually able to conduct rigourous thinking, which can allow Singapore and Singaporeans to have an accurate understanding of our country. This, I feel is eventually dire, if the government and people are not able to have an adequate viewpoint of how Singapore is socially progressing, and what steps we need to take to ameliorate this.



  4. henry

    Thanks for the perspective. It certainly reveals flaws and raises lots of questions on intent and the integrity of the newspapers. ( not that there was much integrity to begin with).
    It amazes me how this can continue despite the age of internet and a more informed public.

    The machinery and apparatus is certainly well and truly oiled.

  5. Alice

    Thank you for enlightening me. There are some unanswered questions that need to be answered by Singapore-based Eden Strategy Institute.

  6. Pingback: The PAP’s Policies Give Singaporeans Heart Attacks? | The Heart Truths
  7. Pingback: Interview on VoicesTODAY: Can we be an even more happier society? | The Heart Truths

    And although the other half wouldn’t be embarrassed, they wouldn’t shout it from
    the rooftops. With online personals and Asian online
    dating rapidly becoming one of the chief ways of meeting Asian men and Asian women,
    Asian online dating sites give users a chance to take advantage of a growing dating pool.
    But is online dating really better than its offline counterpart.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s