Perceived social fairness and trust in government serially mediate the effect of governance quality on subjective well-being.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Jul 2024
10 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
15
09
2023
accepted:
08
07
2024
medline:
11
7
2024
pubmed:
11
7
2024
entrez:
10
7
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Governance quality refers to how well the processes and institutions of public governance function and is widely recognized as having an important influence on human well-being. We developed and tested a theoretical model that elucidates the relationship between governance quality and the subjective well-being of residents in China by revealing the serial mediation effects of perceived social fairness and trust in government. Using data from the nationally representative Chinese Social Survey conducted in 2021 (n = 5019), we performed structural equation modeling to empirically examine our hypotheses. The results indicated that governance quality exerted a significant positive fully indirect impact on subjective well-being through perceived social fairness, trust in government, and their serial mediation effects. This study contributes to the literature by providing valuable insights into the determinants of subjective well-being and highlighting the serial mediating roles of perceived social fairness and trust in government in the relationship between governance quality and subjective well-being. The findings also provide practical insights for policymakers, as they indicate that promoting perceived social fairness and fostering trust in government are essential to translate governance quality into subjective well-being.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38987608
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67124-4
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-67124-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
15905Subventions
Organisme : Philosophy and Social Science Foundation Research Program of Heilongjiang province
ID : 22ZZC347
Organisme : Higher Education Teaching Reform Project of Heilongjiang province
ID : SJGZ20200176
Organisme : Higher Education Teaching Reform Project of Heilongjiang province
ID : SJGSZ2020022
Organisme : Doctoral Research Fund of Mudanjiang Normal University
ID : MNUB201904
Organisme : National Social Science Fund of China
ID : 23AKS007
Organisme : National Social Science Foundation of China
ID : 21BDJ091
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Diener, E., Oishi, S. & Tay, L. Advances in subjective well-being research. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 253–260 (2018).
pubmed: 30936533
doi: 10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
Diener, E. New findings and future directions for subjective well-being research. Am. Psychol. 67, 590–597 (2012).
pubmed: 23163434
doi: 10.1037/a0029541
Chen, J., Wang, S. & Wan, L. Does government environmental governance information disclosure improve residents’ subjective well-being? Evidence from China. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 66, 1720–1742 (2023).
doi: 10.1080/09640568.2022.2038098
Helliwell, J. F., Huang, H., Grover, S. & Wang, S. Empirical linkages between good governance and national well-being. J. Comp. Econ. 46, 1332–1346 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.jce.2018.01.004
Iddawela, Y., Lee, N. & Rodríguez-Pose, A. Quality of sub-national government and regional development in Africa. J. Dev. Stud. 57, 1282–1302 (2021).
doi: 10.1080/00220388.2021.1873286
Peiró-Palomino, J., Picazo-Tadeo, A. J. & Rios, V. Well-being in European regions: Does government quality matter?. Pap. Reg. Sci. 99, 555–582 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/pirs.12494
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A. & Mastruzzi, M. The worldwide governance indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. Hague J. Rule Law 3, 220–246 (2011).
doi: 10.1017/S1876404511200046
Zhi, K. et al. How does social security fairness predict trust in government? The serial mediation effects of social security satisfaction and life satisfaction. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19, 6867 (2022).
pubmed: 35682450
pmcid: 9180476
doi: 10.3390/ijerph19116867
Rothstein, B. The Quality of Government: Corruption, Social Trust, and Inequality in International Perspective (University of Chicago Press, 2011).
doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226729589.001.0001
Scarpa, M. P., Di Martino, S. & Prilleltensky, I. Mattering mediates between fairness and well-being. Front. Psychol. 12, 744201 (2021).
pubmed: 34858276
pmcid: 8630584
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.744201
Ugur, Z. B. How does inequality hamper subjective well-being? The role of fairness. Soc. Indic. Res. 158, 377–407 (2021).
pubmed: 34025004
pmcid: 8122217
doi: 10.1007/s11205-021-02711-w
Mishler, W. & Rose, R. What are the origins of political trust? Testing institutional and cultural theories in post-communist societies. Comp. Political Stud. 34, 30–62 (2001).
doi: 10.1177/0010414001034001002
Acar, Y. G. & Uluğ, Ö. M. When and why does political trust predict well-being in authoritarian contexts? Examining the role of political efficacy and collective action among opposition voters. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 61, 861–881 (2022).
pubmed: 34724227
doi: 10.1111/bjso.12505
Ding, X., Lu, Q., Li, L., Sarkar, A. & Li, H. Evaluating the impact of institutional performance and government trust on farmers’ subjective well-being: A case of urban–rural welfare gap perception and family economic status in Shaanxi, Sichuan and Anhui, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 20, 710 (2023).
doi: 10.3390/ijerph20010710
Shiroka-Pula, J., Bartlett, W. & Krasniqi, B. A. Can the government make us happier? Institutional quality and subjective well-being across Europe. Appl. Res. Qual. Life 18, 677–696 (2023).
doi: 10.1007/s11482-022-10099-z
Cárcaba, A., Arrondo, R. & González, E. Does good local governance improve subjective well-being?. Eur. Res. Manag. Bus. Econ. 28, 100192 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.iedeen.2021.100192
Ferrara, A. R. & Nisticò, R. Does institutional quality matter for multidimensional well-being inequalities? Insights from Italy. Soc. Indic. Res. 145, 1063–1105 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s11205-019-02123-x
Ott, J. C. Government and happiness in 130 nations: Good governance fosters higher level and more equality of happiness. Soc. Indic. Res. 102, 3–22 (2011).
pubmed: 21516144
doi: 10.1007/s11205-010-9719-z
Rodríguez-Pose, A. & Tselios, V. Well-being, political decentralisation and governance quality in Europe. J. Hum. Dev. Capab. 20, 69–93 (2019).
doi: 10.1080/19452829.2018.1563773
Lee, Y. Government for Leaving No One Behind: Social Equity in Public Administration and Trust in Government (SAGE Open, 2021).
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E. & Smith, H. L. Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 125, 276–302 (1999).
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276
Yan, B. & Wen, B. Income inequality, corruption and subjective well-being. Appl. Econ. 52, 1311–1326 (2020).
doi: 10.1080/00036846.2019.1661953
Brosnan, S. F. & De Waal, F. B. Evolution of responses to (un)fairness. Science 346, 1251776 (2014).
pubmed: 25324394
pmcid: 4451566
doi: 10.1126/science.1251776
Gao, S. & Zhao, J. The influence of perception of social equality and social trust on subjective well-being among rural Chinese people: the moderator role of education. Front. Psychol. 12, 731982 (2022).
pubmed: 35046863
pmcid: 8762249
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.731982
Lind, E. A. & Tyler, T. R. The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice (Plenum Press, 1988).
doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4
Liu, Y. et al. Relationship between children’s intergenerational emotional support and subjective well-being among middle-aged and elderly people in China: The mediation role of the sense of social fairness. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19, 389 (2022).
doi: 10.3390/ijerph19010389
Adams, J. S. Toward an understanding of inequity. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 67, 422–436 (1963).
pubmed: 14081885
Jindra, C. & Vaz, A. Good governance and multidimensional poverty: A comparative analysis of 71 countries. Governance 32, 657–675 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/gove.12394
Festenstein, M. Political trust, commitment and responsiveness. Political Stud. 68, 446–462 (2020).
doi: 10.1177/0032321719852569
Wang, Q. & Guan, Z. Can sunlight disperse mistrust? A meta-analysis of the effect of transparency on citizens’ trust in government. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 33, 453–467 (2023).
doi: 10.1093/jopart/muac040
Mishra, J. & Attri, V. Governance, public service delivery and trust in government. Stud. Indian Politics 8, 186–202 (2020).
doi: 10.1177/2321023020963518
Mahmud, R. What explains citizen trust in public institutions? Quality of government, performance, social capital, or demography. Asia Pac. J. Public Adm. 43, 106–124 (2021).
Li, D., Turel, O., Zhang, S. & He, Q. Self-serving dishonesty partially substitutes fairness in motivating cooperation when people are treated fairly. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19, 6326 (2022).
pubmed: 35627863
pmcid: 9140579
doi: 10.3390/ijerph19106326
Mazepus, H. & Van Leeuwen, F. Fairness matters when responding to disasters: An experimental study of government legitimacy. Governance 33, 621–637 (2020).
doi: 10.1111/gove.12440
Brock, J. M. Unfair inequality, governance and individual beliefs. J. Comp. Econ. 48, 658–687 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jce.2020.03.001
Magalhães, P. C. & Aguiar-Conraria, L. Procedural fairness, the economy, and support for political authorities. Political Psychol. 40, 165–181 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/pops.12500
Wu, Y., Qin, G., He, C. & Wang, W. How institutional evaluation bridges uncertainty and happiness: A study of young Chinese people. Front. Psychol. 12, 651844 (2021).
pubmed: 34721129
pmcid: 8548604
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651844
Zhu, Z., Ma, W., Sousa-Poza, A. & Leng, C. The effect of internet usage on perceptions of social fairness: Evidence from rural China. China Econ. Rev. 62, 101508 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2020.101508
Li, N. & He, M. Social security satisfaction and people’s subjective wellbeing in China: The serial mediation effect of social fairness and social trust. Front. Psychol. 13, 855530 (2022).
pubmed: 35444600
pmcid: 9014885
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.855530
Herrera, C. et al. Perceived collective school efficacy mediates the organizational justice effect in teachers’ subjective well-being. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19, 10963 (2022).
pubmed: 36078677
pmcid: 9517792
doi: 10.3390/ijerph191710963
Mansoor, M. Citizens’ trust in government as a function of good governance and government agency’s provision of quality information on social media during COVID-19. Gov. Inf. Q. 38, 101597 (2021).
pubmed: 34642542
pmcid: 8494525
doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2021.101597
Hayes, A. F. Beyond baron and kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Commun. Monogr. 76, 408–420 (2009).
doi: 10.1080/03637750903310360
Hayes, A. F. & Scharkow, M. The relative trustworthiness of inferential tests of the indirect effect in statistical mediation analysis: Does method really matter?. Psychol. Sci. 24, 1918–1927 (2013).
pubmed: 23955356
doi: 10.1177/0956797613480187
Mackinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M. & Williams, J. Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behav. Res. 39, 99–128 (2004).
pubmed: 20157642
pmcid: 2821115
doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4
Di Martino, S. & Prilleltensky, I. Happiness as fairness: The relationship between national life satisfaction and social justice in EU countries. J. Commun. Psychol. 48, 1997–2012 (2020).
doi: 10.1002/jcop.22398
Xu, H., Zhang, C. & Huang, Y. Social trust, social capital, and subjective well-being of rural residents: Micro-empirical evidence based on the Chinese general social survey (CGSS). Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 10, 49 (2023).
doi: 10.1057/s41599-023-01532-1
Dierckx, K., Valcke, B. & Van Hiel, A. The trickle-down effect of procedural fairness on perceptions of daily discrimination: How societal actors can build social trust among minority members. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 51, 343–359 (2021).
doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2742