Hedonic adaptation and the role of decision and experience utility in public policy

Following on from Kahneman & Sugden's 2005 paper Experienced Utility as a Standard of Policy Evaluation there have been several reviews in the area most notably Dolan & White (2007).

Loewenstein & Ubel (2008) update the literature further reviewing emotional adaptation and providing a comprehensive review and critique of methods for measuring experienced utility.

Lowenstein et al point to the absence of inclusion of measures of experiences of life meaning and purpose in studies of experienced utility criticising the sole use of momentary affect measures.

Huppert et al (2005) in their proposal to the ESS argue for the inclusion of measures of positive functionings rather than positive feelings "The eudaimonic approach is operationalised by measures of autonomy, or self-determination, interest and engagement, aspirations and motivation, and a sense of meaning, direction or purpose in life."

Examples of Eudaimonic Well-being items are:

I feel I am free to decide for myself how to live my life.
In my life I do not get much of a chance to show how capable I am.
I generally feel free to express my ideas and opinions.
In my daily life, I frequently have to do what I am told.
The things that I do give me the feeling that I really know who I am.
I feel that life is full of opportunities.
My life has been a continuous process of learning, changing and growth.

Loewenstein et al argue that circumstances matter to people independent of their influence on moment to moment experience and believe that despite its flaws decision utility has the "advantage of capturing these values in a way that experience utility does not — e.g., if an individual cares about meaning, he or she can incorporate that concern into their choices."

Towards the end of the article the authors sway back towards experienced utility
"In summary, whether it comes to government policies that influence individual decisions or policies that directly affect people's situations, the ideal welfare criterion will involve a hybrid consideration of both decision and experience utility. Ultimately, people need to be given as much decision making autonomy as is possible. But the decisions they make should be informed, as much as is possible, by a deep understanding of their consequences for experience utility."