Content uploaded by Michael Mutz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Michael Mutz on Jan 28, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Christmas and Subjective Well-Being: A Research Note
Michael Mutz
1
Institute of Sport Science, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
E-Mail: michael.mutz@sport.uni-goetingen.de
Abstract: According to Holmes and Rahe (1967), Christmas is a critical life event that may
cause feelings of stress that, in turn, can lead to reduced subjective well-being (SWB) and
health problems. This study uses a quantitative approach and large-scale survey data to assess
whether or not respondents in European countries indicate lower SWB before and around
Christmas. Precisely, respondents interviewed in the week before Christmas or at Christmas
holidays are compared to respondents who are questioned at other times throughout the year.
Moreover, the assumption is tested if religious denomination and religiousness moderate the
association between Christmas and SWB. Main findings suggest that the Christmas period is
related to a decrease in life satisfaction and emotional well-being. However, Christians, par-
ticularly those with a higher degree of religiousness, are an exception to this pattern.
Keywords: life satisfaction, emotions, Christmas, holiday, religion
The final version of this manuscript has been published online on November 30, 2015 in
APPLIED RESEARCH IN QUALITY OF LIFE and can be approached at:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11482-015-9441-8
Please cite only the original journal version of this paper:
Mutz, M. (2015). Christmas and Subjective Well-Being: A Research Note.
Applied research in quality of life. Published online, November 30, 2015.
DOI: 10.1007/s11482-015-9441-8.
2
Christmas and Subjective Well-Being: A Research Note
1. Subjective Well-being, Health, and Christmas
At the core of this research is the question whether Christmas can collectively affect subjec-
tive well-being (SWB) in European societies. Prior research has provided limited evidence
that Christmas may be negatively related to physical and mental health, but research directly
addressing SWB is scarce. Statistics from hospitals suggest that deaths per day increase by
22% in the week before Christmas compared to the annual mean (Keatinge and Donaldson
2004). An increase was shown for respiratory diseases as well as ischemic heart diseases
(Keatinge and Donaldson 2004; Kloner 2004; Phillips et al. 2004). Further evidence exists for
an increase of mental problems and illnesses at Christmas: Friedberg (1990) has argued that
dysphoric moods increase around Christmas and a clinical study by Velamoor et al. (1999)
indicates higher levels of loneliness on Christmas. Research on suicide attempts and self-harm
behaviour illustrates that such behaviours are comparably low during Christmas holidays but
peak in the days immediately following Christmas (Bergen and Hawton 2007; Carley 2004;
Cullum et al. 1993; Jessen et al. 1999; Masterton 1991; Sansone and Sansone 2011; Zonda et
al. 2008; as an exception Barker, O’Gorman and De Leo 2014).
Kloner (2004) suggests several mechanisms that may explain this increase in health issues,
amongst others, cold weather, overindulgence, and increased emotional stress. Hairon (2008)
also claims that Christmas may be a time of increased stress, family conflict, alcohol misuse,
lack of exercise, and financial concerns. The assumption that Christmas might be a stress-
related event is not a new one, however. Holmes and Rahe (1967), who developed one of the
first scales that aimed to measure stress levels of individuals based on their experience of a
number of critical life events, also included Christmas to their scale. Their Social Readjust-
3
ment Rating Scale (SRRS) considers Christmas as one of 43 stress- and health-related life
events.
1
According to the SRRS, the stress level potentially induced by Christmas is compara-
ble to “minor violations of the law” or a “change in sleeping habits”. Hence, Christmas is a
yearly and inescapable source of stress for most people.
Individuals who experience a number of critical events in one year are supposed to have a
higher level of permanent stress and are considered to be more vulnerable to health issues
(Holmes and Rahe 1967).
2
Research has provided ample evidence that individual stress levels
predict the probability to contract a disease (Cohen, Tyrrell and Smith 1991, 1993; Cohen,
Janicki-Deverts and Miller 2007; Marsland et al. 2002) or to suffer from severe mental health
problems (Langner and Stanley 1963; Tennant 2002; Wang et al. 2009).
Despite the popular notion that health problems around Christmas may occur due to increased
levels of stress and reduced emotional well-being, few studies have directly investigated the
relation of Christmas with quality of life ratings. Kasser and Sheldon (2002) have assessed
well-being at Christmas with regard to several types of activities in the Christmas period and
found that socializing with family as well as religious experiences are associated with in-
creased SWB whereas consumption activities are associated with higher stress levels and re-
duced SWB. Based on a longitudinal student sample, Páez et al. (2014) are able to show that
SWB is higher three weeks after Christmas than in the week preceding Christmas. Moreover,
they found that participation in ritualised family celebrations at Christmas increase SWB, but
experienced conflicts during Christmas are associated with negative affect, reduced life satis-
faction and less social well-being. However, both studies are based on rather small and homo-
geneous samples, so that studies using larger and representative samples are called for (Kasser
1
The SRSS consists of 43 stressful life events. It asks respondents to indicate all events they have faced during
the previous year. Each event is assigned with a score that is supposed to capture the typical level of stress that
comes along with the respective event. For instance, a divorce accounts for a stress level of 73 points and “being
fired at work” accounts for 47 points. Christmas is associated with a stress level of 12 points.
2
According to Holmes and Rahe (1967), a score above 150 points is supposed to increase the chance of a major
health breakdown by 50% and scores above 300 are associated with an 80% increase.
4
and Sheldon 2002). Moreover, both studies do not measure SWB directly at Christmas but
rely on retrospective data that were collected about two weeks after Christmas holidays.
This paper investigates Christmas effects on SWB, precisely life satisfaction and emotional
well-being, based on large-scale data from 11 European countries (see section 3 for details).
We will first develop two different views of Christmas which both are prevalent in the culture
of affluent Western societies: 1) Christmas as religious ritual and time of charity (with poten-
tially positive effects on SWB) and 2) Christmas as a years’ climax of materialist consump-
tion and spending (with potentially detrimental effects on SWB). From these considerations,
hypotheses that address effects on SWB are then derived. Finally, in a third step, we will put
our hypotheses to a test. Our main findings suggest that Christmas, in particular the pre-
Christmas period, is related to reduced life satisfaction and less favourable affective states.
However, Christians with a higher degree of religiousness are an exception to this rule.
2. The Christmas Experience: Sacred or Secular?
(1) Christmas, Religious Worship, Contemplation, and Charity
On the one hand, Christmas is a holy day in Christianity commemorating the birth of Jesus
Christ, son of God. The figure of Jesus represents basic Christian values for most Christians
worldwide, e.g. compassion, charity, forgiveness, renunciation of violence as well as of in-
dulgence. As a religious celebration, Christmas is closely interconnected with these values.
Attending religious services, intensifying prayer, watching nativity plays, donating for poor
and needy persons, spending time and exchanging gifts with family and friends may be re-
garded as ways in which basic Christian values manifest themselves and are reinforced.
If religious beliefs and religiousness are fostered around Christmas, this alone may have posi-
tive effects on SWB. Numerous studies have shown so far that religious experience, usually
measured by the frequency of attendance at religious services or by religiousness self-ratings,
is associated with better mental health and greater SWB (Byrd et al. 2007; Green and Elliott
5
2010; Keyes and Reitzes 2007; Ellison et al. 2001; Francis and Kaldor 2002; Maltby, Lewis
and Day 1999). This association may be explained by a higher level of social capital and so-
cial support that comes along with being part of a religious community (Putnam and Camp-
bell 2010). Being integrated in a religious group may enhance a person’s sense of belonging
and feeling of appreciation. Fagley (2012) has shown that appreciation is an important predic-
tor of life satisfaction. Moreover, studies have shown that spending money on others promotes
happiness (Aknin et al. 2013; Dunn, Aknin and Norton 2008). Donating, helping and caring
for others may thus be considered appropriate means of increasing SWB (Oarga, Stavrova and
Fetchenhauer 2015; Geenen et al. 2014; for a review: Post 2005).
(2) Christmas, Consumption, Commerce, and Materialism
On the other hand, Christmas has become the year’s climax of consumer materialism which
stands in sharp contrast to the roots of Christian spiritual and religious values (Belk, 1995).
On average, European households spend 265 € on Christmas presents and another 160 € on
foods for the holidays (Deloitte and Touche 2014). A Gallup survey in 2014 indicates that
Americans are even more free-spending and plan to buy presents worth of 780 $ on Christ-
mas.
3
Sales increase dramatically in the pre-Christmas period: Estimations for Germany, for
instance, show that in 2013 Christmas shopping accounted for 18% of all retail sales (Federal
Statistical Office 2014: 575). In a paper on the history of Christmas celebrations in the US,
Bartunek and Do (2011: 803) conclude that “organized commercialism has become sacred,
and the religious experience of Christmas has lost a good deal of its sacred character.” The
replacement of religion by materialism however, may come at the expense of happiness.
Research on materialism and SWB mostly point to negative effects: Individuals who score
higher on materialism and spent more money on material possessions report lower satisfaction
with life (Carter and Gilovich 2012; Manolis and Roberts 2012; Richins and Dawson 1992;
3
http://www.gallup.com/poll/178859/americans-initial-christmas-spending-estimate-positive.aspx (06/22/2015).
6
Roberts and Clement 2007; Van Boven 2005) and lower emotional well-being (Kashdan and
Breen 2007). A recent meta-analysis (Dittmar et al. 2014) has demonstrated a mean correla-
tion of r=-.19 between materialism and SWB, thus further buttressing a negative relationship.
The negative effect proves to be stable across a variety of SWB measures, for instance, life
satisfaction, positive affect, or positive self-appraisals (Dittmar et al. 2014: 907).
A variety of explanations for this negative effect were put forward: Sirgy (1998) has argued
that materialists are dissatisfied with their standard of living because they compare themselves
more often to those who possess more, which may result in feelings of envy and injustice.
Others claimed that consumers usually overestimate the rewards that come along with con-
suming a certain product which leads to disappointment after the purchase (Wilson and Gil-
bert 2005). Norris and Larsen (2011: 878) claim that one feature of materialist culture is the
desire to want more: as soon as we have a particular good, we want another one. In a culture
of “wanting more”, however, dissatisfaction becomes normalcy. Others put forward the as-
sumption that materialistic lifestyles, centred on the acquisition of possessions and status, can
only be pursued at the expense of other basic human needs like relatedness, autonomy, and
competence (Dittmar et al. 2014; Tsang et al. 2014). Hence, lower SWB may be the result of
poor satisfaction of basic psychological needs. Finally, many people experience the time be-
fore Christmas as a period of increased time pressures and social demands, especially the time
where gifts are purchased (Miyazaki 1993). Accordingly, Kasser and Sheldon (2002) have
found that people who report to have spent a lot of money in the time before Christmas also
report higher levels of stress, more negative emotions and lower SWB on Christmas holidays.
Hypotheses
Both rationales summarized above result in different assumptions concerning the effect of
Christmas on SWB. The sacred experience of Christmas does not seem to be in line with the
stress perspective outlined in the introduction. If peoples’ experience of Christmas would be
7
primarily a religious one, stress must not necessarily increase and even a heightened level of
SWB can be assumed, given that religiousness is reinforced. Accordingly, it can be hypothe-
sized that SWB is higher at Christmas compared to other times of the year (H#1). However, if
a materialist consumer culture dominates the Christmas experience, higher stress levels can be
presumed, in particular in the Pre-Christmas period at the peak of commercial activity, which
in turn may result in a decline of SWB. In this perspective, SWB is lower at Christmas com-
pared to other times of the year (H#2). However, it may also be assumed that the sacred, reli-
gious experience of Christmas is more dominant among Christians, and in particular among
very religious Christians, whereas the secular, materialist experience is more dominant among
atheists and non-Christians. Hence, the effect of Christmas time on SWB is likely to be moder-
ated by religious affiliation and religiousness (H#3). Precisely, differences between a) Chris-
tians and Non-Christians as well as between b) less religious and very religious Christians
will be put to a test in the subsequent analyses.
3. Methods
Data
The present study uses a quantitative, cross-sectional approach and is based on survey data
from the European Social Surveys (ESS), particularly ESS Rounds 3 and 6. In both rounds
quality of life was a key topic and a set of similar questions was included. Given the high sim-
ilarity of both waves and the small number of people interviewed at Christmas period (see
details below), they were merged for the subsequent analyses. Wave 3 was carried out in
2006/07 and wave 6 was accomplished in 2012/13. Countries were included in the analysis
under the conditions that a) they took part in ESS waves 3 and 6, b) at least 50 interviews in
this particular country fell into the Christmas period, and c) the countries have been dominat-
ed historically by either Catholic or Protestant Christianity. Eleven countries met all of these
criteria and were selected for the study, namely Belgium, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Ire-
8
land, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom. The national sur-
veys were conducted as Computer-assisted Personal Interviews (CAPI) with the exception of
Slovakia, were a Paper-and-Pencil approach (PAPI) was chosen.
Measuring the Christmas effect
In both ESS Rounds, the survey period originally was scheduled to last from September 1
until December 31 of the respective year. However, in most of the countries data collection
was expanded by weeks or even months. In the 11 countries selected data collection did take
place in the Christmas period. For this analysis, all interviews taken in the week before
Christmas or during the Christmas holidays (16
th
- 26
th
December) are considered as (Pre-
)Christmas interviews (N=2,057). In each country selected at least 50 interviews were realized
in this period. A dummy variable was created which separates (Pre-)Christmas interviews
from the rest. Moreover, another dummy for Post-Christmas interviews (27
th
- 31
st
December)
was created (N=855) to estimate the possible impact of the holidays on SWB. The Christmas
effects are then estimated as the mean difference in SWB between respondents whose inter-
view took place in one of the two defined Christmas periods (Pre-Christmas, Post-Christmas)
compared to those interviews taken at any other time within the survey period, except July
and August (N=42,298).
4
Table 1 shows the distribution of the sample by interview date.
++ Table 1 ++
4
A marginal number of N=73 interviews were conducted in July and August. It was decided to exclude these
interviews from the analyses because July and August are the peak months of Europe’s summer holiday season
and this may be associated with increased subjective well-being amongst respondents. Although the exclusion of
these 73 cases has no influence on the results, it still seems the proper way to handle the data.
9
Measures for SWB
(1) Life Satisfaction. ESS surveys include one of the standard questions for measuring life
satisfaction, namely: “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole”.
Respondents could indicate their satisfaction on an 11-point rating scale that ranged from 0
(=extremely dissatisfied) to 10 (=extremely satisfied).
(2) Emotional Well-being. In both ESS waves respondents were asked to indicate the frequen-
cy of certain emotional states during the last week. In a first step, a measure for positive emo-
tions was calculated that includes the reported frequencies with which the respondents a) were
happy, b) enjoyed life, c) had lots of energy and d) felt calm and peaceful. In a second step, a
similar measure for negative emotions was calculated. This measure is based on the frequen-
cies with which respondents a) felt depressed, b) felt lonely, c) felt sad and d) felt anxious.
The two scales for negative and positive affective states vary between 1 (=never felt that way)
und 4 (=always felt that way), hence higher values indicate more frequent positive (negative)
emotions. Both affect scales are substantially negatively correlated (r=-.55) which means that
persons who report more positive emotions generally report less negative emotions and vice
versa. In light of this substantial correlation, positive and negative emotions were not treated
independently. Instead, the measure for emotional well-being was calculated as the difference
between the frequency of positive affect and the frequency of negative affect. Our final meas-
ure thus captures the affective balance in the week prior to the survey. Its values can range
from +3 (=always positive and no negative emotions) to -3 (always negative and no positive
emotions) with 0 pointing to an equilibrium of positive and negative affect. Similar measures
have been used in prior research (Nawijn et al., 2010; Sanjuan 2011; Schimmack et al. 2002;
Suh et al. 1998).
10
Analytical Approach
Linear regression models were calculated which include a set of control variables which, ac-
cording to the literature on SWB, also predict life satisfaction and emotional well-being.
These control variables include age, gender, completed years of full-time education, unem-
ployment, religious denomination, children at home and a subjective health measure. A full
description of these variables is given in Table 2. Particularly subjective health is an important
control variable because cold weather in December may lead to a higher prevalence of colds,
flu or other related diseases which also affects SWB. Including a subjective health measure
statistically accounts for the shared variance of subjective health and SWB and is thus a rather
conservative approach for assessing the Christmas effect on life satisfaction and emotional
well-being. Additionally, fixed effects for country differences are included in the models.
These effects account for mean differences in life satisfaction and emotional well-being at the
country level. Numerous studies have shown that such differences exist (e.g. Kuppens, Realo
and Diener 2008; Mutz and Kämpfer 2013; Schyns 2002), however explaining country differ-
ences is not in the scope of this study. Moreover, robust standard errors were calculated which
account for possible homoscedasticity in the data due to its multilevel structure (White 1980).
One of the initial assumptions of this study was that religious affiliation is likely to be a mod-
erator for the Christmas effect on SWB (H#3). This assumption is put to a test by including
interaction effects that estimate SWB at Christmas for Christians separately. Precisely, we
calculated a first dummy variable which includes individuals with a Christian religious affilia-
tion who were interviewed in the Christmas period (N=1,072). A second set of dummy varia-
bles comprises a) Christians with low religiousness interviewed in the (Pre-)Christmas period
(N=588) and b) Christians with a high degree of religiousness interviewed in the (Pre-
)Christmas period (N=460). Religiousness values were based on the respondents’ self-ratings.
11
++ Table 2 ++
4. Findings
Descriptive Results
Descriptive statistics regarding the sample are provided in Table 2. Descriptive results reveal
that life satisfaction is on average at M=6.90 with Hungarians reporting the lowest satisfaction
with life (M=5.52) and Swedes indicating the highest life satisfaction (M=7.85). Emotional
well-being scores average at M=1.22, which means that respondents have generally reported
more positive emotions than negative emotions. From the 11 countries included, Hungary has
again the lowest emotional well-being (M=0.48) while Ireland scores highest (M=1.51). At
the individual level, the correlation between life satisfaction and emotional well-being is
r=.46, indicating that emotional well-being and life satisfaction ratings are closely connected
(e.g. Kuppens, Realo and Diener, 2008; Mutz and Kämpfer, 2013; Suh et al., 1998).
Results of the Regression Analyses
More important, however, is the question if the Christmas period has a measurable influence
on SWB. Results are provided in Tables 3 and 4. For each outcome variable, the first regres-
sion model shows the general Christmas effect (model I) whereas additional models (II and
III) estimate separately the effects for Christians (vs. Non-Christians) and for less religious
and very religious Christians (vs. Non-Christians), respectively.
Regarding life satisfaction, interviewees in the (Pre-)Christmas period indicate significantly
lower satisfaction with life compared to respondents surveyed at other times of the year. The
size of the effect, however, is rather small (b=-0.12, p<.05, model I). Interaction effects with
religious denomination (model II) do not point to significant differences (b=0.14, p=.13).
However, the positive coefficient suggests that Christians may be somewhat happier around
12
Christmas compared to non-Christians. More striking are the differences detected for Chris-
tians with a high degree of religiousness (model III). This group sets apart from non-
Christians and less religious Christians with a significantly higher degree of life satisfaction
around Christmas (b=0.23, p<.05). Hence, whereas life satisfaction among atheists, non-
Christians and less religious Christians declines in the (Pre-)Christmas period, it remains ra-
ther stable among very religious Christian believers. In the Post-Christmas period, no signifi-
cant effects are found. In the aftermath of Christmas, respondents report a level of life satis-
faction comparable to the annual mean.
Analyses for emotional well-being yield similar main effects, but differ with regard to interac-
tion effects. First, a significant negative effect for the (Pre-)Christmas period can be demon-
strated (b=-0.21, p<.01, model I). Hence, respondents surveyed in the (Pre-)Christmas period
report a less favourable affective balance compared to respondents surveyed in other periods
of the year. In the (Pre-)Christmas time positive emotions dominate over negative emotions to
a lesser degree. Christians differ in their affective balance significantly from non-Christians,
but only by a small margin (b=0.08, p<.05, model II): Interviewees with Christian denomina-
tion indicate a more positive affective balance at Christmas compared to non-Christians.
However, the absolute value of the negative main effect is greater than the absolute value of
the positive interaction effect, so that emotional well-being in Christians is not higher at
Christmas compared to other periods of the year. Christians are not immune to the Christmas
decline in emotional well-being, but they seem to be less affected. This result holds true for
less religious as well as very religious Christians (model III). The differentiation regarding the
religiousness of Christian interviewees do not yield any significant results. However, a small
but significant Post-Christmas effect is shown (b=-0.09, p<.01) in all models, indicating that
directly after Christmas holidays emotional well-being is still less positive than on a typical
day outside of the Christmas period.
13
Generally it has to be noted that (Pre-)Christmas time has a higher negative influence on emo-
tional well-being than on life satisfaction. This conclusion can be drawn from the standard-
ized regression weights (β), whose absolute value is twice as high for emotional well-being
compared to life satisfaction. On a conceptual level, emotional well-being is regarded as the
short-term and rather fluctuating aspect of SWB, whereas life satisfaction refers to more sta-
ble and mostly cognitive evaluations of life achievements (Schimmack, 2008). Hence, from a
theoretical perspective, the result that the Christmas effect is more pronounced for emotional
well-being and less pronounced for life satisfaction is highly plausible.
The effects of the control variables are rather unsurprising and correspond to findings of pre-
vious studies: Education, children at home and Christian denomination are associated with
slightly higher levels of life satisfaction and emotional well-being. Strong negative effects on
both dependent variables are detected for unemployment and strong positive effects go along
with better subjective health. Age has a negative, but non-linear effect on life satisfaction, but
not on emotional well-being.
5
Gender does not correlate with life satisfaction, but emotional
well-being is lower in females compared to males.
++ Table 3 and 4 ++
5. Summary and Conclusions
Based on a large scale, cross-sectional data set from 11 European countries, this study has
shown that respondents surveyed in the period shortly before or at the Christmas holidays
generally report lower life satisfaction and lower emotional well-being compared to respond-
ents whose interview took place outside of the Chrostmas period. These findings are in line
5
The curvilinear age effect suggests that life satisfaction is generally declining over the life-course. However, at
younger ages the relative decline in life satisfaction per year is larger than in older age groups.
14
with the stress perspective on Christmas, hence Hypothesis #2. In this perspective reduced
SWB at Christmas is a result of perceived time pressure, social obligations and, maybe, finan-
cial concerns which are inherent in the materialist consumer culture that surrounds Christmas
nowadays. In the aftermath of Christmas, subjective well-being is not particularly positive,
but again converging to its annual mean level. This finding may suggest that it is particularly
the Pre-Christmas hustle and not the Christmas holiday itself that has caused the short-term
decline in well-being. Moreover, this study also demonstrated that Christian religious affilia-
tion moderates the way in which Christmas is experienced, buttressing hypothesis #3. Results
indicate that religious Christians do not suffer from reduced life satisfaction in the time before
Christmas (Figure 1). In this regard, religious Christians deviate from the general pattern in a
remarkable, but plausible way. Moreover, the Christmas decline in terms of emotional well-
being is less pronounced in Christians compared to non-Christians (Figure 2). Hence, both
findings consistently show that Christian religious affiliation is a protective factor against the
general decline in SWB around Christmas. It is less clear however, if this protection comes
along with Christian affiliation per se or if it needs to be combined with high religiousness.
++ Figure 1 and 2 ++
Findings of the present study are in line with the Christmas study conducted by Kasser and
Sheldon (2002), who demonstrated in a small sample of US-Americans living in Illinois that
consumption activities come along with reduced SWB at Christmas whereas religious experi-
ences were associated with enhanced SWB at Christmas. Although measures on such activi-
ties were not collected in the present study it is highly plausible that individuals with Christian
affiliation and a strong sense of religiousness celebrate Christmas differently than the majority
of non-Christians. It can be assumed that these individuals are less prone to get absorbed by
15
the consumerism that precedes the holidays.
6
It is an interesting question however, if this de-
viance from the general rule is due to the religious experience or instead a more inward-
oriented, contemplative way to celebrate Christmas. If the latter is true, gains and losses in
SWB are not caused by religion itself but by the way Christmas is celebrated.
The Christmas study from Páez et al. (2014) found that Christmas holidays increase SWB. At
first sight, this seems to contradict the results at hand. However, Páez and colleagues collected
their data in the week before Christmas and again three weeks after Christmas. Thus, it is like-
ly that the initial level of SWB in their sample was particularly low as they scheduled their
first measurement in the stressful week preceding Christmas. Hence, the more positive SWB
values measured three weeks after Christmas may reflect a normalization of well-being in the
aftermath of Christmas rather than an exceptionally high level. If this is true, the results of the
two studies would complement and not contradict each other.
Of course, the present study also has some limitations. One limitation is the small number of
interviews that were conducted directly at Christmas holidays. Therefore, the operational def-
inition of “Christmas time” in this study did also include the week before Christmas Eve. This
week may be particularly stressful as many Christmas presents are purchased in this week.
According to consumer research by Ernst and Young, 27% of all Christmas presents in Ger-
many are purchased in the last two weeks before Christmas.
7
In other European countries sim-
ilar patterns are likely to be found. Hence, the negative Christmas effect on SWB may largely
apply to the pre-Christmas period, but must not necessarily prevail at Christmas Eve. Another
limitation is that no valid measures for perceived stress are included in the ESS data. This is
the reason why the assumed mechanism – declines in SWB at Christmas are due to increased
stress levels – could not be tested directly. Although this mechanism was put forward in this
6
Support of this notion is provided by the Kasser and Sheldon study (2002: 324), when they argue that material-
istic strivings involve more stressful experiences and distract people from the ‚true meaning’ of the season.
7
http://www.de.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssetsPI/EY_Studie_-_Weihnachtsgeschaeft_2014/$FILE/EY-
Weihnachtsgeschaeft-2014.pdf (06/22/2015).
16
study, it is not the only way the demonstrated Christmas effect may be explained. An exper-
imental study (Schmitt et al. 2010) has shown that the mere presence of Christmas symbols
can reduce mood and well-being among non-Christian religious groups, for instance Sikh and
Buddhists. Furthermore, this study can also demonstrate that these negative effects are medi-
ated by reduced feelings of inclusion. The authors argue that individuals feel better in envi-
ronments “that they perceive as inclusive of their identities” (Schmitt et al. 2010: 1019).
However, it is questionable if this argument can be applied in the present case. In the ESS
data used here, the majority of non-Christians are atheists without a religious denomination.
Individuals with a non-Christian denomination, who may indeed feel less included into the
dominant Christmas culture in European countries, are hardly represented in the data.
References
Aknin, L.B., Dunn, E.W., Whillans, A.V., Grant, A.M., and Norton, M.I. (2013). Making a
Difference Matters: Impact Unlocks the Emotional Benefits of Prosocial Spending. Jour-
nal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 88, 90–95
Barker, E., O’Gorman, J., and De Leo, D. (2014). Suicide around public holidays. Australa-
sian Psychiatry, 22(2), 122–126.
Bartunek, J. M., and Do, B. (2011). The Sacralization of Christmas Commerce. Organization,
18(6), 795–806.
Belk, R. (1995). Collecting as Luxury Consumption - Effects on Individuals and Households.
Journal of Economic Psychology, 16(3), 477–490.
Bergen, H., and Hawton, K. (2007). Variation in deliberate self-harm around Christmas and
new year. Social Science and Medicine, 65(5), 855–867.
Byrd, K.R., Hageman, A. and Belle Isle, D. (2007). Intrinsic Motivation and Subjective Well-
Being: The Unique Contribution of Intrinsic Religious Motivation. The International
Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 17(2), 141-156.
Carley, S. (2004). Suicide at Christmas. Emergency Medicine Journal, 21(6), 716–717.
17
Carter, T. J., and Gilovich, T. (2012). I Am What I Do, Not What I Have: The Differential
Centrality of Experiential and Material Purchases to the Self. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 102(6), 1304–1317.
Cohen, S., Tyrrell, D., and Smith, A. (1991). Psychological Stress and Susceptibility to the
Common Cold. New England Journal of Medicine, 325(9), 606–612.
Cohen, S., Tyrrell, D., and Smith, A. (1993). Negative Life Events, Perceived Stress, Nega-
tive Affect, and Susceptibility to the Common Cold. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 64(1), 131–140.
Cohen, S., Janicki-Deverts, D. and Miller, G.E. (2007). Psychological Stress and Disease. The
Journal of the American Medical Association, 298(14), 1685-1687.
Cullum, S. J., Catalan, J., Berelowitz, K., O’Brien, S., Millington, H. T., and Preston, D.
(1993). Deliberate self-harm and public holidays: is there a link? Crisis, 14(1), 39–42.
Deloitte and Touche GmbH (2014). Christmas Survey 2014. Published online:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/de/Documents/consumer-
business/christmas-survey-2014.pdf (accessed 28.06.2015).
Dittmar, H., Bond, R., Hurst, M. & Kasser, T. (2014). The relationship between materialism
and personal well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
107(5), 879-924.
Dunn, E. W., Aknin, L. B., and Norton, M. I. (2008). Spending money on others promotes
happiness. Science, 319(5870), 1687–1688.
Ellison, C. G., Boardman, J. D., Williams, D. R., and Jackson, J. S. (2001). Religious in-
volvement, stress, and mental health: Findings from the 1995 Detroit Area Study. Social
Forces, 80(1), 215–249.
European Social Survey Round 3 Data (2006). Data file edition 3.5. Norwegian Social Sci-
ence Data Services, Norway.
European Social Survey Round 6 Data (2012). Data file edition 2.1. Norwegian Social Sci-
ence Data Services, Norway.
Fagley, N.S. (2012). Appreciation Uniquely Predicts Life Satisfaction above Demographics,
the Big 5 Personality Factors, and Gratitude. Personality and Individual Differences,
53(1), 59–63.
Federal Statistical Office (2014). Statistisches Jahrbuch. Wiesbaden.
Francis, L. J., and Kaldor, P. (2002). The relationship between psychological well-being and
Christian faith and practice in an Australian population sample. Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, 41(1), 179–184.
18
Friedberg, R.D. (1990). Holidays and emotional distress: not the villains they are perceived to
be. Psychology, 27-28, 59-61.
Geenen, N. Y. R., Hoheluechter, M., Langholf, V., and Walther, E. (2014). The beneficial
effects of prosocial spending on happiness: work hard, make money, and spend it on oth-
ers? Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(3), 204–208.
Green, M., and Elliott, M. (2010). Religion, Health, and Psychological Well-Being. Journal of
Religion and Health, 49(2), 149–163.
Hairon, N. (2008). How christmas festivities and pressures can damage health and well-being.
Nursing Times, 104(50-51), 33–4.
Holmes, T., and Rahe, R. (1967). Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal of Psychosomat-
ic Research, 11(2), 213–218.
Jessen, G., Jensen, B. F., Arensman, E., Bille-Brahe, U., Crepet, P., De Leo, D., … Wasser-
man, D. (1999). Attempted suicide and major public holidays in Europe: findings from the
WHO EURO Multicentre Study on Parasuicide. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 99(6),
412–418.
Kashdan, T. B., and Breen, W. L. (2007). Materialism and diminished well-being: Experien-
tial avoidance as a mediating mechanism. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,
26(5), 521–539.
Kasser, T. and Sheldon, K.M. (2002). What makes for a merry Christmas? Journal of Happi-
ness Studies, 3(4), 313-329.
Keatinge, W.R., and Donaldson, G. C. (2004). Changes in mortalities and hospital admissions
associated with holidays and respiratory illness: implications for medical services. Journal
of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 11(3), 275-281.
Keyes, C. L. M., and Reitzes, D. C. (2007). The role of religious identity in the mental health
of older working and retired adults. Aging and Mental Health, 11(4), 434–443.
Kloner, R. A. (2004). The ‘Merry Christmas Coronary’ and ‘Happy New Year Heart Attack’
phenomenon. Circulation, 110(25), 3744–3745.
Kuppens, P., Realo, A., and Diener, E. (2008). The role of positive and negative emotions in
life satisfaction judgment across nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
95(1), 66–75.
Langner, T.S. and Stanley, T.M. (1963). Life Stress and Mental Health. Glencoe: Free Press.
Maltby, J., Lewis, C. A., and Day, L. (1999). Religious orientation and psychological well-
being: The role of the frequency of personal prayer. British Journal of Health Psychology,
4, 363–378.
19
Manolis, C., and Roberts, J. A. (2012). Subjective Well-Being among Adolescent Consumers:
The Effects of Materialism, Compulsive Buying, and Time Affluence. Applied Research
in Quality of Life, 7(2), 117–135.
Marsland, A. L., Bachen, E. A., Cohen, S., Rabin, B., and Manuck, S. B. (2002). Stress, im-
mune reactivity and susceptibility to infectious disease. Physiology and Behavior, 77(4-5),
711–716.
Masterton, G. (1991). Monthly and Seasonal-Variation in Parasuicide - a Sex Difference.
British Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 155–157.
Miyazaki, A. (1993). How Many Shopping Days Until Christmas - a Preliminary Investiga-
tion of Time Pressures, Deadlines, and Planning Levels on Holiday Gift Purchases. Ad-
vances in Consumer Research, 20, 331–335.
Mutz, M., and Kaempfer, S. (2013). Emotions and Life Satisfaction in the “Event Society” -
A Comparative Analysis of 23 European Countries Following Gerhard Schulzes’ Diagno-
sis. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 65(2), 253–275.
Nawijn, J., Marchand, M.A., Veenhoven, R. & Vingerhoets, A.J. (2010). Vacationers happier,
but most not happier after a holiday. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 5(1), 35-47.
Norris, J. I., and Larsen, J. T. (2011). Wanting more than you have and it’s Consequences for
Well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(5), 877–885.
Oarga, C., Stavrova, O., and Fetchenhauer, D. (2015). When and why is helping others good
for well-being? The role of belief in reciprocity and conformity to society’s expectations.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 242–254.
Páez, D., Ángeles Bilbao, M., Bobowik, M., Campos, M. and Basabe, N. (2014). Merry
Christmas and Happy New Year! The impact of Christmas rituals on subjective wellbeing
and family's emotional climate. Revista de Psicología Social, 26 (3), 373-386
Phillips, D. P., Jarvinen, J. R., Abramson, I. S., and Phillips, R. R. (2004). Cardiac mortality is
higher around Christmas and New Year’s than at any other time - The holidays as a risk
factor for death. Circulation, 110(25), 3781–3788.
Post, S. G. (2005). Altruism, happiness, and health: It’s good to be good. International Jour-
nal of Behavioral Medicine, 12(2), 66–77.
Putnam, R.D. and Campbell, D.E. (2010). American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites
Us. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Richins, M., and Dawson, S. (1992). A Consumer Values Orientation for Materialism and Its
Measurement - Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3),
303–316.
20
Roberts, J.A., and Clement, A. (2007). Materialism and satisfaction with over-all quality of
life and eight life domains. Social Indicators Research, 82(1), 79–92.
Sanjuan, P. (2011). Affect Balance as Mediating Variable Between Effective Psychological
Functioning and Satisfaction with Life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(3), 373–384.
Sansone, R. A., and Sansone, L. A. (2011). The christmas effect on psychopathology. Innova-
tions in Clinical Neuroscience, 8(12), 10–3.
Schimmack, U. (2008). The Structure of Subjective Well-Being. In M. Eid, & R. J. Larsen
(Eds.), The Science of Subjective Well-Being (pp. 97-123). New York: Guilford Press.
Schimmack, U., Radhakrishnan, P., Oishi, S., Dzokoto, V., and Ahadi, S. (2002). Culture,
personality, and subjective well-being: Integrating process models of life satisfaction.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 582–593.
Schmitt, M. T., Davies, K., Hung, M., and Wright, S. C. (2010). Identity moderates the effects
of Christmas displays on mood, self-esteem, and inclusion. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 46(6), 1017–1022.
Schyns, P. (2002). Wealth of nations, individual income and life satisfaction in 42 countries:
A multilevel approach. Social Indicators Research, 60(1-3), 5–40.
Sirgy, M. J. (1998). Materialism and quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 43(3), 227–
260.
Suh, E., Diener, E., Oishi, S., and Triandis, H. C. (1998). The shifting basis of life satisfaction
judgments across cultures: Emotions versus norms. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74(2), 482–493.
Tennant, C. (2002). Life events, stress and depression: a review of recent findings. Australian
and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(2), 173–182.
Tsang, J.-A., Carpenter, T.P., Roberts, J.A., Frisch, M.B. & Carlisle, R.D. (2014). Why are
materialists less happy? The role of gratitude and need satisfaction in the relationship be-
tween materialism and life satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences 64(1), 62–
66.
Van Boven, L. (2005). Experientialism, materialism, and the pursuit of happiness. Review of
General Psychology, 9(2), 132–142.
Velamoor, V. R., Voruganti, L. P., and Nadkarni, N. K. (1999). Feelings about Christmas, as
reported by psychiatric emergency patients. Social Behavior and Personality, 27(3), 303–
308.
Wang, J., Schmitz, N., Dewa, C., and Stansfeld, S. (2009). Changes in Perceived Job Strain
and the Risk of Major Depression: Results From a Population-based Longitudinal Study.
American Journal of Epidemiology, 169 (9), 1085–1091.
21
White, H. (1980). A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct
Test for Heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817–838.
Wilson, T. D., and Gilbert, D. T. (2005). Affective forecasting - Knowing what to want. Cur-
rent Directions in Psychological Science, 14(3), 131–134.
Zonda, T., Bozsonyi, K., Veres, E., Lester, D. and Frank, M. (2008). The impact of holidays
on suicide in Hungary. Omega, 58(2), 153-162.
22
Table 1: Interview dates in the Pre-Christmas and Post-Christmas period
Interview date
N
Period
Interview date
N
Period
Sep 1
–
Dec 15
28,
218
Reference
Group
December
24
18
(Pre)Christmas
Dec
ember
16
249
(Pre)Christmas
December
25
17
(Pre)Christmas
December
17
308
(Pre)Christmas
December
26
70
(Pre)Christmas
December
18
346
(Pre)Christmas
December
27
252
Post
-
Christmas
December
19
327
(Pre)Christmas
December
28
231
Post
-
Christmas
December
20
289
(
Pre)Christmas
December
29
205
Post
-
Christmas
December
21
204
(Pre)Christmas
December
30
127
Post
-
Christmas
December
22
146
(Pre)Christmas
December
31
40
Post
-
Christmas
December
23
83
(Pre)Christmas
Jan 1
–
Jun
3
0
1
4
,0
80
Reference
Group
23
Table 2: Sample and Variable Descriptions
Variable
Name
Variable
Description
Univariate
St
a
tistics
Life Satisfaction
“All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a
whole?”
Response categories: 0=extremely dissatisfied …
10=extremel
y satisfied
.
M=6.90
S
D
=2.19
Emotional
Well
-
being
Difference score of positive emotions and negative em
o
tions.
Positive emotions: “Please tell me how much of the time during
the past week a) you felt happy, b) you enjoyed life, c) you had
a lot of energy, d) you felt calm and peaceful.” Negative emo-
tions: “Please tell me how much of the time during the past
week a) you felt depressed, b) you felt lonely, c) you felt sad, d)
you felt anxious.” Response categories: 1=none or almost none
of the time … 4=all or almost all of the time. The final measure
has a value range from
-
3 (
only negative emotions
)
to +3 (only
positive em
o
tions).
M=1.22
S
D
=1.05
Age
Age of the respondent in years
.
Original values.
M=
47
.
3
S
D
=
18
.
4
Gender
G
ender of the respondent
.
Response
categories: 1=female, 0=male
f
e
male=
53.6%
m
ale=
46.4%
Level of
Educ
a
tion
Highest level of education completed, according to ISCED levels
.
Values
:
1
=
less than lower secondary, 2=lower secondary,
3=lower tier upper secondary, 4=upper tier upper secondary,
5=advanced vocational, 6=lower tertiary (B.A. le
v
el), 7=higher
tertiary (M.A. level).
M=2.
98
S
D
=
2
.
18
Children
at Home
Respondent lives with child(ren) in household.
Response cat
e
gories: 1=yes, 0=no
yes=40.0%
no=60.0%
Unemplo
y
ment
Respondent is unemploye
d. Variable includes une
m
ployed
persons who are looking for a job as well as those not loo
k
ing
actively for a job. Response categories: 1=yes, 0=no
yes=7.0%
no=92.9%
Christian
Denom
i
nation
“Do you consider yourself as belonging to any particular rel
i-
gion
?” Variable includes pe
r
sons who self
-
identify as “Roman
Catholic” or “Protestant”.
C
ategories: 1=Christian affiliation,
0=other/no religious affiliation.
Christian=
47.7%,
non
-
Christian=
52.6%
Religiousness
“Regardless of whether you belong to a particul
ar rel
i
gion, how
religious would you say you are?”
Response categories: 0=not at all religious … 10=very reli-
gious. The dummy variable “High religiousness” includes all
Christians (see above) with a religiousness self-rating ≥6. The
dummy variable “
Low re
ligiousness
” includes Christians with a
rel
i
giousness self
-
rating
<
6.
High religiou
s-
ness
=
58.1
%,
Low religious-
ness=41.9%
(in per cent of
all Christians)
Subje
c
tive Health
“How is your health in general?”
Response categories: 1=very bad … 5=very good.
M=3.78
S
D
=0.91
Pre
-
Christmas
Inte
r
view
Respondent surveyed between December, 16 and Dece
m
ber, 26
of the respective year.
yes=4.7%
no=95.3%
Post
-
Christmas
Inte
r
view
Respondent surveyed between December,
27
and Dece
m
ber,
31
of the respective year.
yes=
1
.
9%
no=98
.
1
%
24
Table 3: Christmas Effects on Life Satisfaction
Satisfa
c
tion with Life
I
II
III
b
β
b
β
b
β
Age
-
0.04**
-
.389
-
0.04**
-
.385
-
0.04**
-
.376
Age (squared)
0.001**
.468
0.001**
.453
0.001**
.438
Gender
(female vs. male)
0.04*
.01
0
0.03
.006
0.01
.002
Level of e
ducation
0.05**
.053
0.05**
.053
0.05**
.053
Children at home
0.06*
.012
0.05*
.010
0.04*
.010
Unemployment
-
1.23**
-
.147
-
1.21**
-
.145
-
1.21**
-
.145
Subjective health
0.75**
.319
0.74**
.318
0.74**
.318
Christian den
omination
1)
-
-
0.23**
.053
-
-
Christians, low religiou
s
ness
2
)
-
-
-
-
0.04
.007
Christians, high religiou
s
ness
2
)
-
-
-
-
0.37**
.075
Pre
-
Christmas Interview
-
0.12*
-
.011
-
0.19**
-
.018
-
0.21**
-
.020
Post
-
Christmas Interview
0.04
.002
0.03
.002
0.03
.0
02
IA Pre
-
Christmas Inte
r
view*
Christian Denomin
a
tion
-
-
0.14
.010
-
-
IA Pre
-
Christmas Inte
r
view*
Christian, low religiou
s
ness
-
-
-
-
0.14
.007
IA Pre
-
Christmas Inte
r
view*
Christian, high religiou
s
ness
-
-
-
-
0.23*
.011
R²
.2
18
.22
0
.22
3
Notes: ESS Waves 3 + 6. Countries included: Belgium, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, Por-
tugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom. Linear regression analyses with fixed effects for country
differences. IA = Interaction effect. 1) Christian denomination: Dummy variable that includes respondents with
formal affiliation in the Roman-Catholic or Evangelic church. 2) Dummy variables that include Christians with
high/low religiousness, according to religiousness self-ratings (see Table 1). Significance: */** = p<.05/.01.
25
Table 4: Christmas Effect on Emotional Well-being
Affect Balance
I
II
III
b
β
b
β
b
β
Age
0.001
.014
0.001
.017
0.001
.018
Age (squared)
0.000
.034
0.000
.024
0.000
.022
Gender
(female vs. male)
-
0.18**
-
.089
-
0.19**
-
.091
-
0.19**
-
.092
Level of e
ducation
0.03**
.060
0.03**
.060
0.03**
.060
Children at home
0.04*
.019
0.04*
.018
0.04*
.018
Unemployment
-
0.29**
-
.073
-
0.29**
-
.071
-
0.29**
-
.071
Subjective health
0.46**
-
.405
0.46**
-
.405
0.46**
-
.405
Christian denomination
1)
-
-
0.07**
.033
-
-
Christians, low religiou
s
ness
2
)
-
-
-
-
0.06**
.022
Christians, high religio
u
s
ness
2
)
-
-
-
-
0.08**
.034
Pre
-
Christmas Interview
-
0.21**
-
.039
-
0.25**
-
.047
-
0.24**
-
.046
Post
-
Christmas Interview
-
0.09**
-
.010
-
0.09**
-
.010
-
0.09**
-
.010
IA Pre
-
Christmas Inte
r
view*
Christian Denomin
a
tion
-
-
0.08*
.011
-
-
IA Pre
-
Christmas Int
e
r
view*
Christian, low religiou
s
ness
-
-
-
-
0.08
.008
IA Pre
-
Christmas Inte
r
view*
Christian, high religiou
s
ness
-
-
-
-
0.07
.007
R²
.230
.231
.231
Notes: ESS Waves 3 + 6. Countries included: Belgium, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, Por-
tugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom. Linear regression analyses with fixed effects for country
differences. IA = Interaction effect. 1) Christian denomination: Dummy variable that includes respondents with
formal affiliation in the Roman-Catholic or Evangelic church. 2) Dummy variables that include Christians with
high/low religiousness, according to religiousness self-ratings (see Table 1). Significance: */** = p<.05/.01.
26
Figure 1: The Christmas effect on life satisfaction among religious
Christians and non-Christians, according to Table 3, model III.
Figure 2: The Christmas effect on emotional well-being among
Christians and non-Christians, according to Table 4, model II.
