Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Happiest Life Periods of Older Europeans: The Role of Socio-Economic Circumstances and Personality Traits Cover

The Happiest Life Periods of Older Europeans: The Role of Socio-Economic Circumstances and Personality Traits

Central European Economic Journal
Volume 13 (2026): Issue 60 (January 2026)
By: ,   and    
Open Access
|Aug 2026
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Table 1.

Description of sample: proportion of respondents who identified the happiest period in their lives; mean age at the beginning of this happiest period; and its median duration—by country and region

CountryNumber of respondentsRegionProportion of respondents who identified the happiest period in their livesMean age when the happiest period startedMedian length of happiest period (in years)
Czech Republic2,957East Central Europe58.7825.7426.00
Estonia3,063East Central Europe50.1124.7720.00
Poland1,012East Central Europe44.7624.8721.00
Denmark2,307Scandinavia38.7130.0213.00
Sweden2,244Scandinavia45.3227.4318.00
Croatia1,203South East Europe50.9624.2725.00
Greece2,111South East Europe45.4328.0624.00
Slovenia1,674South East Europe28.7325.7115.00
Italy2,502South West Europe52.5227.7220.00
Portugal762South West Europe50.2625.3625.00
Spain2,842South West Europe48.9126.3929.00
Austria1,854Western Europe41.5928.1914.00
Belgium3,113Western Europe46.6126.2516.50
France2,135Western Europe77.5221.1434.00
Germany2,777Western Europe40.7327.4814.00
Luxembourg771Western Europe39.8224.8716.00
Switzerland1,855Western Europe38.8727.8216.00
Total35,182-47.7926.1420.00

[i] Source: own calculations using SHARELIFE waves 3 and 7, releases 7.1.0. and 7.1.1., respectively

Figure 1.

Share of people who reported that the happiest period in their life was still ongoing (among those who were able to identify such a period), by country. Source: own calculations using SHARELIFE waves 3 and 7 (releases 7.1.0. and 7.1.1. respectively)

Table 2.

Logistic regression estimates of the probability of people being able to identify the happiest period in life

VariableOdds ratioStd. Err.z
Socio-economic characteristics
Female1.28***0.039.99
Education (in years)1.03***0.008.78
Logarithm of household income1.06**0.022.53
Age at interview0.99***0.00−4.75
Current job situation (retired= ref.)
Employed or self-employed0.88***0.03−3.58
Unemployed0.920.08−0.93
Permanently sick or disabled1.24***0.102.80
Homemaker1.040.050.79
Other1.140.101.50
Health status (excellent= ref.)
Very good or good1.13**0.062.43
Fair1.21***0.063.64
Poor1.22***0.073.32
Relationships and family
Ever in a relationship1.20***0.082.73
Ever lost a partner1.49***0.0512.17
Ever got divorced1.41***0.0411.34
Had children1.13***0.052.66
Had grandchildren0.990.03−0.21
Network satisfaction0.98**0.01−2.12
Religiosity (very religious= ref.)
Religious0.95*0.03−1.77
Not religious0.93***0.03−2.69
Difficult events
Experienced financial problems2.02***0.0528.28
Experienced hunger1.15***0.062.79
Experienced discrimination1.47***0.077.69
Individual characteristics
Extroversion0.96***0.01−2.90
Neuroticism1.17***0.0112.89
Openness1.11***0.01852
Agreeableness1.08***0.025.17
Conscientiousness1.000.010.25
Region dummies (South West Europe= ref.)
Scandinavia0.62***0.03−9.83
Western Europe0.73***0.03−8.17
East Central Europe0.91**0.04−2.16
South East Europe0.59***0.02−12.83
Constant0.18***0.05−6.21
Number of observations35,182

Notes:

* p < 0.1,

** p < 0.05,

*** p < 0.01, specificity is 70.20%, sensitivity is about 51.61%, the value of the likelihood ratio test statistics is 2,495.68, and pseudo-R-squared is about 0.05

Source: own calculations using SHARELIFE waves 3 and 7 (releases 7.1.0. and 7.1.1. respectively)

Table 3.

Cox regression estimates of the hazard ratio for a person having the happiest period in their life curtailed, including time-varying covariates

VariableHazard ratioStd. Err.Z
Socio-economic characteristics
Female1.10***0.034.08
Education (in years)1.03***0.006.71
Homeowner1.71***0.108.82
Age at start1.000.001.54
Job situation
In work1.24***0.038.05
Retired1.10**0.052.14
Unemployed1.97***0.206.54
Health status
Illness1.110.091.21
Relationships and family
Relationship0.63***0.02−15.53
Wedding1.80***0.119.26
Divorce4.74***0.6012.39
Partner’s death20.08***1.5638.67
Child1.69***0.0713.24
Difficult events
Experienced financial problems1.17***0.037.43
Experienced hunger1.000.040.11
Experienced discrimination1.12***0.042.89
Individual characteristics
Extroversion0.92***0.02−4.40
Neuroticism1.010.020.44
Openness1.06***0.023.22
Agreeableness0.96***0.01−3.23
Conscientiousness0.91***0.02−4.56
Region dummies (South West Europe= ref.)
Scandinavia1.12**0.052.54
Western Europe1.010.030.23
East Central Europe0.940.05−1.21
South East Europe1.10**0.042.52
Interactions with time
Education1.00***0.00−3.40
Divorce1.03***0.015.42
Partner’s death1.03***0.0012.08
Illness1.01**0.002.51
Extroversion1.00**0.002.32
Neuroticism1.00***0.003.11
Openness1.00**0.00−3.07
Conscientiousness1.00***0.003.18
East Central Europe1.00**0.00−2.56
Number of respondents15,153
Number of observations382,119

Source: own calculations using SHARELIFE waves 3 and 7 (releases 7.1.0. and 7.1.1. respectively).

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01,

*** p<0.001

Table A1.

Explanatory variables and their descriptive statistics (means for continuous variables and shares of respondents for binary and categorical variables)

VariableDescriptionMean (st. dev.)/percentage
LogitCox
FemaleDummy, 1 if a female59.0464.41
EducationYears of education11.01 (4.40)11.13 (4.37)
Household incomeHousehold income per capita at the point of interview (Euro)14,999.19 (18,209.08)-
HomeownerDummy, 1 if they became the owner of a house or apartment in this year-32.19
Age at interviewAge at the point of interview69.95 (9.27)-
Age at startAge at the beginning of the happiest period in their life-26.15 (13.00)
Current job situation
RetiredCategorical variable with five levels describing the employment status at the point of interview67.08-
Employed or self-employed19.30
Unemployed1.70
Permanently sick or disabled2.35
Homemaker7.92
Other1.65
In workDummy, 1 if respondent worked in this year-83.96
RetirementDummy, 1 if respondent was retired in this year-32.27
UnemploymentDummy, 1 if respondent was unemployed in this year-3.61
Health status
ExcellentCategorical variable with four levels describing health status at point of interview5.88-
Very good or good53.61
Fair29.92
Poor10.59
IllnessDummy, 1 if respondent was seriously ill or disabled in this year-10.31
Ever had a partnerDummy, 1 if has ever had either a married or unmarried partner96.25-
RelationshipDummy, 1 if was in a married or unmarried relationship in this year-87.98
WeddingDummy, 1 if got married in this year-55.74
Ever lost a partnerDummy, 1 if lost a partner16.75-
Death of a partnerDummy, 1 if lost a partner in this year-11.56
Ever got divorcedDummy, 1 if got divorced17.52-
DivorceDummy, 1 if got divorced in this year-6.84
Had childrenDummy, 1 if had children90.82-
ChildDummy, 1 if respondent’s child was born or adopted in this year-68.05
Had grandchildrenDummy, 1 if had grandchildren69.79-
Network SatisfactionSatisfaction with social network, where 0 means completely dissatisfied and 10 means completely satisfied9.00 (1.20)-
Religiosity
Very religiousCategorical variable with three levels, very religious means a person prays at least a couple of times a week, religious means a person prays at most once a week, and not religious a person who never prays36.36-
Religious22.50
Not religious41.14
Experienced financial problemsHave had a distinct period of financial hardship31.3639.90
Experienced hungerHave had a distinct period during which they experienced hunger5.746.86
Experienced discriminationHave been a victim of discrimination or persecution5.507.07
ExtroversionExtroversion score, where the greater the score is, the more extroverted the person is3.50 (0.94)3.49 (0.94)
NeuroticismNeuroticism score, where the greater the score is, the more neurotic the person is2.64 (1.02)2.73 (1.04)
OpennessOpenness score, where the greater the score, is the more open the person is3.31 (0.97)3.38 (0.98)
AgreeablenessAgreeableness score, where the greater the score, the more agreeable the person is3.72 (0.81)3.72 (0.81)
ConscientiousnessConscientiousness score, where the greater the score, the more conscientious the person is4.11 (0.79)4.12 (0.79)

[i] Notes: For variables that describe respondents’ circumstances in a particular year, the given percentage represents the share of respondents who reported this event as being part of the happiest period in their lives.

[ii] Source: Own calculations using SHARELIFE waves 3 and 7 (releases 7.1.0. and 7.1.1. respectively).

Table A2.

Detailed results of the test of the proportional hazards assumption based on Schoenfeld residuals.

Variablerhochi2dfProb > chi2
Female−0.010.2610.61
Education−0.039.8010.00
Homeowner0.010.7310.39
Age at start−0.010.2610.61
In work−0.023.0510.08
Retirement0.010.9710.32
Unemployment0.000.0310.87
Illness0.025.2810.02
Relationship0.000.0010.98
Wedding0.022.3310.13
Divorce0.0418.3110.00
Partner’s death0.15183.4610.00
Child0.010.7710.38
Experienced financial problems0.000.1410.71
Experienced hunger0.000.0010.94
Experienced discrimination−0.010.9410.33
Extroversion0.024.3010.04
Neuroticism0.037.5810.01
Openness−0.037.6810.01
Agreeableness0.000.2310.63
Conscientiousness0.037.7910.01
Scandinavia−0.011.9110.17
Western Europe−0.010.2410.63
East Central Europe−0.024.7510.03
South East Europe0.011.2410.27
South West Europe..1.
Global test316.82250.00

[i] Source: Own calculations using SHARELIFE waves 3 and 7, releases 7.1.0. and 7.1.1., respectively.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ceej-2026-0016 | Journal eISSN: 2543-6821 | Journal ISSN: 2544-9001
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 280 - 303
Submitted on: Aug 4, 2025
Accepted on: Jun 17, 2026
Published on: Aug 3, 2026
Published by: Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
happiness,
SHARELIFE,
ageing,
retrospective data,
Cox proportional hazards model
JEL:
I31,
J10
Related subjects:
Business and economics,
Political economics,
Economic theory, systems and structures,
Microeconomics,
Macroeconomics,
Economic policy

© 2026 Magdalena Grabowska, Agata Górny, Małgorzata Kalbarczyk, published by Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 13 (2026): Issue 60 (January 2026)
Previous article
Next article