Perceived Social Fairness and Trust in Government Serially Mediate the Effect of Governance Quality on Subjective Well-being

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2024 Jul 10

PMID 38987608

Authors

Yongqiang Ma

Baobin Ma

Lichun Yu

Mingyang Ma

Yibing Dong

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

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.

References

Acar Y, Ulug O . 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. 2021; 61(3):861-881. DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12505. View

Ott J . Government and Happiness in 130 Nations: Good Governance Fosters Higher Level and More Equality of Happiness. Soc Indic Res. 2011; 102(1):3-22. PMC: 3068254. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-010-9719-z. View

Diener E, Oishi S, Tay L . Advances in subjective well-being research. Nat Hum Behav. 2019; 2(4):253-260. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6. View

Diener E . New findings and future directions for subjective well-being research. Am Psychol. 2012; 67(8):590-7. DOI: 10.1037/a0029541. View

Zhi K, Tan Q, Chen S, Chen Y, Wu X, Xue C . 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. 2022; 19(11). PMC: 9180476. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19116867. View

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. 2021; 38(4):101597. PMC: 8494525. DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2021.101597. View

Herrera C, Torres-Vallejos J, Martinez-Libano J, Rubio A, Cespedes C, Oyanedel J . Perceived Collective School Efficacy Mediates the Organizational Justice Effect in Teachers' Subjective Well-Being. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(17). PMC: 9517792. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710963. View

Ugur Z . How does Inequality Hamper Subjective Well-being? The Role of Fairness. Soc Indic Res. 2021; 158(2):377-407. PMC: 8122217. DOI: 10.1007/s11205-021-02711-w. View

Di Martino S, Prilleltensky I . Happiness as fairness: The relationship between national life satisfaction and social justice in EU countries. J Community Psychol. 2020; 48(6):1997-2012. DOI: 10.1002/jcop.22398. View

10.

Wu Y, Qin G, He C, Wang W . How Institutional Evaluation Bridges Uncertainty and Happiness: A Study of Young Chinese People. Front Psychol. 2021; 12:651844. PMC: 8548604. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651844. View

11.

Adams J . TOWARD AN UNDERSTANDING OF INEQUITY. J Abnorm Psychol. 1963; 67:422-36. DOI: 10.1037/h0040968. View

12.

Hayes A, Scharkow M . The relative trustworthiness of inferential tests of the indirect effect in statistical mediation analysis: does method really matter?. Psychol Sci. 2013; 24(10):1918-27. DOI: 10.1177/0956797613480187. View

13.

Scarpa M, Di Martino S, Prilleltensky I . Mattering Mediates Between Fairness and Well-being. Front Psychol. 2021; 12:744201. PMC: 8630584. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.744201. View

14.

MacKinnon D, Lockwood C, Williams J . Confidence Limits for the Indirect Effect: Distribution of the Product and Resampling Methods. Multivariate Behav Res. 2010; 39(1):99. PMC: 2821115. DOI: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4. View

15.

Brosnan S, de Waal F . Evolution of responses to (un)fairness. Science. 2014; 346(6207):1251776. PMC: 4451566. DOI: 10.1126/science.1251776. View

16.

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. 2022; 13:855530. PMC: 9014885. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.855530. View

17.

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. 2023; 20(1). PMC: 9819754. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20010710. View

18.

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. 2022; 19(10). PMC: 9140579. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19106326. View

19.

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. 2022; 12:731982. PMC: 8762249. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.731982. View

20.

Liu Y, Li L, Miao G, Yang X, Wu Y, Xu Y . 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. 2022; 19(1). PMC: 8751110. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19010389. View