Keywords: cross-cultural research; subjective well-being; measurement error

While valid assessment of subjective well-being (SWB) is at the forefront of social science research, literature increasingly reports cross-cultural noncomparability for measurement tools designed to capture SWB. Notably, typical SWB measures use multiple statements that respondents rate using Likert-type, agree-disagree response scales. One of the important and popular SWB measures is the Satisfaction with Life (SWL) scale developed by Diener and his colleagues. The SWL scale uses five items, all written in the direction of satisfaction. A potential source of measurement noncomparability of the SWL Scale is response style, a tendency for respondents to choose certain response options regardless of the question content. Acquiescence response style (ARS) a tendency to choose responses indicating agreement, is an example of such response styles. With ARS, it becomes murky whether a high SWL score is a reflection of true life satisfaction or ARS. Comparing cultural groups on SWL scores may become futile if the comparison groups engage in different response styles.
This study examines an alternative version of the SWL scale that balances items by re-writing some of the original items in the dissatisfaction direction through randomized experiments implemented in five surveys that targeted various racial, ethnic and linguistic groups in the U.S. and Mexico (English-dominant Hispanic Americans, Spanish-dominant Hispanic Americans, non-Hispanic White Americans, non-Hispanic Black Americans, English-dominant Korean Americans, Korean-dominant Korean Americans and Mexicans). Our analysis compares the original and alternative versions of the SWL scale on their response distributions, measurement reliability and concurrent validity in order to ascertain whether scale balancing of the SWL offers merits to improving measurement comparability.