The Effect of Light on Wellbeing: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.1007/s10902-024-00838-4

A. Landvreugd, M. G. Nivard, M. Bartels

{"title":"The Effect of Light on Wellbeing: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis","authors":"A. Landvreugd, M. G. Nivard, M. Bartels","doi":"10.1007/s10902-024-00838-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Due to the dominant presence of studies and reviews exploring the impact of light on physical and mental illness, studies specifically investigating the effect of light on wellbeing are often overshadowed. The aim of this review is to give an overview of specifically these studies conducted on light and wellbeing, and to summarize the reported effects. After a literature search in PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science, 74 studies were found eligible to be included in this systematic review, i.e. they included surveys assessing wellbeing, happiness, life satisfaction, positive affect, or quality of life. Of these 74 studies, 30 were included in the meta-analysis and assessed for their risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed a pooled effect size of 0.46 (CI = 0.29–0.62), indicating that light has a small-to-moderate positive effect on wellbeing. After removing outliers and studies with a high risk of bias, the sensitivity analysis showed the pooled effect size to be robust (0.53, CI = 0.35–0.72). Although the sensitivity analysis indicated a robust effect, the results might still be biased due to the relatively small sample sizes, risk of bias in the designs (due to e.g. difficulties handling confounders and the reporting of the outcomes), and publication bias. We encourage future studies to replicate these positive results in larger samples, and to give extensive details about the light design and statistical outcomes, to increase the number of studies that can be included in these types of systematic reviews.","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00838-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Due to the dominant presence of studies and reviews exploring the impact of light on physical and mental illness, studies specifically investigating the effect of light on wellbeing are often overshadowed. The aim of this review is to give an overview of specifically these studies conducted on light and wellbeing, and to summarize the reported effects. After a literature search in PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science, 74 studies were found eligible to be included in this systematic review, i.e. they included surveys assessing wellbeing, happiness, life satisfaction, positive affect, or quality of life. Of these 74 studies, 30 were included in the meta-analysis and assessed for their risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed a pooled effect size of 0.46 (CI = 0.29–0.62), indicating that light has a small-to-moderate positive effect on wellbeing. After removing outliers and studies with a high risk of bias, the sensitivity analysis showed the pooled effect size to be robust (0.53, CI = 0.35–0.72). Although the sensitivity analysis indicated a robust effect, the results might still be biased due to the relatively small sample sizes, risk of bias in the designs (due to e.g. difficulties handling confounders and the reporting of the outcomes), and publication bias. We encourage future studies to replicate these positive results in larger samples, and to give extensive details about the light design and statistical outcomes, to increase the number of studies that can be included in these types of systematic reviews.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Happiness Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

6.50%

发文量

110

期刊介绍： The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?