5

Over and over again sociologists have found that people in the countryside report a higher happiness index than people who live in cities. Is this effect well received by all sociologists?

Source:

https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/research-confirms-country-folk-are-way-happier-than-city-people/

https://www.citylab.com/design/2011/10/urban-rural-happiness-debate/290/

Brythan
  • 10,162
  • 5
  • 46
  • 53
geocalc33
  • 257
  • 1
  • 7
  • 5
    At Skeptics SE we usually only check whether a claim is true or not. In this case you are essentially saying "This claim is probably true. **Why** is it true?". I do not really see that this is within the scope for Skeptics SE. –  Sep 10 '18 at 06:06
  • 3
    There are several Stack Exchange sites where this question *may* be on-topic, but borderline in all cases: [Outdoors.SE], [Health.SE], and [Psychology.SE] come to mind, but I'm not sure it would be a good fit on any of them. You may try to ask on their meta site or check what previous questions have been well received. – gerrit Sep 10 '18 at 11:59
  • @dandavis: source? I haven't heard that. I have heard that farmers have a higher suicide rate, but rural != farmers. (I believe that the later has to do with a cultural identity tied to a specific profession, as well as land ownership, especially of a specific geographical piece of land, combined with an extremely stressful cashflow situation and high investment in land and machinery). – sharur Sep 11 '18 at 01:50
  • 1
    @sharur: to me, rural means "low population density", and looking at the [US states raked by suicide rates](https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/population-health/us-states-ranked-by-suicide-rate.html), we see the ranking is very close to the population density ranking of each state (in reverse order). – dandavis Sep 11 '18 at 02:11

0 Answers0