Correct me if I'm mistaken, but are you saying, on the one hand, you're going with the study stats, but on the other to say you can't see how the study could measure happiness stats??
What I'm saying is that anecdotes don't make a science. Now, the study
might not be good science, either - but anecdotes
definately aren't good science, so it's useless to try to disprove a study with anecdotes.
It's a rather silly study. it appears politically motivated.
What possible motivation could lead someone to pick
Nigeria as the happiest nation? It's "so weird it must be true."
I'm still shaking my head on the #1 pick though, regardless. How could anyone in their right mind pick this looser, strife ridden unstable nation as no. one of all the nice places in the world?
Because it might be that happiness is unrelated to all the various metrics that you think it is. It may very well be that everything that the Swiss have that the Nigerians don't - good watches, guns in every home, chocolate - are totally unrelated to real happiness. Maybe happiness isn't related to material goods. Maybe, as the study suggests, you're happier in cultures that have little because you don't know what you don't have.
In the western world we're bombarded by images of things we don't have. If all you know is your village, then you don't know what's out there for you to have. It seems increasingly likely to me as I write this that the happiest people are those who don't know what they don't have. That sounds like Nigeria to me.