Research · Draft protocol v0.3
Study protocol
Purpose: to describe how life satisfaction and wellbeing change over the first year among people new to The Journey — honestly, including where they do not.
- Design
- Prospective, observational, single-arm cohort. Permanent rolling enrolment.
- Population
- New adult participants (18+) entering 90-day Mentorship, 12-month Trainer Certification or 18-month Practitioner Accreditation.
- Exclusion
- Prior Journey programme participation (flagged for research review; may join a separate descriptive sub-sample).
- Baseline
- Completed before meaningful programme exposure; chronology of programme start and baseline is recorded and checked.
- Follow-up
- Days 90, 180, 270, 365 from programme start, each with a ±14 day response window.
- Primary outcome
- OECD overall life satisfaction (0–10), change from baseline to day 365.
- Secondary outcomes
- Cantril present-life ladder; OECD worthwhile; five life-domain satisfactions; three eudaimonic items; WHO-5 (0–100); four Journey exploratory items; optional OECD pain item.
- Qualitative
- Optional reflections, analysed thematically and reported in aggregate only.
- Reporting
- Annual reports including positive, neutral and negative results and attrition.
The measures in plain English
The study borrows well-known questions so results can be understood alongside other research. Here is what each one is — and is not.
Cantril Ladder
A question format (scale), first published by psychologist Hadley Cantril in 1965
What it measures
People picture a ladder from 0 (worst possible life for them) to 10 (best possible life) and say which step they stand on now. A second, optional question asks where they expect to stand about five years from now.
Why we use it
It lets each person judge their life by their own standards, and it is one of the most widely used life-evaluation questions in the world, so our figures can be read against a familiar reference point.
How to read it
Higher is a better self-rated life. A one-step change on one person's ladder is small and can come from many things; we look at group patterns over the year.
How it differs: It is a scale, not an organisation. It asks for an overall judgement of life against a self-chosen best and worst, rather than 'satisfaction' (OECD) or recent mood (WHO-5).
Gallup
An independent research and polling organisation
What it measures
The Gallup World Poll asks people in many countries both Cantril questions — present life and life in five years, each 0–10. These answers supply the life-evaluation data used in the World Happiness Report.
Why we use it
We use the same ladder wording so that results can be compared, in a broad way, with a large international body of data. We do not use Gallup's services and are not connected to Gallup.
How to read it
Gallup groups people as 'thriving' (present 7 or more AND future 8 or more), 'suffering' (present 4 or less AND future 4 or less), or otherwise 'struggling'. These labels need both questions. Because our five-year question is optional, we only apply them to people who answered both, and we never apply them from the present ladder alone.
How it differs: Gallup is the organisation that runs the survey; the Cantril Ladder is the question it uses. Gallup is not a standard-setting or health body.
OECD
An international organisation that sets statistical standards for its member countries
What it measures
The OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being (2025 update) recommend a core set of questions — satisfaction with life overall, whether the things you do are worthwhile, and physical pain — plus extended modules on areas of life (domains) and on meaning and growth (eudaimonia).
Why we use it
Their goal is comparable, carefully worded measures of how people experience their lives, collected alongside economic statistics. Following that guidance makes our main outcome — overall life satisfaction — standard and transparent.
How to read it
All items use 0–10. Higher means more satisfied, more worthwhile, or more pain (the pain item runs the other way). Some wording here is still marked 'to verify' against the published guidelines.
How it differs: The OECD publishes guidance; it does not run this study and has not reviewed or approved it. 'Satisfaction' asks how content you are, which is close to — but not the same as — the Cantril ladder's best-to-worst life judgement.
WHO-5
A short questionnaire published by the World Health Organization, a health agency
What it measures
Five positive statements about mental wellbeing over the last two weeks (for example 'I have felt calm and relaxed'), each answered from 0 ('At no time') to 5 ('All of the time').
Why we use it
It adds a short, widely used view of recent day-to-day wellbeing, which can move differently from overall life judgements.
How to read it
The five answers are added (0–25) and multiplied by four, giving 0–100. Higher means better recent wellbeing. It is not a diagnosis and this study does not use it to screen or advise anyone.
How it differs: It uses a 0–5 answer scale, not 0–10, and covers the last two weeks rather than life as a whole. Licensing and translation terms are still to be confirmed. The WHO is not involved in this study.
Journey exploratory items
The four Journey items (meeting difficult emotions, recognising habitual reactions, compassion, authenticity) were written for this study. They are exploratory and not validated. They are not OECD or WHO measures and should be read with more caution than the established scales.
Associations, not causes. Every change this study reports is an association over time, not proof of cause. Without a comparison group we cannot say The Journey caused any change — life events, expectations and natural ups and downs also play a part. Gallup, the OECD and the WHO are not partners in, and have not endorsed, reviewed or certified, this study.
Pre-registration
The protocol, hypotheses and analysis plan will be pre-registered on a public registry (e.g. OSF) before the first baseline response is collected. Not yet registered
Pre-specified analysis
- Linear mixed-effects models: outcome ~ wave (categorical) + track + baseline covariates + (1 + time | participant).
- Estimates reported with 95% confidence intervals; effect sizes alongside p-values; no subgroup claims beyond pre-specified ones.
- Proportions improving, unchanged and declining by ±1 point (0–10 scales) and ±10 points (WHO-5).
Attrition and missingness
- Wave-by-wave response rates published every year.
- Comparison of baseline characteristics of completers and non-completers.
- Primary analysis under missing-at-random via mixed models; sensitivity via multiple imputation and δ-adjusted pattern-mixture models for missing-not-at-random.
Causal language
Without a suitable comparison group, the study will not claim that The Journey causes changes in wellbeing. Future designs (e.g. waitlist comparison) may be considered under independent advice.
Sample size
Sample size and precision plan pending appointment of the independent statistician. Pending
Ethics and governance
No ethics approval has been sought or granted. An independent ethics review route is to be determined. To be determined
Instruments and data dictionary · Privacy and consent · Governance roles