**5. Conclusions**

This study explored the impact of four types of CHECS on the life satisfaction of Chinese older adults, namely, LCS, MCS, SCS, and RLS. The results indicate that MCS, SCS, and RLS had varying degrees of improvement in their life satisfaction. However, the effect of LCS on their life satisfaction was insignificant. Next, using cohort difference analysis, this work then explored the heterogeneous impact of the four types of CHECS on the life satisfaction of the elderly in three categories: whether the ADL were limited, the level of depression, and whether they lived with their families. The four types of CHECS had a more prominent effect on the life satisfaction of Chinese older adults who lived with their children, whose daily living activities were not limited, and whose depression level was generally lower. The findings offer an essential reference for the Chinese governmen<sup>t</sup> that CHECS need precise policies for different elderly groups, attention to the positive impact of SCS and RLS on the life satisfaction of the elderly, and the substantive effectiveness of LCS and MCS.

However, several limitations in our study could be improved in future research. First of all, due to the limitations of cross-sectional data, we could not discuss the long-term effect of CHECS on the life satisfaction of the elderly. Secondly, we attenuated the endogeneity problems caused by sample self-selection by PSM and adding control variables. However, endogeneity brought by missing variables is still unavoidable in our study. Therefore, a further collection of panel data for two-stage least squares (2SLS) or difference in difference (DID) analysis is a direction worth paying attention to in follow-up research.

**Author Contributions:** Methodology, Y.M.; formal analysis, Z.Z.; data curation, Y.S. and R.D.; writing—original draft preparation, Z.Z.; writing—review and editing, Z.Z. and Y.M.; project administration, Y.H.; funding acquisition, Y.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This work is funded by the Center for Balance Architecture, Zhejiang University (Project No. 20203512-28C) and the MOE Youth Funded Project of Humanities and Social Sciences (Project No. 20YJC840008).

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** This study was performed in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration guidelines and approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Peking University (IRB00001052–13074).

**Informed Consent Statement:** Each participant was a volunteer, who was informed of the study objective and context and provided their written informed consent regarding privacy and information managemen<sup>t</sup> policies.

**Data Availability Statement:** Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) belongs to public database (https://opendata.pku.edu.cn/dataverse/CHADS (accessed on 17 October 2022)). Users can download relevant data for free for research and publish relevant articles. Our study is based on open source data, so there are no ethical issues or other conflicts of interest.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
