you're all missing the point, and it isn't a particularly marxist study, either; if anything, it's upholding the idea that dystopia is a more realistic end than utopia.

what the study is stating is simply the old adage that money cannot buy happiness. happiness is tied up into purpose. so, when basic needs are met, people lose meaning to existence. if you want to see this in action, you don't need to go to an orwellian fabrication or mid 80s poland, you just need to go to an american suburb and observe the average teenager in it's natural environment.

one could perhaps argue that the solution to the ennuie that bourgeois comfort produces is labour. marxists and neo-liberals would actually agree on this point.

...or one could accept the existentialist position and recognize the inherent futility in the utilitarian project of maximizing "happiness". apathy for all!

https://phys.org/news/2013-11-economic-happiness-sweet-gdp-person.html

i mean, take it to a basic biological example everybody understands. you put a tiger in a wildlife sanctuary and bring it food, it's miserable. it wants to hunt. it has a biological imperative to do so.

humans are not as predatory creatures, but the same basic concept applies. we need to have some meaning. some challenge. some reason to exist.