Tripartite model of subjective well-being

src: i.ytimg.com

Subjective wellbeing (SWB) is a self-reported measure of welfare, usually obtained by questionnaire.

The Tripartite model of subjective wellbeing ( SWB ) is a theory developed in 1984 by Diener that describes how people experience their quality of life and includes emotional and cognitive reactions of judgment. It shows "three distinct components but often associated with wellbeing: frequent positive influences, rarely negative affect, and cognitive evaluation such as life satisfaction."

Therefore SWB includes mood and emotion as well as evaluation of one's satisfaction with the general and specific areas in one's life. The concepts covered by SWB include happiness.

SWBs tend to be stable over time and strongly associated with personality traits. There is evidence that health and SWB may interfere with each other, because good health tends to be associated with greater happiness, and a number of studies have found that positive emotions and optimism can have a beneficial effect on health.

Video Tripartite model of subjective well-being

Komponen SWB

Diener et al. argues that the various components of SWB represent different constructs that need to be understood separately, even though they are closely related. Therefore, SWB can be considered "a common area of ​​scientific interest rather than a special construction". Due to the special focus on the subjective aspects of welfare, the SWB definition usually excludes objective conditions such as material or health conditions, although this may affect the SWB rating. Therefore, the SWB definition focuses on how one evaluates one's own life, including the emotional experience of pleasure versus pain in response to a particular event and cognitive evaluation of what people perceive as a good life. SWB components related to influences include positive influences (experiencing pleasant emotions and moods) and low negative influences (experiencing unpleasant emotions and moods), and "overall influence" or "hedonistic balance", defined as the overall balance between positive and negative influences, and is usually measured as the difference between the two. High positive influences and low negative influences are often highly correlated, but not always.

There are two SWB components. One is the Affective Balance and the other is Life Satisfaction. Individual scores on two sizes are summed to yield a total SWB score. In some cases, these scores are kept separate.

Affective balance

Affective balance refers to the emotions, moods, and feelings a person has. These can all be positive, all negative, or a combination of both positive and negative. Several studies have also shown that reward feelings are separate from positive and negative influences.

Life satisfaction

Life satisfaction (global appraisal in a person's life) and satisfaction with a particular life domain (eg job satisfaction) is considered a cognitive component of SWB. The term "happiness" is also commonly used in the case of the SWB and has been defined as a variety of "satisfaction of desire and purpose" (as it relates to life satisfaction), as "positive dominant rather than negative influence" (because it is related to the emotional component of the SWB) as "satisfaction," and as a "consistent and optimistic mood" and may imply an affective evaluation of one's overall life. Life satisfaction can also be known as a "stable" component in a person's life. The affective concepts of SWB can be considered in terms of instantaneous emotional states as well as in moods and long-term trends (ie how many positive and/or negative influences a person experiences in general over a period of time). Life satisfaction and in some research happiness are usually considered over a long period of time, up to a lifetime. "Quality of life" has also been studied as a SWB conceptualization. Although the exact definition varies, it is usually measured as a welfare aggregation across multiple domains of life and may include subjective and objective components.

Measurement of SWB components

Life satisfaction and balance are generally measured separately and independently. Life satisfaction is generally measured using self-report methods. The general measure for life satisfaction is the questionnaire. Affective balance is also generally measured using self-report methods. An example of an affective equilibrium measurement is HE (Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule). The problem with the current measurement of life satisfaction and affective equilibrium is that they are self-reports. The problem with self-reports is that participants may lie or at least not tell the whole truth on the questionnaire. Participants may lie or refrain from revealing certain things because they are embarrassed or they may fill in what they believe the researcher wants to see in the results. To get more accurate results, other measurement methods have been used to determine a person's SWB. Another way to corroborate or ensure that accurate self-report results is through an informant's report. Informant reports are given to the closest friends and family of the participants and they are asked to fill out surveys or forms that ask about participants' moods, emotions, and lifestyles. Participants can write in self-reports that they are very happy, but friends and family members note that he is always depressed. This will obviously be a contradiction in the results that will ultimately lead to inaccurate results. Another method to gain a better understanding of the correct results is through the ESM, or Sampling Methods of Experience. In this size, participants are given a pager/pager that will ring randomly throughout the day. Each time the pager/pager goes off, the participant will stop what he is doing and record the activities that they are currently engaged in and their current moods and feelings. Tracking this for a week or a month will give researchers a better understanding of the emotions, moods, and feelings that participants experience, and how these factors interact with other thoughts and behaviors. The third measurement to ensure validity is the Method of Reconstruction Day. In this measure, participants fill in diaries from previous days activities. Participants are then asked to describe each activity and report on how they feel, what mood they are in, and whatever emotions come up. Thus to ensure valid results, a researcher may tend to use self-reports along with other measurements mentioned above. A person with a high level of life satisfaction and a positive affective balance is said to have a high SWB level.

Maps Tripartite model of subjective well-being

Theory

Theories that cause SWB tend to emphasize top-down or bottom-up influences.

Top-down perspectives

In a top-down view, the global features of personality affect how people perceive events. Individuals may therefore have a global tendency to view life consistently positive or negative, depending on their stable personality traits. SWB's top-down theory shows that people have a genetic predisposition to be happy or unhappy and this predisposition determines their SWB "setpoint". The Set Point theory implies that a baseline level or a person's equilibrium of SWB is a consequence of heredity characteristics and therefore, almost entirely predetermined at birth. The evidence for this genetic predisposition comes from a genetic-behavior study that has found that positive and negative affectivity each have high heritability (40% and 55%, respectively, in one study). Many twin studies confirm the idea of ​​set point theory, however, they do not rule out the possibility that it is possible for individuals to experience long-term changes in SWB.

Diener et al. Note that heritability studies are limited because they describe long-term SWB in people's samples in modern western society but may not apply to more extreme environments that might affect SWB and do not provide an absolute indicator of genetic effects. In addition, heritability estimates were inconsistent throughout the study.

Further evidence for a genetically influenced predisposition of SWB stems from the finding that personality has a major influence on long-term SWB. This has caused the dynamic balance model of the SWB. This model proposes that personality provides the basis for emotional responses. External events can keep people away from the baseline, sometimes dramatically, but these moves tend to be limited in duration, with most people returning to their baseline eventually.

Bottom viewing angle

From a bottom-up perspective, happiness represents the accumulated blissful experience. Bottom-up influences include external events, and extensive situational and demographic factors, including health and marital status. The bottom-up approach is based on the idea that there is a universal human basic need and that the result of happiness from its fulfillment. To support this view, there is evidence that a daily fun event is associated with an increase in positive influence, and every day an unpleasant event or disturbance is associated with an increase in negative influence.

However, research shows that external events represent a much smaller proportion of variance in self-reports of SWBs rather than top-down factors, such as personality. A proposed theory to explain the limited impact of external events on SWB is the adaptation of hedonists. Initially based on the concept of "hedonist treadmill," this theory suggests that positive or negative external events temporarily increase or decrease SWB feelings, but over time people tend to become habituated with their circumstances and have a tendency to return to the person. SWB "setpoint" or base level.

The hedonist treadmill theory originally proposed that most people return to neutral levels of SWB (ie unhappy or unhappy) because they are habituated to events. However, subsequent research has shown that for most people, baseline SWB rates are at least slightly positive, as most people tend to report at least somewhat happy in general and tend to experience positive moods when no adverse events occur. Additional additions to this theory have shown that people do not adapt to all life events simultaneously, because people tend to adapt quickly to some events (eg jail), slowly to others (eg the death of a loved one), and not altogether others (eg noise and sex).

src: positivepsychology.org.uk

Factors that affect SWB

Personality and genetics

A number of studies have found that SWB constructs are strongly associated with various personality traits, including those in the five factor models. Findings from various personality studies show that genetics accounts for 20-48% of the variance in the Five-Factor Model and the variance in subjective wellbeing is also inherited. In particular, neuroticism predicts poorer subjective wellbeing while extraversion, friendliness, sincerity and openness to experience tend to predict higher subjective wellbeing. A meta-analysis finds that neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness are significantly related to all aspects of SWB examined (positive, negative and overall influences: happiness, life satisfaction, and quality of life). Neuroticism is the strongest predictor of overall SWB and is the strongest predictor of negative influence.

A large number of personality traits are related to SWB construction, although intelligence has negligible relationships. Positive influences are highly predicted by extraversion, to a lesser extent, and weaker by an openness to experience. Happiness is most predicted by extraversion, and is also highly predicted by neurotism, and to a lesser extent by three other factors. Life satisfaction is significantly predicted by neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Quality of life is highly predicted by neuroticism, and is also highly predicted by extraversion and conscientiousness, and to a modest degree by agreement and openness to experience. One study found that genetically subjective well-being was unclear from personality traits, especially those reflecting emotional stability (low neurotism), and social and physical activity (high Extraversion), and constraints (high Conscientiousness).

DeNeve (1999) argues that there are three trends in the relationship between personality and SWB. First, SWB is closely related to traits related to emotional tendencies (emotional stability, positive effectiveness, and tension). Second, relationship enhancing traits (eg trust, affiliation) is important for subjective wellbeing. Happy people tend to have strong relationships and are good at cultivating them. Third, the way people think and explain events important to subjective wellbeing. Evaluation events in an optimistic way, have a sense of control, and make active countermeasures facilitate subjective wellbeing. Trust, a trait substantially related to SWB, which contradicts cynicism involves making positive attributions rather than negatives about others. Creating a positive and optimistic attribution rather than a negative pessimistic facilitates subjective wellbeing.

The associated nature of eudaimonia or psychological well-being, is also inherited. The evidence from one study supports five independent genetic mechanisms underlying the psychological aspect of Ryff's well-being, leading to the genetic construct of eudaimonia in terms of general self-control, and the four biological mechanisms of children that enable the psychological ability of positive goals, agencies, growth, and social relations

Social effects

A person's subjective well-being is determined by many different factors and social influences proven to be strong. The results of the famous Framingham Heart Study show that three-degree friends of secession (ie, friends of friends of friends) can affect one's happiness. From the abstract: "A friend who lives within a mile (about 1.6 km) and who becomes happy increases the likelihood that a person is happy by 25%."

Wealth

Research shows that wealth is associated with many positive outcomes in life. These outcomes include: improved mental health and health, longer longevity, lower infant mortality rate, fewer life-threatening events, and fewer victims of violent crime Nevertheless, research shows that wealth has a smaller impact on SWBs than people generally think, though higher revenues are substantially correlated with life satisfaction reports.

The relative influence of wealth together with other material components on the overall subjective well-being of a person is being studied through new research. The Welfare Project in Human Science Lab investigates how material well-being and perceptual perception work as a relative determinant in conditioning our minds for positive emotions.

In a study conducted by Aknin, Norton, & amp; Dunn (2009), the researcher asks participants from across the income spectrum to report their own happiness and to predict the happiness of others and themselves at different income levels. In study 1, the prediction of happiness ranged from 2.4-7.9 and actual happiness ranged from 5.2-7.7. In study 2, the prediction of happiness ranged from 15-80 and the actual happiness ranged from 50-80. These findings suggest that people believe that money is more for happiness than it really is. However, some studies show that while the size of socioeconomic status is incompatible with greater happiness, the sociometric status size (status compared with face-to-face people daily) is correlated with an increase in subjective well-being, above and beyond the effects of extroversion and factors others.

The Easterlin paradox also shows that there is no relationship between community economic development and the average level of happiness. Through time, Easterlin has seen the relationship between happiness and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) across countries and within countries. There are three different phenomena to look at when examining the relationship between money and subjective wellbeing; increasing GDP in a country, relative incomes within a country, and differences in GDP between countries.

More specifically, when making comparisons between countries, a principle called Thinning Marginal Income Utility (DMUI) stands strong. Veenhoven (1991) says, "[W] e not only sees a clear positive relationship [between happiness and GNP per capita], but also the curvilinear pattern, which shows that wealth is subject to the laws that decrease happiness." Means the $ 1,000 increase in real income, the smaller the higher the initial rate of income, the less has an impact on subjective wellbeing. Easterlin (1995) proves that DMUI is true when comparing countries, but not when looking at an increase in gross domestic product within countries.

Health

There is a substantial positive relationship between health and SWB so that people who assess their general health as "good" or "excellent" tend to experience better SWBs than those who value their health as "fair" or "poor". A meta-analysis found that the ranking of self from general health is more closely related to SWB than the health rating of physicians. The relationship between health and SWB may be bidirectional. There is evidence that good subjective well-being contributes to better health. A longitudinal study review found that basic subjective welfare construction measures such as optimism and positive influence predict long-term health status and mortality. In contrast, a number of studies have found that basic depression predicts poorer, longer-term health and mortality. Baseline health may have a causal influence on subjective wellbeing so that causality is difficult to determine. Numerous studies have found that positive emotions and optimism have a beneficial impact on cardiovascular health and on immune function. Mood swings are also known to be associated with changes in immune and cardiovascular responses. There is evidence that successful interventions that enhance subjective well-being can have beneficial effects on the health aspects. For example, meditation and relaxation training have been found to increase positive influence and reduce blood pressure. The influence of certain types of subjective well-being is not entirely clear. For example, how long lasting mood and emotional effects on health remains unclear. Whether some kind of subjective health predicts health independently of others is also unclear. Meditation has the power to increase happiness because it can increase self-confidence and reduce anxiety, which increases your well-being. Cultivating personal strengths and resources, such as humor, social/animal companies, and daily work, also seems to help people maintain acceptable SWB levels despite symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress.

Research shows that investigating patient happiness is one of the most important things a doctor can do to predict the health and age of the patient. In a health-conscious modern society, most people ignore emotions as a vital component of a person's health, while focusing more on diet and exercise. According to Diener & amp; Biswas-Diener, a happy person becomes less sick than an unhappy person. There are three types of health: morbidity, survival, and longevity. The evidence shows that all three can be enhanced through happiness:

1. Morbidity, simply, is whether a person develops a serious illness, such as flu or cancer. In a 30-year longitudinal study, participants who had high positive emotions were found to have lower rates of many health problems. Some diseases/problems include lower mortality rates of heart disease, suicide, accidents, killing, mental illness, drug dependence, and alcohol-related liver diseases. In addition, the results showed that participants who were depressed were more likely to have a heart attack and a recurrence of a heart attack when compared to a happy person.
2. Survival is the term used for what happens to a person after he has developed or developed a serious illness. Although happiness has been shown to improve health, by survival, this is unlikely to happen. Survival may be the only health field proven that evidence of happiness may sometimes be detrimental. It is not clear why the results show that this is the case, but Diener & amp; Biswas-Diener offers an explanation. It is possible that happy people fail to report symptoms of the disease, which in turn may lead to no treatment or inadequate treatment. Another possible reason may be that happy people tend to be optimistic, causing them to take their symptoms too lightly, seek treatment too late, and/or follow the doctor's instructions halfheartedly. And finally, Diener & amp; Biswas-Diener suggests that people with serious illness may prefer to live the rest of their days without painful or invasive treatments.
3. Longevity, third health area, measured by the age of one's death. Chief researcher Deborah Danner of the University of Kentucky examines the relationship between individual happiness and longevity. Danner recruited 180 Catholic nuns from a nearby monastery as a participant. He chose nuns because they lived a very similar life. This eliminates many confounding variables that may exist in other samples, which can lead to inaccurate results. Such confounding variables may include drug use, alcohol abuse, diet, and sexual risk taking. Because there are some differences between the sisters as far as nuisance variables, this sample offers the best option for matching controlled laboratory settings. The results indicate that nuns who are considered happy or positive in the way and their language average live 10 years longer than the nuns who are considered unhappy or negative in their manner and language. A follow-up study by health researcher Sarah Pressman examined 96 well-known psychologists to determine whether similar results from nun research would be seen as well. Pressman's results show that positive or happy psychologists live, on average, 6 years longer. Psychologists who are considered negative or unhappy live, on average, 5 years less.

Physical Characteristics

A positive relationship has been found between the volume of gray matter in the precuneus area of ​​the right brain, and subjective subjective happiness score. Interestingly a six-week awareness intervention was found to correlate with a significant increase in gray matter in the precuneus.

Spare time

There are a number of domains that are considered to contribute to subjective wellbeing. In a study by Hribernik and Mussap (2010), comfort satisfaction was found to predict the unique variance in life satisfaction, supporting inclusion as a different life domain that contributes to subjective wellbeing. In addition, the relationship status interacts with age group and gender on the difference in recreational satisfaction. The relationship between comfort satisfaction and life satisfaction, however, diminishes when considering the impact of core influences (underlying mood conditions). This suggests that comfort satisfaction is primarily influenced by the level of subjective well-being of the individual represented by core influences. This has implications for possible limitations in the extent to which comfort satisfaction can be increased beyond the level of wellbeing and mood that existed previously in individuals.

Cultural variations

Although all cultures seem to appreciate happiness, cultures vary in the way they define happiness. There is also evidence that people in more individualistic cultures tend to value themselves more highly in subjective wellbeing compared to people in more collectivistic cultures.

In Western cultures, the predictors of happiness include elements that support personal independence, a sense of personal agency, and self-expression. In Eastern cultures, the predictors of happiness focus on the interdependent self that can not be separated from significant others. Compared to people in individualistic cultures, people in collective culture are more likely to base their judgment on life's satisfaction about how others judge their lives than the emotional inner balance experienced as fun versus unpleasant. Delightful emotional experiences have a stronger social component in East Asian cultures than Western cultures. For example, people in Japan are more likely to associate happiness with emotions that interact interpersonally (such as feelings of hospitality), whereas people in the United States are more likely to associate happiness with emotions that interpersonally escape (pride, for example). There are also cultural differences in the motives and goals associated with happiness. For example, Asian Americans tend to experience greater happiness after achieving a goal that is pleasing or approved by significant others compared to European Americans. There is also evidence that high self-esteem, a sense of personal control and a consistent sense of identity are more associated with SWB in Western culture than in the East. However, this is not to say that these things are not important to the SWB in Eastern cultures. Research has found that even within Eastern cultures, people with high self-esteem and a more consistent sense of identity are somewhat happier than those who are low on these characteristics. There is no evidence that low self-esteem and so on actually benefit SWBs in a known culture.

A large amount of research evidence has confirmed that people in individualistic societies report a higher level of happiness than people in the collective group and that socioeconomic factors alone are not sufficient to explain this difference. In addition to political and economic differences, individualistic versus collectivist countries reliably differ in the various psychological characteristics associated with SWB, such as the emotional norms and attitudes toward the expression of individual needs. Collective culture is based on the belief that individuals exist for the benefit of larger social units, whereas a more individualistic culture considers the opposite. Collective culture emphasizes maintaining social order and harmony and therefore expects members to suppress their personal desires when necessary to promote collective interests. Therefore, such a culture regards self-organization as more important than self-expression or individual rights. Individualistic culture instead emphasizes the inalienable value of everyone and expects the individual to be self-directive and self-sufficient. Although people in collective culture can gain happiness from the social consent they receive from suppressing self-interest, research seems to indicate that self-expression results in a greater "payment" of happiness than seeking outside self-approval.

Positive psychology

Positive psychology is mainly concerned with the study of SWB. Positive psychology was founded by Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) who identified that psychology is not just about pathology, weakness and damage; but also learn about strength and virtue. Researchers in positive psychology have shown that in almost every culture studied, the pursuit of happiness is considered one of the most valuable goals in life. Understanding individual differences in SWBs is a major interest in positive psychology, particularly why some people are happier than others. Some people continue to be happy in the face of adversity while others are chronically unhappy at the best of times.

Positive psychology has investigated how people can increase their SWB levels and sustain these improvements over the long term, rather than returning to the baseline. Lyubomirsky (2001) argues that SWB is influenced by a combination of personality/genetics (research has found that genetic influences typically account for 35-50% of variance in measurement of happiness), external circumstances, and activities affecting SWB. He argues that changing one's external circumstances tends to have only a temporary effect on SWB, while engaging in activities (mental and/or physical) that increase SWB can lead to more lasting improvement in SWB.

src: www.frontiersin.org

Use in Happiness economy

SWB is often used in assessing population welfare.

src: slideplayer.com

See also

• The Canadian Welfare Index
• Positive psychology
• Personality psychology
• Heddonist treadmill
• Nutritious
• Stream (psychology)
• Sonja Lyubomirsky
• Ed Diener
• Religion and happiness
• Reasonable People Model
• Happiness economics

src: www.frontiersin.org

External links

• The Happiness Institute
• World Values ​​website
Survey
• Happiness event
• Sonja Lyubomirsky's web page about The How of Happiness book
• Martin Seligman Authentication Happiness Site

src: www.dovepress.com

References

Source of the article : Wikipedia