Response to “Advancing the Science of Well-Being: A Dissenting View on Measurement Recommendations”

Abstract

In response to Chapter 18, the authors of this chapter agree with the points made by Ryff et al. on the importance of nomenclature, the multidimensional nature of well-being, and the importance of context while holding that none of this contradicts their own recommendations. The authors revisit the rationale provided for their specific recommendations, which they believe Ryff et al. chose to ignore. They defend the view, contrary to Ryff et al., that if it is possible to include only a single well-being item on a survey then it is best to include one, rather than nothing at all. The authors note that several single-item well-being indicators strongly predict numerous relevant outcomes in longitudinal studies. They reiterate that the present recommendations are provisional and observe that Ryff et al. offer no alternative set of recommendations. The authors state their belief that a set of provisional recommendations, drawing on current evidence, will help promote the monitoring and study of well-being and is better than none at all.