S. Margolis, Eric Schwitzgebel, D. Ozer, S. Lyubomirsky
{"title":"Empirical Relationships Among Five Types of Well-Being","authors":"S. Margolis, Eric Schwitzgebel, D. Ozer, S. Lyubomirsky","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197512531.003.0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Philosophers, psychologists, economists, and other social scientists continue to debate the nature of human well-being. The authors argue that this debate centers around five main conceptualizations of well-being: hedonic well-being, life satisfaction, desire fulfillment, eudaimonia, and non-eudaimonic objective list well-being. Although each type of well-being is conceptually different, this chapter addresses the question of whether they are empirically distinguishable. The authors first developed and validated a measure of desire fulfillment and then examined associations between this new measure and several other well-being measures. In addition, they explored associations among all five types of well-being and found high correlations among all measures of well-being. However, correlations generally did not approach unity even when correcting for unreliability. Furthermore, correlations between well-being and related constructs (e.g., demographics, personality) depended on the type of well-being measured. The authors conclude that empirical findings based on one type of well-being measure may not generalize to all types of well-being.","PeriodicalId":423496,"journal":{"name":"Measuring Well-Being","volume":"206 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Measuring Well-Being","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197512531.003.0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
Abstract
Philosophers, psychologists, economists, and other social scientists continue to debate the nature of human well-being. The authors argue that this debate centers around five main conceptualizations of well-being: hedonic well-being, life satisfaction, desire fulfillment, eudaimonia, and non-eudaimonic objective list well-being. Although each type of well-being is conceptually different, this chapter addresses the question of whether they are empirically distinguishable. The authors first developed and validated a measure of desire fulfillment and then examined associations between this new measure and several other well-being measures. In addition, they explored associations among all five types of well-being and found high correlations among all measures of well-being. However, correlations generally did not approach unity even when correcting for unreliability. Furthermore, correlations between well-being and related constructs (e.g., demographics, personality) depended on the type of well-being measured. The authors conclude that empirical findings based on one type of well-being measure may not generalize to all types of well-being.