Between Science and Self-Help: A Scoping Review of Scholarly and Popular DefinitionS Of IKIGAI

IF 3.7 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2026-07-21 DOI:10.1007/s10902-026-01080-w

Eugene Y. J. Tee, Saori Tsukamoto, Michael F. Steger

{"title":"Between Science and Self-Help: A Scoping Review of Scholarly and Popular DefinitionS Of IKIGAI","authors":"Eugene Y. J. Tee, Saori Tsukamoto, Michael F. Steger","doi":"10.1007/s10902-026-01080-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<italic>Ikigai</italic> is a Japanese term often described as “one’s reason for living”, but a consistent definition remains elusive. The present scoping review of the published works on <italic>ikigai</italic> is guided by the central research question, “How is <italic>ikigai</italic> defined in both the scholarly/academic and popular press literature?” The review is complemented by classic and contemporary conceptualizations of <italic>ikigai</italic>, as well as recent empirical efforts to generate an evidence-based definition of the term. Results of the scoping reveal five key findings. First, the perception and experience of a life worth living is more appropriately termed <italic>ikigai-kan</italic>; <italic>ikigai</italic> refers to the source of these perceptions and experiences. Second, <italic>ikigai</italic> is differentiated from meaning in life (MIL), comprising affective and cognitive components that include both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Third, the majority of English scholarly and popular press definitions continue to define the term as ‘purpose in life’ and ‘reason for being’ while Japanese-only sources reflect nuances in describing the experience as associated with meaning and joy. Fourth, measures of <italic>ikigai</italic> are varied, with a reliance on single-item closed-ended measures. Fifth, grounded theory evidence suggests that <italic>ikigai</italic> revolves around valued experiences (<italic>keiken</italic>), authentic relationships (<italic>ibasho</italic>), and life directionality (<italic>houkousei</italic>). We draw on the findings from this scoping review to offer a conceptualization of <italic>ikigai-kan</italic> and <italic>ikigai,</italic> placing this definition in the context of wellbeing and MIL research. We conclude with considerations of further research.","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"299 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-026-01080-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ikigai is a Japanese term often described as “one’s reason for living”, but a consistent definition remains elusive. The present scoping review of the published works on ikigai is guided by the central research question, “How is ikigai defined in both the scholarly/academic and popular press literature?” The review is complemented by classic and contemporary conceptualizations of ikigai, as well as recent empirical efforts to generate an evidence-based definition of the term. Results of the scoping reveal five key findings. First, the perception and experience of a life worth living is more appropriately termed ikigai-kan; ikigai refers to the source of these perceptions and experiences. Second, ikigai is differentiated from meaning in life (MIL), comprising affective and cognitive components that include both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Third, the majority of English scholarly and popular press definitions continue to define the term as ‘purpose in life’ and ‘reason for being’ while Japanese-only sources reflect nuances in describing the experience as associated with meaning and joy. Fourth, measures of ikigai are varied, with a reliance on single-item closed-ended measures. Fifth, grounded theory evidence suggests that ikigai revolves around valued experiences (keiken), authentic relationships (ibasho), and life directionality (houkousei). We draw on the findings from this scoping review to offer a conceptualization of ikigai-kan and ikigai, placing this definition in the context of wellbeing and MIL research. We conclude with considerations of further research.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在科学和自助之间：IKIGAI的学术和流行定义的范围审查

Ikigai是一个日语术语，通常被描述为“一个人活着的理由”，但一个一致的定义仍然难以捉摸。目前对已发表的ikigai作品的范围审查是由一个中心研究问题指导的，“ikigai在学术/学术和大众新闻文献中是如何定义的？”这篇综述还补充了经典的和当代的ikigai概念，以及最近的实证努力，以产生一个基于证据的术语的定义。范围界定的结果揭示了五个关键发现。首先，对值得过的生活的感知和体验更恰当地被称为ikigai-kan；Ikigai指的是这些感知和体验的来源。其次，ikigai与生活意义（MIL）不同，它包括情感和认知成分，包括享乐和幸福。第三，大多数英语学术和大众媒体的定义继续将这个词定义为“生活的目的”和“存在的理由”，而只有日语的来源反映了在描述与意义和喜悦相关的经历时的细微差别。第四，ikigai的衡量标准多种多样，依赖于单项封闭式衡量标准。第五，有根据的理论证据表明，ikigai围绕着有价值的经历（keiken）、真实的关系（ibasho）和生活方向（houkousei）。我们利用这一范围审查的结果来提供ikigai-kan和ikigai的概念化，并将这一定义置于福祉和MIL研究的背景下。最后，我们提出了进一步研究的设想。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Happiness Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

6.50%

发文量

110

期刊介绍： The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?