结论

Matthew T. Lee, L. Kubzansky, T. VanderWeele
{"title":"结论","authors":"Matthew T. Lee, L. Kubzansky, T. VanderWeele","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197512531.003.0022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The chapters in this volume affirm the value not only of specialized, discipline-specific research on the nature of well-being—its antecedents, and its consequences—but also of synthesizing interdisciplinary scholarship into a coherent body of research findings, theoretical explanations, and policy recommendations regarding well-being. Each of the 20 chapters makes a contribution to more than one scholarly discipline, and many bridge the social sciences and the humanities. In some cases, a disciplinary expert engaged with the methods or findings of an outside discipline. Other chapters were co-authored by scholars in the both humanities and social sciences. Still others were written by interdisciplinary experts. Beyond the individual chapters, the volume as a whole informs the meta-conversation about how scholars might draw on their specific expertise to transcend disciplinary boundaries and contribute to the collective work of conceptualizing and measuring well-being in ways that effectively advance our understanding of and ability to improve population health. In other words, we believe bringing together work from across often siloed disciplines will provide important insight regarding how individuals and social organizations can pursue the good life and build better societies. We hope that readers will appreciate each individual chapter on its own terms while also gaining a broader awareness of how the study of well-being might benefit from more sustained interdisciplinary dialogue. Ultimately, we hope our volume will encourage further efforts at synthesis by identifying and then building on areas of emerging consensus (see, for example, ...","PeriodicalId":423496,"journal":{"name":"Measuring Well-Being","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conclusion\",\"authors\":\"Matthew T. Lee, L. Kubzansky, T. VanderWeele\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780197512531.003.0022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The chapters in this volume affirm the value not only of specialized, discipline-specific research on the nature of well-being—its antecedents, and its consequences—but also of synthesizing interdisciplinary scholarship into a coherent body of research findings, theoretical explanations, and policy recommendations regarding well-being. Each of the 20 chapters makes a contribution to more than one scholarly discipline, and many bridge the social sciences and the humanities. In some cases, a disciplinary expert engaged with the methods or findings of an outside discipline. Other chapters were co-authored by scholars in the both humanities and social sciences. Still others were written by interdisciplinary experts. Beyond the individual chapters, the volume as a whole informs the meta-conversation about how scholars might draw on their specific expertise to transcend disciplinary boundaries and contribute to the collective work of conceptualizing and measuring well-being in ways that effectively advance our understanding of and ability to improve population health. In other words, we believe bringing together work from across often siloed disciplines will provide important insight regarding how individuals and social organizations can pursue the good life and build better societies. We hope that readers will appreciate each individual chapter on its own terms while also gaining a broader awareness of how the study of well-being might benefit from more sustained interdisciplinary dialogue. Ultimately, we hope our volume will encourage further efforts at synthesis by identifying and then building on areas of emerging consensus (see, for example, ...\",\"PeriodicalId\":423496,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Measuring Well-Being\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Measuring Well-Being\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197512531.003.0022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Measuring Well-Being","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197512531.003.0022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本卷中的章节不仅肯定了关于幸福本质的专业、学科特定研究的价值——它的前因后果——而且还肯定了将跨学科学术综合成一个关于幸福的研究成果、理论解释和政策建议的连贯体的价值。20章中的每一章都对一个以上的学术学科做出了贡献,许多章节连接了社会科学和人文科学。在某些情况下,学科专家参与外部学科的方法或发现。其他章节由人文和社会科学领域的学者共同撰写。还有一些是跨学科专家写的。除了个别章节,卷作为一个整体通知元对话关于学者如何利用他们的特定专业知识,超越学科界限,并有助于概念化和衡量福祉的集体工作的方式,有效地推进我们的理解和能力,以改善人口健康。换句话说,我们相信,将经常孤立的学科的工作汇集在一起,将为个人和社会组织如何追求美好生活和建设更好的社会提供重要的见解。我们希望读者能够欣赏每一章,同时也能更广泛地认识到福祉研究如何从更持续的跨学科对话中受益。最后,我们希望我们的卷将通过确定并建立正在形成共识的领域(例如,参见……)来鼓励进一步的综合努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conclusion
The chapters in this volume affirm the value not only of specialized, discipline-specific research on the nature of well-being—its antecedents, and its consequences—but also of synthesizing interdisciplinary scholarship into a coherent body of research findings, theoretical explanations, and policy recommendations regarding well-being. Each of the 20 chapters makes a contribution to more than one scholarly discipline, and many bridge the social sciences and the humanities. In some cases, a disciplinary expert engaged with the methods or findings of an outside discipline. Other chapters were co-authored by scholars in the both humanities and social sciences. Still others were written by interdisciplinary experts. Beyond the individual chapters, the volume as a whole informs the meta-conversation about how scholars might draw on their specific expertise to transcend disciplinary boundaries and contribute to the collective work of conceptualizing and measuring well-being in ways that effectively advance our understanding of and ability to improve population health. In other words, we believe bringing together work from across often siloed disciplines will provide important insight regarding how individuals and social organizations can pursue the good life and build better societies. We hope that readers will appreciate each individual chapter on its own terms while also gaining a broader awareness of how the study of well-being might benefit from more sustained interdisciplinary dialogue. Ultimately, we hope our volume will encourage further efforts at synthesis by identifying and then building on areas of emerging consensus (see, for example, ...
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信