S. Margolis, Eric Schwitzgebel, D. Ozer, S. Lyubomirsky
{"title":"五种幸福感的实证关系","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":"{\"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}","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}
Empirical Relationships Among Five Types of Well-Being
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.