In this research, content analysis was employed to investigate older adults' perceptions of successful aging and the relationship of these perceptions to definitions given in the literature to date. Participants were 18 males and 42 females between the ages of 70 and 101 years. Analyses revealed older adults mentioned only 1 or 2 criteria of successful aging if asked for a definition; however, when prompted, they rated almost all the criteria emerging from the literature as highly important. Participants reported adjusting to the situations they were in by compensating for losses that occurred and selecting activities that best suited their capabilities. Overall, older adults' perceptions of successful aging were similar to aspects identified in the literature. Not all aspects, however, were seen as important by all participants, and only low to moderate correlations were found between some aspects of successful aging.

Recently, the disagreement that separates hedonic from eudaimonic philosophers has spread to the science of wellbeing. This has resulted in two opposing perspectives regarding both wellbeing concepts and proposed pathways to wellbeing. Whilst contention continues, most contemporary psychologists now agree that hedonic and eudaimonic approaches each denote important aspects of wellbeing. This has led to integrated wellbeing conceptualisations, in which the combined presence of hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing components is referred to as 'flourishing'. In regard to the attainment of wellbeing, research simultaneously investigating hedonic and eudaimonic pathways suggests that a life rich in both types of pursuits is associated with the highest degree of wellbeing. Despite this assertion, previously underemphasised methodological limitations question the validity of such claims. To further progress this important area of investigation, future research directions to ameliorate said limitations are explored. It is recommended that the past tendency to contrast and compare hedonia and eudaimonia be abandoned, and instead that the inherent value of both be recognised. Time-use research methods are needed to cross-validate past findings obtained from cross-sectional research, which will make it possible to transition from purely descriptive conclusions to applied conclusions.

Caregivers play a vital role in providing support to adults with a chronic condition, or cognitive or physical impairment. Low health literacy in caregivers has the potential to impact adequate care provision, and consequently, care recipient health outcomes. The aim of the study was to systematically review literature related to health literacy of caregivers of adult care recipients, and examine its relationship with care recipient, and caregiver, health outcomes. Electronic databases were searched for relevant English-language publications that assessed health literacy in caregivers. Included studies were abstracted into evidence tables and assessed using an eight-item quality scale. The search identified 2717 new titles and abstracts, with 67 shortlisted for full review. Twelve papers from 2003 to 2015 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of limited health literacy in caregivers ranged from 0% to 52.5% depending on the measure and cut-off criteria used. Associations were found between low caregiver health literacy and (i) poorer care recipient self-management behaviours; (ii) increased care recipient use of health services; and (iii) increased caregiver burden. The quality of the studies ranged from fair to excellent. Low health literacy in caregivers differed depending on the measures and scoring criteria used. Evidence to support the relationship between caregiver health literacy and care recipient, and caregiver health outcomes was limited to single studies. Recommendations for further research include: the development of caregiver health literacy measures across different populations; examination of associations between caregiver health literacy and care recipient outcomes; and the development of interventions designed to improve caregiver health literacy.

Abstract:Recently, the disagreement that separates hedonic from eudaimonic philosophers has spread to the science of wellbeing. This has resulted in two opposing perspectives regarding both wellbeing concepts and proposed pathways to wellbeing. Whilst contention continues, most contemporary psychologists now agree that hedonic and eudaimonic approaches each denote important aspects of wellbeing. This has led to integrated wellbeing conceptualisations, in which the combined presence of hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing components is referred to as 'flourishing'. In regard to the attainment of wellbeing, research simultaneously investigating hedonic and eudaimonic pathways suggests that a life rich in both types of pursuits is associated with the highest degree of wellbeing. Despite this assertion, previously underemphasised methodological limitations question the validity of such claims. To further progress this important area of investigation, future research directions to ameliorate said limitations are explored. It is recommended that the past tendency to contrast and compare hedonia and eudaimonia be abandoned, and instead that the inherent value of both be recognised. Time-use research methods are needed to cross-validate past findings obtained from cross-sectional research, which will make it possible to transition from purely descriptive conclusions to applied conclusions.

No abstract