Beyond Ryff's scale: Comprehensive measures of eudaimonic well‐being in clinical populations. A systematic review

Abstract

Eudaimonic well-being that protects mental and physical health has received increasing attention. This investigation aimed to review which comprehensive instruments for measuring eudaimonic well-being were applied with clinical populations (reporting mental or physical illnesses), beyond Ryff's Psychological Well-Being Scale. Articles citing at least 1 of the measures of eudaimonic well-being identified by previous theoretical work were extracted from medical and psychological electronic databases and screened. Only investigations involving clinical populations were included and reviewed. An initial screening identified 5,065 articles using eudaimonic well-being measures, out of which only 28 articles encompassed clinical populations and could be included. Sixteen involved patients with mental disorders and 12 populations with medical conditions. In these articles, only 4 measures of eudaimonic well-being were used (Mental Health Continuum, Flourishing Scale, General Causality Orientations Scale, and Orientations to Happiness Subscales), out of the 12 currently available in literature. The Mental Health Continuum was the most used instrument, particularly in adults with depression, whose levels of eudaimonic well-being are impaired, but may be improved by specific interventions. Autonomy appeared to influence patients' motivation to treatment, both in mental and physical disorders. The need for a larger consensus regarding specific measures of eudaimonic well-being for clinical populations emerged. The importance of including assessment of positive functioning as an indicator of recovery in clinical domains is discussed.

Validation of the Mental Health Continuum‐Short Form and the dual continua model of well‐being and psychopathology in an adult mental health setting

“…After testing the one factor model of well‐being, the two factor model is evaluated. The rationale for fitting this model was found in research exploring the extent to which eudaimonia and hedonia differ (Baumeister, Vohs, Aaker, & Garbinsky, ; Disabato, Goodman, Kashdan, Short, & Jarden, ; Huta & Ryan, ; Keyes, Shmotkin, & Ryff, ; Waterman, ) and research targeting eudaimonic treatment outcomes (Brandel, Vescovelli, & Ruini, ; Weiss et al., ).…”

Eudaimonic Well-Being and Coping with Stress in University Students: The Mediating/Moderating Role of Self-Efficacy

“…Eudaimonic well-being has been measured by Ryff’s Scales of Psychological Well-Being. Although this tool has received broad empirical support in different cultural contexts [50,51,52,53,54,55,56] and is thus being widely used, some studies have questioned its psychometric properties [57,58,59]. Specifically, the validity of the six-factor structure (i.e., self-acceptance, positive relationships with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth) originally proposed by Ryff [60] has been discussed, and there is no full consensus on what and how many factors comprise the eudaimonic well-being construct.…”

Adolescents’ Psychological Well-Being: A Multidimensional Measure

“…Ryff’s [ 52 , 53 ] theoretical contributions regarding psychological well-being have laid the foundations for developing one of the most commonly used instruments for measuring it [ 54 , 55 ]. On the basis of perspectives such as Maslow’s conception of self-actualization [ 56 ], Rogers’s view of the fully functioning person [ 57 ], Allport’s conception of maturity [ 58 ] or Erikson’s psychosocial stage model [ 5 ] (for review, see [ 52 , 59 ]), Ryff proposed six dimensions to put into practice and measure the eudaimonic approach to the concept of well-being [ 60 ]: (1) autonomy, understood by the capacity to have the strength to follow personal convictions, even if they go against conventional wisdom; (2) environmental mastery, which includes being able to manage the demands of everyday life; (3) personal growth, understood by feeling that personal talents and potential are being fulfilled over time; (4) positive relationships with others, in terms of close, valued significant connections with others; (5) purpose in life, in other words, to have goals and objectives that give life meaning and direction; and (6) self-acceptance, or the capacity to see and accept one’s strengths and weaknesses (see [ 52 , 53 ] for complete descriptions).…”