Iranian and Swedish adolescents: differences in personality traits and well-being

Abstract

Introduction. This study addresses the need to further contextualize research on well-being (e.g., Kjell, 2011) in terms of cross-cultural aspects of personality traits among adolescents and by examining two different conceptualizations of well-being: subjective well-being (i.e., life satisfaction, positive and negative affect) and psychological well-being (i.e., positive relations with others, environmental mastery, self-acceptance, autonomy, personal growth, and life purpose).Methods. Iranian (N = 122, mean age 15.23 years) and Swedish (N = 109, mean age 16.69 years) adolescents were asked to fill out a Big Five personality test, as well as questionnaires assessing subjective well-being and psychological well-being.Results. Swedes reported higher subjective and psychological well-being, while Iranians reported higher degree of Agreeableness, Openness and Conscientiousness. Neuroticism and Extraversion did not differ between cultures. Neuroticism was related to well-being within both cultures. Openness was related to well-being only among Iranians, and Extraversion only among Swedes. A mediation analysis within the Swedish sample, the only sample meeting statistical criteria for mediation analysis to be conducted, demonstrated that psychological well-being mediated the relationship between Neuroticism and subjective well-being as well as between Extraversion and subjective well-being.Conclusions. Certain personality traits, such as Extraversion, Openness, and Conscientiousness, relate differently to well-being measures across cultures. Meanwhile, Neuroticism seems to relate similarly across cultures at least with regard to subjective well-being. Furthermore, the results give an indication on how psychological well-being might mediate the relationship between certain personality traits and subjective well-being. Overall, the complexity of the results illustrates the need for more research whilst supporting the importance of contextualizing well-being research.

Health enhancing coping as a mediator in relationships of positive emotionality and cognitive curiosity with quality of life among type 2 diabetes patients

“…Fredrickson, 2003;Aspinwall, 1998;Park, et al, 2004;Kjell, et al, 2013). Both in the case of type 2 diabetes patients and healthy people, a relationship was observed between positive emotionality and cognitive curiosity with the quality of life indicators, including general satisfaction, satisfaction with present life, satisfaction with health, satisfaction with physical, psychological, social and environmental domains, satisfaction with a broadly understood treatment, and knowledge about the disease.…”

“…Fredrickson, 2003;Aspinwall, 1998;Park, et al, 2004;Kjell, et al, 2013). The relationships of the examined predispositions with perceived quality of life are not of a direct character, but an indirect one.…”

“…Cognitive openness helps in the cognitive study of a disease situation, and one's current and future abilities, because it is a basis for a broad understanding of various events, fluency of thinking and noticing a larger number of possible solutions (DeYoung et al, 2003;after: Eldesouky, 2012). The research shows that proactive strategies (Greenglass, Schwarzer, Jakubiec, Fisenbaum, & Taubert, 1999) and cognitive curiosity (Eldesouky, 2012) are conducive to a better functioning and sense of health, and sometimes to a higher assessment of one's quality of life (Kjell, Nima, Sikstrom, Archer, & Garcia, 2013). However, the example from the research by Hambrick and McCord (2010) shows that the relationship between cognitive openness measured by the BIG-FIVE personality test with applying proactive strategies is very weak.…”

Locomotion (Empowering) and Assessment (Disempowering) Self-Regulatory Dimensions as a Function of Affective Profile in High School Students

“…Earlier well-being research has focused on physical (i.e., bodily health due to absence of ill-heath and presence of a healthy, functional body) and material well-being (i.e., sufficient material status in the form of domestic harmony, transportation, healthy food and economic security) [15]. As a complement, current research suggests two definitions of well-being: subjective well-being and psychological well-being [16,17].…”

“…Regarding psychological well-being, Ryff [20] suggested a multidimensional model that consists of six different factors that together present individuals' psychological well-being, positive relations with others, self-acceptance, feeling of control of one's environment, self-determination, life purpose and personal development [15,21]. These notions rest upon positive attributes rather than negative attributes or outcomes [15], reflecting well-being derived from love of another(s) and good relations with friends and family, a high level of self-acceptance of all aspects of one's personal attributes, environmental control, meaning in life, personal growth, and autonomy.…”