Psychometric properties of measures of hedonic and eudaimonic orientations in Japan: The HEMA scale

The Different Roles of Hedonic and Eudaimonic Motives for Activities in Predicting Functioning and Well-Being Experiences

“…Our results supported the three-factor structure of the HEMA-R, providing justification to use the eudaimonic orientation, pleasure orientation, and relaxation orientation subscale scores. This result replicated previous findings obtained with other non-English versions of the HEMA-R, in which it was showed that the best fit of the model to the data was obtained by separating the hedonic dimension in orientation to pleasure and orientation to relaxation (Asano et al 2018;Bujacz et al 2014).…”

“…The HEMA-R authors (Huta and Waterman 2014), with respect to the HEMA, expanded the eudaimonic orientation subscale by including an item concerning the concept of meaning, given that the evidence outlined an important element of Eudaimonia involves caring about and contributing to something larger than themselves (Huta 2016;Seligman 2002). Although several studies confirmed a two-factor solution for the HEMA (e.g., Anić 2014; Huta and Ryan 2010), other studies showed that a better model fit was provided by a threefactor solution obtained by decomposing the hedonic orientation in pleasure and relaxation (Asano et al 2018;Bujacz et al 2014). Because of the mixed results on the factorial structure of the instrument, and because we employed an adaptation of the HEMA-R in a new linguistic and cultural context, we deemed testing its factorial validity in our sample as important.…”

The Associations Between Happiness Motives and Well-Being in China: The Mediating Role of Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration

“…Therefore, Chinese people may find it more appropriate and be more encouraged by their culture to pursue happiness in a eudaimonic manner than in a hedonic one. However, the associations between hedonic motives and well-being were out of our expectation and incongruent with prior studies (e.g., Chen, 2010;Asano et al, 2018). Hedonic motives made little contribution to well-being in our studies.…”

“…The research regarding happiness motives that have been conducted in collectivist cultures is scanty, thus yielding inconclusive findings. Following Huta (2016) revised framework that differentiates between seeking pleasure and seeking comfort in hedonic motives, Asano et al (2018) found that, among Japanese people, enhanced pleasure motives and eudaimonic motives predicted an increased positive affect and meaning in life after 2 months, while enhanced comfort motives did not predict any well-being outcomes; however, this study examined different types of motives separately, and little is known about their relative effects. The study of Lai et al (2020), although assessing happiness motives, examined the moderation role of happiness motives in the effects of prosocial behavior on SWB by manipulating prosocial behavior with an experimental design.…”

“…Additionally, due to the single component, the HEMA framework also enables us to directly compare the effects of hedonic and eudaimonic ways of living and understand their relative contribution to well-being. However, almost all the studies on happiness motives have been conducted in Western societies [see one exception from Japan (Asano et al, 2018) and one exception from China (Lai et al, 2020)]. Cross-cultural studies have pointed to the possibility of different understandings and attitudes toward hedonism between Western individualist societies and Eastern collectivist societies (Lu and Gilmour, 2004;Oishi and Gilbert, 2016).…”