The Engine of Well-Being

Abstract

The study of well-being is hampered by the multiplicity of approaches, but focusing on a single approach begs the question of what “well-being” really is. We analyze how well-being is defined according to the three main kinds of theories: “Liking” approaches (generally adopted by psychologists), “Wanting” approaches (predominant among economists), and “Needing” approaches (used in both public policy and psychology). We propose an integrative framework, the engine model of well-being, drawing on Seligman (Seligman, M. E. P., 2011, Flourish. New York, NY: The Free Press) and Sen's (Sen, A. K., 1999, Development as freedom. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press) emphasis on the plurality of this construct by distinguishing among (a) inputs (resources that enable well-being), (b) processes (internal states of mechanisms influencing well-being), and (c) outcomes (the intrinsically valuable behaviors that reflect the attainment of well-being). We discuss implications for research, measurement, and interventions.

Elucidating the constructs happiness and wellbeing: A mixed-methods approach

“…In this study, we suggest that rather than simply measuring happiness or life satisfaction, it is more meaningful to attempt to uncover a more holistic measure of wellbeing, which the participants differentiated from happiness. This confirms the conclusions of other researchers (e.g., Hone et al, 2014;Jayawickreme et al, 2012). The findings of the current study can help inform future research on how to measure these constructs in operationalizations that are meaningful for people's daily lives, and to help promote balance and a focus on all parts of life -social, familial, physical, as well as work-related and educational -as a way to promote happiness and wellbeing.…”

“…From these ideas emerges a metaphor for wellbeing: wellbeing can be visualized as a set of interlocking gears (see Figure 2). This metaphor is similar but distinct from the "engine of wellbeing" metaphor used by Jayawickreme et al (2012). Although these researchers focus on inputs, process, and outcome variables, working on the basis of earlier systems-theory approaches, our metaphor focuses on how this would unfold within individuals' lives.…”

“…These approaches can be separated into three main groups: Approaches that emphasize desire-fulfillment, which dominate the economic literature; approaches that focus on hedonic pleasure or "feeling good," which are prominent in the psychological literature; and approaches that propose lists or models of what people need, such as Nussbaum's (2011) objective list of capabilities and the eudaimonic approaches to wellbeing found in psychology (Jayawickreme, Forgeard, & Seligman, 2012;Nussbaum, 2011). These can be summed up succinctly as "wanting," "liking," and "needing" theories (Dolan & White, 2007), and have been classified into similar categories by other…”

Diagnosing Well-Being in Work Context – Eudemonic Well-Being in the Workplace Questionnaire

“…Consequently, measures referring to eudemonia at work are multidimensional and they are aimed to diagnose positive attitudes toward work and organization. Considering positive psychology's recent growth in popularity and its eudemonic perspective, it seems surprising that there are only few studies directly diagnosing eudemonic well-being in the workplace (Jayawickreme et al 2012;Seligman 2011). The development of tools in that area seems urgent.…”

Implicit theories of personal and social attributes: Fundamental mindsets for a science of wellbeing

“…Seligman (2011) and Jayawickreme, Forgeard, and Seligman (2012) conceptualise positive emotion as the regulation of both positive and negative emotion in order to maximise positive emotional experience; engagement as the setting of and striving toward goals that allow one to be challenged by, to be interested and absorbed in, and to exert mastery over what one is doing; relationships as the maintenance of positive interactions with others; meaning as contributing to something beyond oneself; and accomplishment (or achievement) as the attainment of success within a particular performance domain.…”