| Literature DB >> 32006530 |
Tyler J VanderWeele1, Claudia Trudel-Fitzgerald2, Paul Allin3, Colin Farrelly4, Guy Fletcher5, Donald E Frederick6, Jon Hall7, John F Helliwell8, Eric S Kim9, William A Lauinger10, Matthew T Lee11, Sonja Lyubomirsky12, Seth Margolis13, Eileen McNeely14, Neil Messer15, Louis Tay16, Vish Viswanath17, Dorota Węziak-Białowolska18, Laura D Kubzansky19.
Abstract
Measures of well-being have proliferated over the past decades. Very little guidance has been available as to which measures to use in what contexts. This paper provides a series of recommendations, based on the present state of knowledge and the existing measures available, of what measures might be preferred in which contexts. The recommendations came out of an interdisciplinary workshop on the measurement of well-being. The recommendations are shaped around the number of items that can be included in a survey, and also based on the differing potential contexts and purposes of data collection such as, for example, government surveys, or multi-use cohort studies, or studies specifically about psychological well-being. The recommendations are not intended to be definitive, but to stimulate discussion and refinement, and to provide guidance to those relatively new to the study of well-being.Keywords: Flourishing; Happiness; Life satisfaction; Measurement; Optimism; Psychology; Public health; Purpose in life; Surveys; Well-being
Year: 2020 PMID: 32006530 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2020.106004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Med ISSN: 0091-7435 Impact factor: 4.018