APPROACHES TO STUDYING THE PHENOMENON OF HUMAN WELL-BEING: A REVIEW OF FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC THEORIES

Kollontai G.A.

ANO DPO "Institute of Psychology of Creativity"«
Saint Petersburg, Russia
e-mail: gkollontay@gmail.com

At the current stage of societal development, in the age of metamodernism (P.M. Piskarev), when people constantly process large volumes of information, experience an acute lack of time, and adapt to suddenly changed working conditions (remote work, freelance), the issue of examining such a phenomenon as human well-being has become increasingly pressing. The processes currently taking place represent different aspects of the process of "anthropo-socio-techno-transformation" [7], and we believe that modern people are beginning to participate in them more actively and consciously. In modern society, well-being has gone beyond just physical well-being and has focused on creating a culture of holistic well-being, including physical, emotional, financial, social, career, community, and purposeful well-being. Well-being is a "multifactorial construct characterized by a complex interrelationship of social, cultural, economic, psychological, and spiritual factors" [4, p. 103]. The modern type of work (including remote work, freelance) blurs the line between work and life and, unsurprisingly, the well-being and mental health of employees are coming to the forefront and are a priority for business leaders: according to a survey «"Future Workplace 2021 HR Sentiment»"— 68% HR managers rated employee well-being and mental health as a top priority for companies [https://futureworkplace.com/ebooks/2021-hr-sentiment-survey]. Central to this is the study of what modern humans ("homo-beatus" [15]) understand by the phenomenon of well-being, what factors influence a person's assessment of this phenomenon, and how to measure well-being levels in order to use this information to understand the basis for creating a well-being environment and developing well-being programs. In fact, this is precisely what determines the relevance of this problem.

The study of human well-being has its roots in philosophy, psychology, sociology, and other sciences. The problem of well-being and happiness—as the highest good—has occupied the thoughts of philosophers for millennia. People have attempted to understand and explain the phenomenon of happiness, while ideas about it originate in religion and philosophy. Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Democritus, Seneca, Descartes, Spinoza, Holbach, and other prominent philosophers studied the phenomenon of happiness and human well-being. In the 1st century BC, the Roman philosopher Varro counted 289 points of view on happiness [11]. Gradually, the religious paradigm and the idea of well-being as the ultimate goal to strive for were replaced by a scientific consensus, within which researchers associate a favorable state of the human psyche with a person's inner world and its characteristics. However, the question of the methodology for studying the phenomenon of subjective well-being remains open, as does an understanding of the process and the factors that form it. In our view, the difficulty in agreeing on a definition of subjective well-being lies in the fact that the construct of well-being itself is associated with subjective perception, and each component represents a person’s subjective assessment of how they understand what well-being is for them.

The first attempts to measure "happiness" originate from the research of E. Durkheim. Somewhat later, N. Bradbourne (1969) proposed to evaluate "happiness" as a balance between positive and negative subjective assessments of the emotional attitude of an individual to various circumstances in life and began to study the influence of various factors on the feeling of happiness and general satisfaction [23]. In subsequent studies, the problem of measuring happiness and well-being was considered in the context of various directions: as a single factor of human experience (M. Argyle [2]), as a balance of experiences between positive and negative emotions, a psychological state arising as a result of self-improvement of the individual and within the framework of current activities (L.Z. Levit [10]), as a complex construct and a subjective positive assessment of what is happening, the semantic foundations of personality (D.A. Leontiev [11]), in a subjective sense of being (I.A. Dzhidaryan [5]), self-actualization (L.Z. Levit [10]); the ability to control oneself, one’s feelings and impressions, to find joy in everyday life (M. Csikszentmihalyi [26]); as a set of resources and positive qualities of a person (M. Robinson and K. Ryff [46]; K. Case and M. Waterman [39]).

Attempts to measure population well-being began as early as the 1940s, when the concept of well-being appeared in the opening paragraph of the World Health Organization's constitution [52], which defines health as "a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." Since then, interest in the concept of population and individual well-being, including in the business environment, has only increased. For example, if you look at Google Trends, you will see that it reflects a steady upward trend in Google search queries including the phrase "well-being," starting in June 2004 (the earliest data) with an index of 0, increasing to an index of 100 (December 2022) and 75 (September 2023), indicating very strong search volume today and high interest in this topic.

Since the mid-20th century, American scientists began to actively study happiness and satisfaction, and gradually the practice of considering mental well-being as the opposite of mental ill-health and distress developed, which gave impetus to the appearance of the following scientific works: Cantril's Model of Human Anxiety (1965); Bradburn's Structure of Psychological Well-Being (1969); in 1967, Wilson first published a review of the scientific literature studying the phenomenon of subjective well-being; in 1976, Campbell, Converse and Rogers conducted a study called "The Quality of American Life". In 1984, E. Diener repeated Wilson's work. In 1994, Veenhoven's scientific work "Correlates of Happiness" was published, consisting of three volumes, which analyzed 630 major studies from around the world, and in 1999, under his leadership, the Journal of Happiness Research was created. In the same year, 1999, Kahnman, Diener and Schwartz published their work "Fundamentals of Hedonistic Psychology" [12]. The development of the main approaches to the definition of well-being was carried out by: N. Bradburn, E. Diener, K. Ryff, K. Case, M. Seligman, E. Deci, M. Agrail, M. Csinkszentmihalyi, E. Giovanni, M. Gallagher, D. Chapinski, D.A. Leontiev, G.M. Shamionov, L.V. Kulikov, S.V. Yaremchuk, T.D. Shevelenkova, P.P. Fesenko, G.V. Puchkova, P.M. Piskarev, V.O. Tatarkievich, V.V. Kozlov, N.A. Baturin and many other famous scientists, each of whom made a significant contribution to the understanding of this phenomenon, considering its manifestations in various aspects of human life. Subjective well-being has become a key indicator of a person's mental and psychological health, an essential condition for its full development. A sense of well-being is crucial to a person's subjective world, and there are objective criteria for well-being: success, material wealth, physical health indicators, etc. It is an important component of a person's mental state, influencing their relationships with the outside world and their success in interacting with others and the environment. Currently, a number of terms reflecting the state of human well-being are used in scientific literature: «subjective well-being», «life satisfaction», «happiness», «psychological well-being», «psychological health», «emotional health», «quality of life», «prosperity», «vitality», «psychological», «material/economic/financial», «subjective», «social», «professional», «physical», «interpersonal», «personal», «spiritual», «emotional», etc. However, we consider it important to note that there is no strict differentiation of the above-mentioned terms, and there is no description of the differences between them and recommendations for the area of application. Based on the analysis conducted, we can conclude that subjective well-being is viewed by scientists as a multi-component phenomenon that includes various types of objective and subjective factors: intelligence level, personal qualities, emotional and behavioral patterns, various communication skills, personal value systems, and specific life goals. Various aspects of well-being can be measured by subjective (self-assessment) and objective (psychodiagnostic) methods.

 

Approaches to studying the phenomenon of human well-being

We believe that increased interest in this topic has led to the emergence of a large number of psychological, sociological, political, and economic studies of the phenomenon of well-being. However, we would like to note that the lack of an integrative approach to studying the phenomenon of subjective well-being has led to the absence of a unified point of view regarding the concept of "human well-being." Currently, there are several approaches to combining existing theories of well-being into groups. K. Ryff believes that all theories can be divided into hedonic and eudaemonistic; E. Dacey and G. Ryan propose their theory of self-determination as integrating both approaches; E. Pozdnyakova divides existing theories into 4 conceptual approaches: hedonistic (N. Bradbourne, E. Diener), eudaemonistic (A. Waterman), theories in line with positive psychology (A. Maslow, K. Rogers, G. Allport, K. Jung, E. Erickson, M. Yagoda, D. Birren) and self-determination theory (R. Ryan, E. Deci); P. Cook and co-authors in 2016 identified four approaches and differentiated them according to the criterion of general applicability: hedonistic, eudaemonistic, quality of life and health, while in their work they provide 42 methods for measuring various aspects of well-being [25]

And if in foreign psychology the main, most frequently used approaches to the study of well-being are the hedonistic and eudaemonistic approaches, the affective and cognitive approaches, and the modern direction is the practice-oriented approach, then in domestic psychology, when analyzing the psychological phenomenon of well-being, scientists more often rely on the structural and genetic approaches [1, p. 206].

 

Hedonistic and eudaemonistic approaches

Since ancient philosophy, there have been two main concepts of human happiness and well-being: hedonistic (founded by Aristippus of Cyrene) and eudaemonistic (a term introduced by Aristotle). Today, in psychological science, the above-mentioned main approaches, hedonistic and eudaemonistic, are used to classify existing concepts of well-being. The hedonistic line of interpretation of the phenomenon is that subjective well-being is associated with positive emotions; the eudaemonistic line of interpretation is that subjective well-being is associated with the satisfaction of human needs, which leads to the experience of psychological well-being of the individual [14]. However, we consider it necessary to note that the disadvantage of the hedonistic approach is its theoretical underdevelopment, and the eudaemonistic approach is the difficulty of empirically assessing the level of well-being. The hedonistic approach is based on the study of happiness and defines well-being in terms of achieving pleasure and avoiding negative affect; the emotional state of well-being is studied. Hedonia refers to the subjective experience of pleasure regardless of the sources from which this pleasure arises. In classical philosophy, Aristippus of Cyrene defined hedonia as the basis for the "good life" and believed that "pleasure is the only good, but also that only one's own physical, positive, momentary pleasure is good, and is so regardless of its cause" [17]. The most popular studies in the mainstream of the hedonistic approach include the studies of such scientists as N. Bradburn, E. Diener, M. Agrail, S. Lyubomirsky, E. Giovanini and others. N. Bradburn introduced the term psychological well-being into scientific discourse and interpreted its structure as the ratio of positive and negative affects arising in response to various events in the external environment [23]. The most famous theory in the hedonistic direction is considered to be the three-component theory of E. Diener [15]. E. Diener, developing the ideas of N. Bradburn, in the 1980s Introduced the phenomenon of "life satisfaction" into scientific discourse and, in his opinion, "satisfaction", "positive affect" and "negative affect" are three factors that participate in the formation of psychological well-being. Later, in 1995, while studying the problems associated with life satisfaction, E. Diener introduced the concept of "subjective well-being". The phenomenon of subjective well-being has received extensive and systematic empirical and theoretical treatment. Subjective well-being is defined by E. Diener as the quality of a person's life in relation to both the presence and relative frequency of positive and negative emotions over time, as well as the overall level of satisfaction with life, as "a broad category of phenomena consisting of people's emotional reactions, their satisfaction with individual areas of life, as well as their judgments about the quality of life in general" [15]. In 2003, M. Agrail, relying on the same constructs in his research, unites them under the term "happiness", which he equates with subjective well-being [2]. It is important to note that later, scientists working with the above-mentioned factors of well-being drew attention to the fact that it is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of intensity and duration of affect, since in the course of research, a relationship was discovered between the frequency of experiencing positive and negative affects - the more often a person experiences a positive affect, the less often he experiences a negative one, and vice versa, while the correlations of the intensity of these affects are usually positive, which means that the frequency of affect will serve as the best indicator of well-being [14]. This opinion is also supported by S. Lyubomirsky, who studies happiness as a long-term predominance of positive affect [40]. We can also attribute to the hedonic approach a study conducted in 2009 by E. Giovanini, who identified six factors of subjective well-being: physical and mental health, freedom and self-determination, good work, satisfactory interpersonal relationships, material well-being, and knowledge and understanding of the world [33]. In the approaches listed above, a key role in achieving psychological well-being is attributed to the ratio of positive and negative emotions, which gives grounds to consider them as hedonic concepts of subjective well-being.

In turn, the eudaemonistic approach emphasizes self-realization and personal meaning, and it defines human well-being in terms of the full realization of an individual's potential, and eudaemonistic models contain more components and differ in content. Modern eudaemonistic philosophers, R. Kraut and D.L. Norton, noted that there is a certain set of subjective experiences present in life in accordance with the qualities described by Aristotle [18; 43]. D.L. Norton described this as the feeling of "being where you want to be, doing what you want to do" [43], when what you want is perceived as worth doing. Eudaemonistic well-being refers to the concept of quality of life obtained as a result of developing a person's best potentials and using them to achieve personally expressive and self-consistent goals. The term eudaemonic well-being arose as both a complement to and a contrast to subjective well-being for understanding and studying quality of life. A. Waterman identified eudaimonia as being associated with variables that reflect intrinsic motivation and include developing one's best qualities and using these qualities to achieve life goals. In arguing for the further application of eudaimonic philosophical concepts to the development of psychological theory and research on well-being, A.S. Waterman and colleagues concluded that the value of such efforts would depend on the development of tools that accurately reflect the philosophical understanding of eudaimonia [53]. The bulk of the work and scientific materials written within the eudaimonic approach is represented by the research and developments of K.D. Ryff, E.L. Deci, R.M. Ryan, K. Case, M. Seligman, and others. Authors drawing on the eudaimonic tradition in the study of well-being consider personality within the framework of social context and relationships, and take into account not only the currently achieved level of life satisfaction, but also the experience and resources acquired by a person that are significant for his or her further development. One of the most famous models of subjective well-being in the eudaemonistic approach is the model proposed by K. Ryff [39; 57], which included six personal spheres, with a balance in the development of which a person can be considered psychologically well-off: autonomy, control over the environment, personal growth, a positive attitude towards others, the presence of life goals, self-acceptance; also, the structure of psychological well-being was identified and a fairly popular scale for diagnosing psychological well-being was developed. In line with the eudaemonistic approach, in 2001 the theory of self-determination by R. Ryan and E. Deitchy was proposed, which includes three components: self-determination; competence; positive relationships [48].

 

Affective and cognitive approaches

The affective approach focuses on the relationship between activity and emotion, while the cognitive approach focuses on the balance between challenges and human skills. The most well-known theories within these approaches were proposed by scientists P. Warr, Gonzalez-Roma, Salanova, and others. Within the context of the affective-cognitive approach to the study of well-being, several directions can be distinguished, each emphasizing different semantic aspects. For example, P. Warr presents his concept of the affective approach to well-being (1990), linking it to the emergence of sensory arousal, which becomes the basis for activity, and satisfying experiences [54]. M. Csinkszentmihalyi, within the framework of the cognitive approach, proposes maintaining a balance between skills and challenges (problems) [26]. In 2006, a group of scientists (V. Gonzalez-Roma, V. Schaufeli, A. Bakker, A. Lloret) proposed to combine the affective and cognitive approaches, and they are measured by the level of energy and identification [35]. Finally, in 2014, an integrative model of well-being was presented, which includes four types of classifications of well-being indicators: satisfaction and stimulation, depression and enthusiasm, challenges and skills, energy and identity (M. Salanova, M. Del Libano, S. Llorens, V. Schaufeli) [49].

 

Structural and genetic approaches

We would like to note that in Russian psychology, when analyzing the psychological phenomenon of well-being, scientists often rely on structural and genetic approaches [1, p. 206]. The genetic approach emphasizes the development and formation of the phenomenon of well-being and the factors influencing this process. The structural approach examines the componential composition of the phenomenon of well-being. Research by Russian scientists has shown that well-being is a complex entity, comprising a number of interconnected components.

The structural approach consists of three components: emotional, cognitive and behavioral. The emotional component includes experiences caused by the degree of success of the individual in various spheres of activity. The cognitive component implies understanding of the current life situation and a consistent picture of the world [17, p. 127]. The behavioral component is presented in the form of manifestations of the individual's well-being in various spheres and ensures goal-setting, as well as control over the events in one's own life [17]. In 2003, L. Kulikov identified 5 interrelated elements of subjective well-being within the framework of the structural approach: 1) social well-being (satisfaction with one's social status, the state of the society to which the individual belongs, interpersonal connections, etc.; 2) spiritual well-being (the opportunity to partake in the riches of spiritual culture, awareness and experience of the meaning of one's life, freedom of religion, etc.; 3) physical (bodily) well-being - good physical health, feeling of health, etc.; 4) material well-being – satisfaction with the material sphere of one’s life; 5) psychological well-being (spiritual comfort) – coherence of mental processes, harmony of personality, feeling of integrity, inner balance [9, p.127]. A little later, in 2005, scientists T.D. Shevelenkova and P.P. Fesenko proposed introducing a summary indicator of well-being based on 6 components proposed by K. Ryff and additionally identified 4 more components of well-being: «affect balance» (the ratio of positive and negative affects), «meaningfulness of life» (assessment of the past, present and prospects), «person as an open system» (ability to maintain close contacts and assimilate new experiences), and also proposed to assess the component «autonomy» (ability to be independent) in a different way than K. Ryff [21]. The theoretical model of «personal well-being» was developed and proposed by N.A. Baturin (2005). By this term he understands the systemic formation of the psyche, the basis of which, on the one hand, is positive functioning, allowing a person to demonstrate positive activity in various spheres of life, and on the other hand, the presence of positive subjective assessments of external factors of well-being. Within the framework of this model, well-being appears as a generalized reflection of factors of all levels in the form of emotions, assessments and judgments that allow a person to experience satisfaction with life [3]. Scientists L.V. Karapetyan and G.A. Glotova identified three components in the structure of "emotional-personal well-being" (a positive emotional component, a positive personal component and a negative component, a component of ill-being), formed by nine parameters of internal well-being (happiness, luck, optimism, success, competence, reliability, pessimism, unhappiness, envy), each of which has four components (emotional, cognitive, regulatory, behavioral) [6]. R. Shaminov in his work devoted to the criteria of subjective well-being of an individual writes that in Russian psychology the content of the concept of well-being demonstrates an intersection with such concepts as personality maturity (K.A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya), subjectivity (A.V. Brushlinsky), «life satisfaction» (R.Kh. Shakurov, A.B. Belousova), «subjective quality of life» (A.A. Poduzov, V.S. Yazykova), «happiness» (I.A. Dzhidaryan, D.A. Leontiev), «emotional comfort» (S.V. Dukhnovsky), etc. R.M. Shamionov writes that the concepts of «optimism», «life satisfaction», «happiness» are related to the term «subjective well-being» [20].

In the works of Russian authors, carried out within the framework of the genetic approach, the factors influencing the formation and dynamics of individual well-being are studied. In his study, S.V. Yaremchuk names such types of factors of subjective well-being as biological (gender, age and level of somatic health), social-activity (quality of relationships with significant others, work and leisure activities with the possibility of creative self-realization, adequate assessment by society, decent social status and standard of living) and intrapersonal factors (confidence in oneself and one's own future, optimism, psychological stability, a sense of security, as well as the number of intrapersonal conflicts and the degree of realization of personal values. Among the determinants of well-being, he includes health status, material security, social support, and features of the cultural environment [22]. It should be noted that the results of the work of Russian scientists on the study of the phenomenon of well-being have shown that the multifunctionality and multifaceted nature of the personality leads to the identification of various types of well-being.

 

Theories of the 20th centuryI centuries in the mainstream of positive psychology

At the beginning of the 21st century, the study of the phenomenon of subjective well-being and happiness became one of the most popular targets of empirical research in the human sciences. The observed growth of interest in the factors influencing happiness and well-being was generated by the phenomenon of positive psychology—a field of research and applied development focused on the reliable empirical identification of conditions and factors that contribute to happiness and well-being and based on the proven fact that simply eliminating problems and disorders is not enough: the positive dynamics of human life have their own patterns that cannot be reduced to a mirror image of its negative dynamics [11].

Having studied foreign theories of well-being developed in the mainstream of positive psychology, we can say that the authors most often rely on B. Fredrickson's theory "On the expansion and construction of positive emotions" [32], M. Seligman's concept of strengths PERMA [50], the Gallup Research Center model, M. Csikszentmihalyi's flow theory [19], R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci's theory of self-determination [48], and C. R. Snyder's theory of hope [51]. At the same time, in the last decade, M. Seligman's theory of well-being "PERMA" [50] has been widely used in the Western business environment. In his works, Seligman shifted the focus from negative factors in a person's life (stress, fear, depression) to positive ones that contribute to an increase in the level of happiness. M. Seligman identified five components of subjective well-being: positive emotions, meaning, involvement, positive relationships with others, and achievements. The author introduced the concepts of "thriving," "virtue," and "strength of character," and presented a classification of "positive symptoms" and "strong character traits." He believes that both individual genetic makeup and environmental conditions play a significant role in shaping subjective well-being, but personality traits also play a decisive role. M. Seligman notes that, when making life choices, people strive to achieve maximum success in each component. We believe that the widespread application of his theory in the business environment stems from the current belief that happy, active, psychologically healthy employees who love their work, utilize their professional environment to develop their personal and professional potential, and are able to ensure organizational prosperity.

 

Practice-oriented approach

In addition to the above-described approaches, which primarily focus on the psychological aspects of well-being, there is also a practice-oriented approach. This approach examines the relationship between well-being and various aspects of human life and the business environment. Studies examining the relationship between the phenomenon of subjective well-being and the processes occurring in business structures are of scientific interest to us, since they reflect the mutual influence of a person's subjective well-being on the economic performance of a business system and vice versa, which is relevant for people in the modern era, when most of their lives are spent interacting with various socio-economic systems. The relationship between income and well-being was first studied in 2005 [31]; In 2010, studies were conducted examining the relationship between emotional well-being and labor productivity, as well as between internal job satisfaction and problems of training and development of managers [37], at the same time, J. Oswald and S. Wu found objective confirmation of subjective indicators of human well-being [45]. In the work of Fabius, a relationship was identified between the health and safety of employees and the final result of their work, through tracking the market indicators of companies that cultivate a «culture of health», which has a direct impact on the level of human well-being [29]. In 2014, a group of scientists presented a description of four types of employee well-being and the associated psychosocial prerequisites [49]. D.W. Edington, J.S. Pitts and A.B. Schultz, studying health as an economic strategy, obtained comparative data related to lifestyle, diseases, and economic losses in the workplace, and identified additional determinants of health that characterize well-being: socio-emotional states and positive characteristics of the individual, as well as the environment and culture [30]. A little later, in 2015, a number of studies identified a relationship between the return on investment (ROI) and best practices for promoting health in the workplace and organizational financial performance through tracking the market performance of companies [36; 44].

In 2016, M. Linton and colleagues conducted a major research project and published an analysis of existing well-being instruments [41]. The goal of their work was to identify and systematize well-being instruments (it is important to note that they only used instruments available in English) in order to understand which existing instruments might best meet the goals of measuring well-being. In their review, the researchers provided a detailed list of 99 common indicators of adult well-being, a timeline illustrating the development of these instruments over the past 50 years in Western psychology, and a thematically cataloged inventory of 196 available measures. The evidence they obtained indicates that there is no consensus on how well-being should be measured, how instruments should be developed, or which measures should be included. The variability between instruments observed in the research confirms the need to pay close attention to what is being assessed within the framework of measuring «well-being.» The authors write that they recommend using the term "well-being" as an "umbrella term reflecting the aforementioned concepts, rather than as a separate, unitary concept. Instead, greater attention should be paid to the dimensions of well-being." After conducting their study, they concluded that future research should focus on better understanding the conceptual similarities and differences between the various dimensions of well-being.

 

Conclusions

Based on the above, we believe that a theoretical analysis of the literature on the problem of studying the phenomenon of subjective well-being has allowed us to generalize the main theories and draw a number of conclusions:

1. The question of methodology for studying the phenomenon of subjective well-being remains open. To date, there is no consensus on the process by which subjective well-being develops and the factors that influence it. Several main approaches are most often used to classify existing theories of well-being: hedonic, eudaemonistic, affective, cognitive, practice-oriented, structural, genetic, and the approach inspired by 21st-century positive psychology.
2. Currently, the scientific literature uses a variety of constructs by which researchers understand the phenomenon of subjective well-being, while they are poorly differentiated and are often used as synonyms: happiness (W. Wilson, N. Bradburn, M. Argyle, Ed Diener, IA Dzhidaryan, D. Kahneman, Ed Diener, & N. Schwarz, S. Lyubomirsky, L. King, Ed Diener); mental health (M. Jahoda) life satisfaction (N. Bradburn, FM Andrews & SB Withey, Ed Diner, Ed Diener, JS Larsen, S. Levine, RA Emmons, IA Dzhidaryan); satisfaction in specific areas (Ed Diener, Ulrich Schimmack); quality of life (A. Campbell, DP Crowne, DA Marlowe); well-being (N. Schwarz, GL Clore, RM Ryan, EL Deci, HT Reis, RM Ryan); psychological well-being (N. Bradburn, C. Ryff, Chan Mei Fen, A. S. Waterman; D. Kahneman; M. Seligman, S. V. Karskanova, E. Loznyakova, A. S. Shiryaeva, Yu. M. Aleksandrov, S. A. Vodyakha, G. S. Khafizova, Yu. B. Dubovik, G. S. Sharapova, A. S. Shiryaeva, A. Syrtsova, L. N. Yavorskoy, G. S. Filonenko, Ya. I. Pavlotskaya); subjective well-being (Ed Diener, PT Costa, RR McCrae, Ed Diener, JS Larsen, S. Levine, R.A. Emmons, M.W. Fordyce, K. Magnus & Ed Diener, Ed Diener, JS Larsen, Ed Diener, E. Sandvik, W.G. Pavot, Ed Diener, S. Oishi, G.M. Shamionov, U. Schimmack, M. Eid, R.J. Larsen, M. Dmitrieva, M. Rozanova, N.S. D.A. Leontyev, S.K. Letyagina, G.L. Puchkova, M.V. Sokolova, S.V. Yaremchuk, L.V. Karapetyan, N.V. Podbutskaya, A.G. Zueva, T.V. Danilchenko, E. Benko); actual and ideal psychological well-being (P.P. Fesenko).
3. Subjective well-being can be considered as a systemic phenomenon that includes the widest range of subjective and objective factors of positive personality functioning, including emotional, cognitive, behavioral and motivational components.

 

Literature

1. Ananyev B.G. On the Problems of Modern Study of Humanity. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2001. 260 p.
2. Argyle M. Psychology of happiness. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2003. 272 p.
3. Baturin N.A.., Bashkatov S.A., Gafarova N.V. Theoretical model of personal well-being // Bulletin of SUSU. 2013. No. 4. P. 4-13.
4. Gordeeva T. Self-determination theory: present and future. Part 1: Problems of theory development // Psychological research. 2010. No. 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v3i12.90;
5. Dzhidaryan I. A. Happiness in the concepts of everyday consciousness // Psychological journal. 2000. Vol. 21, No. 2. Pp. 40-48.
6. Karapetyan L.V., Glotova G.A. Emotional and personal well-being: monograph // Ekaterinburg: Ural Institute of the State Fire Service of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia, 2017. - 212 p.
7. Kozlov V.V. Integrative psychology. Monograph - M.: IP Petrosyan Publishing House, 2023. - 748 p.
8. Kitaeva M.P.. Coaching approach to overcoming digital alienation of a person of a free profession // Organizational psycholinguistics [Electronic resource]: electronic. scientific journal – No. 4 (24). - P. 96-113.
9. Kulikov L.V. Personality Mental Hygiene. Issues of Psychological Stability and Psychoprophylaxis: A Study Guide. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2004. 464 p.
10. Levit L. Z. Person-oriented concept of happiness: a new systemic paradigm // Pedagogical education in Russia. 2013. No. 1. P. 102-111.
11. Leontiev D. A. Happiness and subjective well-being: towards constructing a conceptual field // Monitoring public opinion: economic and social changes. 2020. No. 1. P. 14-37. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.02.
12. Matyushina M.G. The main approaches to the disclosure of the concept of "subjective well-being" in domestic and foreign psychology // Bulletin of the A. I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University [Text]. - St. Petersburg, 2016. - N 182. - P. 127-131.
13. Novak N. G. The main approaches to defining psychological well-being of an individual in modern psychology // Psychological journal. 2008. No. 2 (18). P. 21-25.
14. Pakhol B.E. Subjective and psychological well-being: modern and classical approaches, models and factors / B. E. Pakhol // Ukrainian Psychological Journal. - 2017. - No. 1 (3). - P. 80-104.
15. Piskarev P.M. Metamodernism and Integrative Theory of Humanitarian Knowledge: Doctor of Psychology dissertation. Yar., 2019. 469 p.
16. Puchkova G.L. Subjective well-being as a factor in self-actualization of the individual: dis. … candidate of psychological sciences: 19.00.01. Khabarovsk, 2003. 163 p.
17. Tatarkiewicz V. O. On the Happiness and Perfection of Man / translated from Polish, compiled by L. V. Konovalova, edited by L. M. Arkhangelsky. — Moscow: Progress, 1981. — 368 p.
18. Fesenko P.P. Does the concept of psychological well-being have socio-cultural specificity? // Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2005. Vol. 2. No. 4. Pp. 132-138.
19. Csikszentmihalyi M. Flow: Psychology of Optimal Experience. Moscow: Smysl; Alpina non-fiction, 2017. 416 p.
20. Shamionov R.M.. Criteria of subjective well-being of an individual: socio-cultural determination // News of Saratov University. Nov. series. Series: Acmeology of education. Developmental psychology. 2015. Vol. 4, issue 3 (15).
21. Shevelenkova T.D., Fesenko P.P. Psychological well-being of the individual (review of concepts and research methods) // Psychological diagnostics. 2005. No. 3. P. 95-129.
22. Yaremchuk S.V. Subjective well-being as a component of the value-semantic sphere // Psychological journal. 2013. Vol. 34. No. 5. Pp. 85-95.
23. Bradburn N. The Structure of Psychological well-being / N. Bradburn. - Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 1969. – R. 320.
24. Czapinski J. Illusions and Biases in Psychological Well-Being: An 'Onion' Theory of Happiness // Working Meeting of ISR and ISS (Ann Arbor, 1991). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1991. P. 23.
25. Cooke Р. J. Measuring Well-Being: A Review of Instruments / Philip J. Cooke, Timothy P. Melchert, Korey Connor // Published. - SAGE Publications, 2016. - P. 730-757.
26. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
27. Diener E (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist. 55. pp. 34-43.
28. Deci E. L. Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former Eastern Bloc country: a cross-cultural study of self-determination / Deci EL, Ryan RM, GagneP M., Leone DR, Usunov J. & Kornazheva BP // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. - 2001. - P. 930-942.
29. Fabius, R., Thayer, R.D., Konicki, D.L., Yarborough, C.M., Peterson, K.W., Isaac, F., … Dreger, M. (2013). The link between workforce health and safety and the health of the bottom line: tracking market performance of companies that nurture a “culture of health”. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 55(9), P. 993-1000.
30. Edington, DW, Pitts, JS, Schultz, AB. (2014). Health as an economic strategy: special emphasis on the workplace. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 8(5), P. 330-335.
31. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2005). Income and well-being: an empirical analysis of the comparison income effect. Journal of public economics, 89(5-6), 997-1019.
32. Fredrickson, B. (2009). Positivity: Groundbreaking Research Reveals How to Embrace the Hidden Strength of Positive Emotions, Overcome Negativity, and Thrive. New York, NY: Crown.
33. Giovanini E., Hall J., Morrone A., Rannuzi G. A framework to measure the progress of societies, OECD Working Paper, 2009.
34. Gallagher MW, Lopez SJ, Preacher KJ. The hierarchical structure of well-being // Journal of Personality. 2009. No. 77. pp. 1025–1050. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00573.x
35. González-Romá, V., Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of vocational behavior, 68(1), 165-174.
36. Grossmeier, J., Fabius, R., Flynn, JP, Noeldner, SP, Fabius, D., Goetzel, RZ, Anderson, DR. (2016). Linking workplace health promotion best practices and organizational financial performance: tracking market performance of companies with highest scores on the HERO scorecard. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 58(1), 16-23.
37. Hosie, PJ, Sevastos, PP. (2010). A framework for conceiving of job-related affective wellbeing. Management review, 406-436.
38. Kraut R (1979). Two conceptions of happiness. Philosophical Review. 87.167-196.
39. Keyes CLM, Waterman MB. Dimensions of Well-Being and Mental Health in Adulthood // Well-being. Positive Development Across the life Course. Hillsdale; London: Erlbaum Associates. 2003. P. 477-495.
40. Lyubomirsky S. The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? / Lyubomirsky S., King L. & Diener E. // Psychological Bulletin. – 2005. – No. 131. – R. 803-855.
41. Linton MJ, Dieppe, P., Medina-Lara, A. Review of 99 self-report measures for assessing well-being in adults: Exploring dimensions of well-being and developments over time. British Medical Journal Open. 2016;6(7): e010641.
42. McDowell J. The role of eudaimonia in Aristotle's ethics. In Rorty A. O. (Ed.), Essays on Aistotle's ethics (pp. 359-376). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
43. Norton DL (1976). Personal destinations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]. pp.216.
44. O'Donnell, MP. (2015). What is the ROI for workplace health promotion? It really does depend, and that's the point.
45. Oswald, AJ, Wu, S. (2010). Objective confirmation of subjective measures of human well-being: Evidence from the USA. Science, 327(5965), 576-579.
46. Robinson MD, Ryff CD. The role of self-deception in perceptions of past, present and future happiness // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1999. Vol. 25. N. 5. P. 596-608.
47. Ryff CD. The contours of positive human health // Psychological Inquiry. 1998. Vol. 9. P. 1-28.
48. Ryan R. M. On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudemonic well-being / Ryan RM, & Deci EL // Annual Review of Psychology. – 2001. – No. 52(1). – R. 141-166.
49. Salanova, M., Del Líbano, M., Llorens, S., Schaufeli, W. B.. (2014). Engaged, workaholic, burned-out or just 9-to-5? Toward a typology of employee well-being. Stress and Health, 30(1), 71-81.
50. Seligman M. (2018): PERMA and the building blocks of well-being, The Journal of Positive Psychology, DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2018.1437466
51. Snyder, CR. (2000b). The past and possible futures of hope. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 19, 11-28.
52. World Health Organization, “Constitution of the World Health Organization,” American Journal of Public Health 36 no. 11 November 1 1946. pp. 1315-1323.
53. Waterman AS, Schwartz SJ, & Conti R (2008). The implications of two conceptions of happiness (hedonic enjoyment and eudaimonia) for the understanding of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Happiness Studies. 9. pp. 41-79.
54. Warr, P. (1990). The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. Journal of occupational Psychology, 63(3), 193-210.

References

 

1. Anan'ev BG. On the Problems of Modern Human Knowledge. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2001. 260 pp.
2. Argajl M. Psihologija schast'ja. SPb.: Piter, 2003. 272 s.
3. Baturin NA, Bashkatov SA, Gafarova NV. Theoretical model of personal well-being // Vestnik of JuUrGU. 2013. No. 4. P. 4-13.
4. Gordeeva T. Self-determination theory: present and future. Part 1: Problems of theory development // Psychological studies. 2010. No. 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v3i12.90;
5. Dzhidar'jan IA. Happiness in the representations of everyday consciousness // Psihol. zhurn. 2000. Vol. 21, No. 2. Pp.
6. Karapetjan LV, Glotova GA. Social and personal well-being: monograph // Ekaterinburg: Ural Institute of GPS of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia, 2017. 212 p.
7. Kozlov VV. Integrative psychology. Monografija – M.: Izd-vo IP Petrosjan, 2023-748s.
8. Kitaeva MP. A coaching approach to overcoming digital alienation of a person of a free profession // Organizational psychology [Electronic resource]: electronic journal – No. 4 (24). -P. 96-113.
9. Kulikov LV. Personality psychology. Issues of psychological stability and psychoprophylaxis: a manual. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2004. 464 p.
10. Levit LZ. Personality-oriented concept of happiness: a new systemic paradigm // Pedagogical education in Russia. 2013. No. 1. P. 102-111.
11. Leont'ev D. A. Happiness and subtly positive well-being: towards constructing a low-lying field // Monitoring public opinion: economic and social variables. 2020. No. 1. P. 14-37. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.02.
12. Matjushina MG. The main approaches to the disclosure of the concept of "sub#ektivnoe well-being" in domestic and foreign psychology // Bulletin of the A. I. Gertsen Russian State Pedagogical University [Text]. - St. Petersburg, 2016. - N 182. - P. 127-131.
13. Novak N. G. Basic approaches to defining psychological well-being of an individual in modern psychology // Psihol. zhurn. 2008. No. 2 (18). P. 21-25.
14. Pahol' B. E. Sub#actical and psychological well-being: modern and classical approaches, models and factors / B. E. Pahol // Ukrainian psychological journal. – 2017. – No. 1 (3). – P. 80-104.
15. Piskarev PM. Metamodern i integrativnaja teorija gumanitarnogo znanija: dis. … D-ra psihol.nauk. Jar., 2019.469s.
16. Puchkova GL. Sub#actical well-being as a factor in self-actualization of personality: dis. … cand. psihol. nauk: 19.00.01. Khabarovsk, 2003. 163 s.
17. Tatarkiewicz V. On the Happiness and Perfection of Man / translated from Polish by L. V. Konovalova, edited by L. M. Arkhangelsky. — Moscow: Progress, 1981. — 368 pages.
18. Fesenko PP. Does the concept of psychological well-being have a specific socio-cultural character? // Psihologija. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2005. Vol. 2. No. 4. Pp.
19. Chiksentmihaji M. Potok: Psihologija optimal'nogo perezhivanija. M.: Smysl; Al'pina non-fikshn, 2017. 416 s.
20. Shamionov RM. Kriterii sub#ektivnogo well-being of an individual: socio-cultural determination // Izv. Saratov University. Nov.ser. Ser. Akmeologija obrazovanija. Psihologija razvitija. 2015. V. 4, issue 3 (15).
21. Shevelenkova TD., Fesenko PP Psychological well-being of the individual (review of concepts and research methods) // Psihologicheskaja diagnostika. 2005. No. 3. P. 95-129.
22. Jaremchuk SV. Sub#actical well-being as a component of the value-semantic sphere // Psihologicheskij zhurnal. 2013. Vol. 34. No. 5. Pp. 85-95. Str. 93.
23. Bradburn N. The Structure of Psychological well-being / N. Bradburn. - Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 1969. – R. 320.
24. Czapinski J. Illusions and Biases in Psychological Well-Being: An 'Onion' Theory of Happiness // Working Meeting of ISR and ISS (Ann Arbor, 1991). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1991. P. 23.
25. Cooke Р. J. Measuring Well-Being: A Review of Instruments / Philip J. Cooke, Timothy P. Melchert, Korey Connor // Published. - SAGE Publications, 2016. - P. 730-757.
26. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.
27. Diener E (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist. 55. pp. 34-43.
28. Deci E. L. Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former Eastern Bloc country: a cross-cultural study of self-determination / Deci EL, Ryan RM, GagneP M., Leone DR, Usunov J. & Kornazheva BP // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. - 2001. - P. 930-942.
29. Fabius, R., Thayer, R.D., Konicki, D.L., Yarborough, C.M., Peterson, K.W., Isaac, F., … Dreger, M. (2013). The link between workforce health and safety and the health of the bottom line: tracking market performance of companies that nurture a “culture of health”. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 55(9), 993-1000.
30. Edington, DW, Pitts, JS, Schultz, AB. (2014). Health as an economic strategy: special emphasis on the workplace. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 8(5), 330-335.
31. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A. (2005). Income and well-being: an empirical analysis of the comparison income effect. Journal of public economics, 89(5-6), 997-1019.
32. Fredrickson, B. (2009). Positivity: Groundbreaking Research Reveals How to Embrace the Hidden Strength of Positive Emotions, Overcome Negativity, and Thrive. New York, NY: Crown.
33. Giovanini E., Hall J., Morrone A., Rannuzi G. A framework to measure the progress of societies, OECD Working Paper, 2009.
34. Gallagher MW, Lopez SJ, Preacher KJ. The hierarchical structure of well-being // Journal of Personality. 2009. No. 77. pp. 1025-1050. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00573.x
35. González-Romá, V., Schaufeli, W.B., Bakker, A.B., Lloret, S. (2006). Burnout and work engagement: Independent factors or opposite poles? Journal of vocational behavior, 68(1), 165-174.
36. Grossmeier, J., Fabius, R., Flynn, JP, Noeldner, SP, Fabius, D., Goetzel, RZ, Anderson, DR. (2016). Linking workplace health promotion best practices and organizational financial performance: tracking market performance of companies with highest scores on the HERO scorecard. Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 58(1), 16-23.
37. Hosie, PJ, Sevastos, PP. (2010). A framework for conceiving of job-related affective wellbeing. Management review, 406-436.
38. Kraut R (1979). Two conceptions of happiness. Philosophical Review. 87.167-196.
39. Keyes CLM, Waterman M.B. Dimensions of Well-Being and Mental Health in Adulthood // Well-being. Positive Development Across the life Course. Hillsdale; London: Erlbaum Associates. 2003. P. 477-495.
40. Lyubomirsky S. The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? / Lyubomirsky S., King L. & Diener E. // Psychological Bulletin. – 2005. – No. 131. – R. 803-855.
41. Linton MJ, Dieppe, P., Medina-Lara, A. Review of 99 self-report measures for assessing well-being in adults: Exploring dimensions of well-being and developments over time. British Medical Journal Open. 2016;6(7): e010641.
42. McDowell J. The role of eudaimonia in Aristotle's ethics. In Rorty A. O. (Ed.), Essays on Aistotle's ethics (pp. 359-376). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
43. Norton DL (1976). Personal destinations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]. pp. 216.
44. O'Donnell, MP. (2015). What is the ROI for workplace health promotion? It really does depend, and that's the point.
45. Oswald, AJ, Wu, S. (2010). Objective confirmation of subjective measures of human well-being: Evidence from the USA. Science, 327(5965), 576-579.
46. Robinson MD, Ryff C. D. The role of self-deception in perceptions of past, present and future happiness // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1999. Vol. 25. N. 5. P. 596-608.
47. Ryff CD. The contours of positive human health // Psychological Inquiry. 1998. Vol. 9. P. 1-28.
48. Ryan R. M. On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudemonic well-being / Ryan RM, & Deci EL // Annual Review of Psychology. – 2001. – No. 52(1). – R. 141-166.
49. Salanova, M., Del Líbano, M., Llorens, S., Schaufeli, W. B.. (2014). Engaged, workaholic, burned-out or just 9-to-5? Toward a typology of employee well-being. Stress and Health, 30(1), 71-81.
50. Seligman M. (2018): PERMA and the building blocks of well-being, The Journal of Positive Psychology, DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2018.1437466
51. Snyder, C. R. (2000b). The past and possible futures of hope. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 19, 11-28.
52. World Health Organization, “Constitution of the World Health Organization,” American Journal of Public Health 36 no. 11 November 1 1946. pp. 1315-1323.
53. Waterman AS, Schwartz SJ, & Conti R (2008). The implications of two conceptions of happiness (hedonic enjoyment and eudaimonia) for the understanding of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Happiness Studies. 9. pp. 41-79.
54. Warr, P. (1990). The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health. Journal of occupational Psychology, 63(3), 193-210.