Well-being contributing factors

Well-being is a multifaceted topic studied in psychology, especially positive psychology. Biologically, well-being is highly influenced by endogenous molecules that impact happiness and euphoria in organisms, often referred to as "well-being related markers". Related concepts are eudaimonia, happiness, flourishing, quality of life, contentment, and meaningful life.

Theories Central theories are Diener's tripartite model of subjective well-being, Ryff's Six-factor Model of Psychological Well-being, Corey Keyes' work on flourishing, and Seligman's contributions to positive psychology and his theories on authentic happiness and P.E.R.M.A. Positive psychology is concerned with eudaimonia, "the good life" or flourishing, living according to what holds the greatest value in life – the factors that contribute the most to a well-lived and fulfilling life. While not attempting a strict definition of the good life, positive psychologists agree that one must live a happy, engaged, and meaningful life in order to experience "the good life". Martin Seligman referred to "the good life" as "using your signature strengths every day to produce authentic happiness and abundant gratification". According to Christopher Peterson, "eudaimonia trumps hedonism". Research on positive psychology, well-being, eudaimonia and happiness, and the theories of Diener, Ryff, Keyes and Seligmann cover a broad range of levels and topics, including "the biological, personal, relational, institutional, cultural, and global dimensions of life." Happiness was famously analyzed by Aristotle as being the sole ultimate goal of human existence, meaning that he viewed it the only thing important in its own right, not merely as a means to an end. The pursuit of happiness predicts both positive emotions and less depressive symptoms. People who prioritize happiness are more psychologically able, all else held equal.

Methodology of study

Well-being measurement Different ways of measuring well-being reveal different contributing factors. The correlation between two of these, life satisfaction and happiness, in the World Values Survey (1981–2005) is only 0.47. These are different, but related concepts which are used interchangeably outside of academia. Typically, life satisfaction, or evaluative wellbeing is measured with Cantril's self-anchoring ladder, a questionnaire where wellbeing is rated on a scale from 1–10. Happiness or hedonic/Affective well-being measurement is measured with the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS), a more complex scale.

Limitations The UK Government's Department of Health compiled a factsheet in 2014, in which it is stated that the key limitations to well-being, quality of life and life satisfaction research are that:

There are numerous associations and correlations in the body of evidence, but few causal relationships, since existing longitudinal datasets "do not use consistent wellbeing and predictor measures at different time points"; After controlling for mental health status, not many of the found associations are still significant; Subgroup analyses are rare; There are too few studies to conduct meta-analyses; There are too few interventional studies.

Major factors

For evaluative well-being (life satisfaction) Mental health is the strongest individual predictor of life satisfaction. Mental illness is associated with poorer well-being. In fact, mental health is the strongest determinant of quality of life at a later age. Studies have documented the relationship between anxiety and quality of life. The VOXEU analysis of happiness showed the principal determinants of an adult's life satisfaction to be income, parenting, family break up, mother's mental health and schooling. The factors that explain life satisfaction roughly map (negatively) to those factors that explain misery. They are first and foremost diagnosed depression/anxiety, which explains twice as much as the next factor, physical health (number of medical conditions), that explains just as much variance in subjective well-being between people, as income and whether someone is partnered. These factors count twice as much as each of whether someone is employed and whether they are a non-criminal, which in turn are 3 times as important as years of education. Overall, the best predictor of an adult's life satisfaction is their emotional health as a child as reported by the mother and child. It trumps factors like the qualifications that someone gets and their behaviour at 16 as reported by the mother. A child and therefore an adult's emotional health is most affected itself by a mother's mental health, which is just over twice as important as family income. 2/3 as important as family income is parent's involvement, which is 0.1 partial correlation coefficients more important than aggressive parenting (negative), father's unemployment (negative), family conflict (negative) and whether the mother worked in the subject's 1st year of life. Whether the mother worked thereafter has 0 correlation with well-being, however. In terms of non-family factors, the place where someone goes to secondary school matters a fair bit more than observed family background altogether, which in turn is slightly more important than the place where someone went to primary school.

For affective well-being (happiness) The main determinants of affective well-being, by correlation and effect size are:

Corruption index (-0.54) Control of corruption (0.47) Bureaucratic quality (0.40) PPP-adjusted GDP per capita (although there is evidence of publication bias) (0.39) Economic freedom (0.35) Human rights violations (-0.33) Political and ethnic violence (-0.28) Civil liberties (0.28) Life expectancy at birth (0.27) Satisfaction with standard of living (0.24)

Biological factors

… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.