Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

Subjective well-being
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Subjective well-being (SWB) refers to how people experience the quality of their lives and
includes both emotional reactions and cognitive judgments.[1] Psychologists have defined
happiness as a combination of life satisfaction and the relative frequency of positive and negative
affect. SWB therefore encompasses moods and emotions as well as evaluations of one's satisfaction
with general and specific areas of one's life.[2] Concepts encompassed by SWB include positive and
negative affect, happiness, and life satisfaction. Positive psychology is particularly concerned with
the study of SWB.[3] SWB tends to be stable over time[2] and is strongly related to personality
traits.[4] There is evidence that health and SWB may mutually influence each other, as good health
tends to be associated with greater happiness,[5] and a number of studies have found that positive
emotions and optimism can have a beneficial influence on health.[6]

Contents
1 Components
1.1 Affect balance
1.2 Life satisfaction
1.3 Measurement
2 Theories
2.1 Top-down perspective
2.2 Bottom-up perspective
3 Personality and genetics
4 Social influences
5 Positive psychology
6 Correlation of precuneus gray matter volume and subjective happiness score
7 Wealth
8 Health
9 Leisure
10 Cultural variations
11 See also
12 External links
13 References

Components
Diener et al. argued that the various components of SWB represent distinct constructs that need to

1 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

be understood separately, even though they are closely related. Hence, SWB may be considered "a
general area of scientific interest rather than a single specific construct".[2] Due to the specific focus
on the subjective aspects of well-being, definitions of SWB typically exclude objective conditions
such as material conditions or health, although these can influence ratings of SWB.[1] Definitions
of SWB therefore focus on how a person evaluates his/her own life, including emotional
experiences of pleasure versus pain in response to specific events and cognitive evaluations of what
a person considers a good life.[3] Components of SWB relating to affect include positive affect
(experiencing pleasant emotions and moods) and low negative affect (experiencing unpleasant,
distressing emotions and moods), as well as "overall affect" or "hedonic balance", defined as the
overall equilibrium between positive and negative affect, and usually measured as the difference
between the two.[4] High positive affect and low negative affect are often highly correlated, but not
always.[3]

There are two components of SWB. One is Affect Balance and the other is Life Satisfaction. An
individual's scores on the two measures are summed to produce a total SWB score. In some cases,
these scores are kept separate.[7]

Affect balance

Affect balance refers to the emotions, moods, and feelings a person has. These can be all positive,
all negative, or a combination of both positive and negative.[7] Some research shows also that
feelings of reward are separate from positive and negative affect. [8]

Life satisfaction

Life satisfaction (global judgments of one's life) and satisfaction with specific life domains (e.g.
work satisfaction) are considered cognitive components of SWB.[3] The term "happiness" is also
commonly used in regards to SWB and has been defined variously as "satisfaction of desires and
goals" (therefore related to life satisfaction), as a "preponderance of positive over negative affect"
(therefore related to emotional components of SWB),[1] as "contentment",[9] and as a "consistent,
optimistic mood state"[4] and may imply an affective evaluation of one's life as a whole.[10] Life
satisfaction can also be known as the "stable" component in one's life.[1] Affective concepts of
SWB can be considered in terms of momentary emotional states as well as in terms of longer-term
moods and tendencies (i.e. how much positive and/or negative affect a person generally experiences
over any given period of time).[2] Life satisfaction and in some research happiness are typically
considered over long durations, up to one's lifetime.[4] "Quality of life" has also been studied as a
conceptualization of SWB. Although its exact definition varies, it is usually measured as an
aggregation of well-being across several life domains and may include both subjective and
objective components.[4]

Measurement

2 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

Life satisfaction and Affect balance are generally measured separately and independently.[11] Life
satisfaction is generally measured using a self-report method. A common measurement for life
satisfaction is questionnaires. Affect balance is also generally measured using a self-report method.
An example of a measurement of Affect balance is PANAS (Positive Affect Negative Affect
Schedule).[11] The issue with the current measurements of life satisfaction and affect balance is that
they are self-reports. The problem with self-reports is that the participants may be lying or at least
not telling the whole truth on the questionnaires. Participants may be lying or holding back from
revealing certain things because they are either embarrassed or they may be filling in what they
believe the researcher wants to see in the results. To gain more accurate results, other methods of
measurement have been used to determine ones SWB. Another way to corroborate or confirm that
the self-report results are accurate is through informant reports.[11] Informant reports are given to
the participants closest friends and family and they are asked to fill out either a survey or a form
asking about the participants mood, emotions, and overall lifestyle. The participant may write in the
self-report that they are very happy, however that participants friends and family record that he/she
is always depressed. This would obviously be a contradiction in results which would ultimately
lead to inaccurate results. Another method of gaining a better understanding of the true results is
through ESM, or the Experience Sampling Method.[11] In this measure, participants are given a
beeper/pager that will randomly ring throughout the day. Whenever the beeper/pager sounds, the
participant will stop what he/she is doing and record the activity they are currently engaged in and
their current mood and feelings. Tracking this over a period of a week or a month will give
researchers a better understanding of the true emotions, moods, and feelings the participant is
experiencing, and how these factors interact with other thoughts and behaviors. [12] A third
measurement to ensure validity is the Day Reconstruction Method.[11] In this measure, participants
fill out a diary of the previous days activities. The participant is then asked to describe each
activity and provide a report of how they were feeling, what mood they were experiencing, and any
emotions that surfaced. Thus to ensure valid results, a researcher may tend to use self-reports along
with another form of measurement mentioned above. Someone with a high level of life satisfaction
and a positive affect balance is said to have a high level of SWB.[11]

Theories
Theories of the causes of SWB tend to emphasise either top-down or bottom-up influences.[1]

Top-down perspective

In the top-down view, global features of personality influence the way a person perceives events.
Individuals may therefore have a global tendency to perceive life in a consistently positive or
negative manner, depending on their stable personality traits.[13] Top-down theories of SWB
suggest that people have a genetic predisposition to be happy or unhappy and this predisposition
determines their SWB "setpoint". Set Point theory implies that a person's baseline or equilibrium
level of SWB is a consequence of hereditary characteristics and therefore, almost entirely
predetermined at birth.[14] Evidence for this genetic predisposition derives from behavior-genetic

3 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

studies that have found that positive and negative affectivity each have high heritability (40% and
55% respectively in one study).[2] Numerous twin studies confirm the notion of set point theory,
however, they do not rule out the possibility that is it possible for individuals to experience long
term changes in SWB.[14][15]

Diener et al. note that heritability studies are limited in that they describe long-term SWB in a
sample of people in a modern western society but may not be applicable to more extreme
environments that might influence SWB and do not provide absolute indicators of genetic effects.
Additionally, heritability estimates are inconsistent across studies.

Further evidence for a genetically influenced predisposition to SWB comes from findings that
personality has a large influence on long-term SWB. This has led to the dynamic equilibrium model
of SWB. This model proposes that personality provides a baseline for emotional responses.
External events may move people away from the baseline, sometimes dramatically, but these
movements tend to be of limited duration, with most people returning to their baseline
eventually.[2]

Bottom-up perspective

From a bottom-up perspective, happiness represents an accumulation of happy experiences.

Bottom-up influences include external events, and broad situational and demographic factors,
including health and marital status. Bottom-up approaches are based on the idea that there are
universal basic human needs and that happiness results from their fulfilment. In support of this
view, there is evidence that daily pleasurable events are associated with increased positive affect,
and daily unpleasant events or hassles are associated with increased negative affect.

However, research suggests that external events account for a much smaller proportion of the
variance in self-reports of SWB than top-down factors, such as personality.[2] A theory proposed to
explain the limited impact of external events on SWB is hedonic adaptation.[3] Based originally on
the concept of a "hedonic treadmill", this theory proposes that positive or negative external events
temporarily increase or decrease feelings of SWB, but as time passes people tend to become
habituated to their circumstances and have a tendency to return to a personal SWB "setpoint" or
baseline level.

The hedonic treadmill theory originally proposed that most people return to a neutral level of SWB
(i.e. neither happy nor unhappy) as they habituate to events. However, subsequent research has
shown that for most people, the baseline level of SWB is at least mildly positive, as most people
tend to report being at least somewhat happy in general and tend to experience positive mood when
no adverse events are occurring. Additional refinements to this theory have shown that people do
not adapt to all life events equally, as people tend to adapt rapidly to some events (e.g.
imprisonment), slowly to others (e.g. the death of a loved one), and not at all to others (e.g. noise
and sex).[3]

4 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

Personality and genetics

A number of studies have found that SWB constructs are strongly associated with a range of
personality traits, including those in the five factor model.[4] Findings from numerous personality
studies show that genetics account for 20-48% of the variance in Five-Factor Model and the
variance in subjective well-being is also heritable.[16] Specifically, neuroticism predicts poorer
subjective well-being whilst extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to
experience tend to predict higher subjective well-being. A meta-analysis found that neuroticism,
extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness were significantly related to all facets of SWB
examined (positive, negative, and overall affect; happiness; life satisfaction; and quality of life).
Neuroticism was the strongest predictor of overall SWB and is the strongest predictor of negative
affect.[4]

A large number of personality traits are related to SWB constructs, although intelligence has
negligible relationships.[10] Positive affect is most strongly predicted by extraversion, to a lesser
extent agreeableness, and more weakly by openness to experience. Happiness was most strongly
predicted by extraversion, and also strongly predicted by neuroticism, and to a lesser extent by the
other three factors. Life satisfaction was significantly predicted by neuroticism, extraversion,
agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Quality of life was very strongly predicted by neuroticism,
and also strongly predicted by extraversion and conscientiousness, and to a modest extent by
agreeableness and openness to experience.[4] One study found that subjective well-being was
genetically indistinct from personality traits, especially those that reflected emotional stability (low
Neuroticism), and social and physical activity (high Extraversion), and constraint (high
Conscientiousness).[17]

DeNeve (1999) argued that there are three trends in the relationship between personality and SWB.
Firstly, SWB is closely tied to traits associated with emotional tendencies (emotional stability,
positive affectivity, and tension). Secondly, relationship enhancing traits (e.g. trust, affiliation) are
important for subjective well-being. Happy people tend to have strong relationships and be good at
fostering them. Thirdly, the way people think about and explain events is important for subjective
well-being. Appraising events in an optimistic fashion, having a sense of control, and making
active coping efforts facilitates subjective well-being. Trust, a trait substantially related to SWB, as
opposed to cynicism involves making positive rather than negative attributions about others.
Making positive, optimistic attributions rather than negative pessimistic ones facilitates subjective
well-being.[13]

The related trait of eudaimonia or psychological well-being, is also heritable. Evidence from one
study supports 5 independent genetic mechanisms underlying the Ryff facets of psychological
well-being, leading to a genetic construct of eudaimonia in terms of general self-control, and four
subsidiary biological mechanisms enabling the psychological capabilities of purpose, agency,
growth, and positive social relations[18]

5 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

Social influences
A person's level of subjective well-being is determined by many different factors and social
influences prove to be a strong one. Results from the famous Framingham Heart Study indicate that
friends three degrees of separation away (that is, friends of friends of friends) can affect a person's
happiness. From abstract: "A friend who lives within a mile (about 1.6 km) and who becomes
happy increases the probability that a person is happy by 25%."[19]

Positive psychology
The study of SWB is a central concern of positive psychology.[20] Positive psychology was
founded by Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) who identified that psychology is not just the
study of pathology, weakness, and damage; but it is also the study of strength and virtue. [21]
Researchers in positive psychology have pointed out that in almost every culture studied the pursuit
of happiness is regarded as one of the most valued goals in life. Understanding individual
differences in SWB is of key interest in positive psychology, particularly the issue of why some
people are happier than others. Some people continue to be happy in the face of adversity whereas
others are chronically unhappy at the best of times.[22] Additionally, positive psychology has
investigated how people might improve their level of SWB and maintain these improvements over
the longer term, rather than returning to baseline.[20] Lyubomirsky (2001) argued that SWB is
influenced by a combination of personality/genetics (studies have found that genetic influences
usually account for 35-50% of the variance in happiness measures), external circumstances, and
activities that affect SWB.[23] She argued that changing one's external circumstances tends to have
only a temporary effect on SWB, whereas engaging in activities (mental and/or physical) that
enhance SWB can lead to more lasting improvements in SWB.[20]

Correlation of precuneus gray matter

volume and subjective happiness score
A positive relationship has been found between the volume of
gray matter in the right precuneus and the subject's subjective
happiness score.[25] Interestingly a 6 week mindfulness based
intervention was found to correlate with a significant gray According to Sonja Lyubomirsky
matter increase within the precuneus.[26] the determinants of happiness are
a combination of a person's
genetic set-point, intentional
Wealth
activities and life
circumstances[24]
Research indicates that wealth is related to many positive
outcomes in life.[27] Such outcomes include: improved health
and mental health,[28] greater longevity,[29] lower rates of infant mortality,[30] experience fewer

6 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

stressful life events,[31] and less frequently the victims of violent crimes[32] However, research
suggests that wealth has a smaller impact on SWB than people generally think, even though higher
incomes do correlate substantially with life satisfaction reports.[33]

The relative influence of wealth together with other material components on overall subjective
well-being of a person is being studied through new researches. The Well-being Project at Human
Science Lab investigates how material well-being and perceptual well-being works as relative
determinants in conditioning our mind for positive emotions.[34]

In a study done by Aknin, Norton, & Dunn (2009), researchers asked participants from across the
income spectrum to report their own happiness and to predict the happiness of others and
themselves at different income levels. In study 1, predicted happiness ranged between 2.4-7.9 and
actual happiness ranged between 5.2-7.7. In study 2, predicted happiness ranged between 15-80 and
actual happiness ranged between 50-80. These findings show that people believe that money does
more for happiness than it really does.[35] However, some research indicates that while
socioeconomic measures of status do not correspond to greater happiness, measures of sociometric
status (status compared to people encountered face-to-face on a daily basis) do correlate to
increased subjective well-being, above and beyond the effects of extroversion and other factors.[36]

The Easterlin Paradox also suggests that there is no connection between a society's economic
development and its average level of happiness. Through time, the Easterlin has looked at the
relationship between happiness and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) across countries and within
countries. There are three different phenomena to look at when examining the connection between
money and Subjective well-being; rising GDP within a country, relative income within a country,
and differences in GDP between countries.[37]

More specifically, when making comparisons between countries, a principle called the Diminishing
Marginal Utility of Income (DMUI) stands strong. Veenhoven (1991) said, "[W]e not only see a
clear positive relationship [between happiness and GNP per capita], but also a curvilinear pattern;
which suggest that wealth is subject to a law of diminishing happiness returns."[38] Meaning a
$1,000 increase in real income, becomes progressively smaller the higher the initial level of
income, having less of an impact on subjective well-being. Easterlin (1995) proved that the DMUI
is true when comparing countries, but not when looking at rising gross domestic product within
countries.[39]

Health
There are substantial positive associations between health and SWB so that people who rate their
general health as "good" or "excellent" tend to experience better SWB compared to those who rate
their health as "fair" or "poor". A meta-analysis found that self-ratings of general health were more
strongly related to SWB than physician ratings of health.[5] The relationship between health and
SWB may be bidirectional. There is evidence that good subjective well-being contributes to better
health.[6] A review of longitudinal studies found[7] that measures of baseline subjective well-being

7 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

constructs such as optimism and positive affect predicted longer-term health status and mortality.
Conversely, a number of studies found that baseline depression predicted poorer longer-term health
status and mortality. Baseline health may well have a causal influence on subjective well-being so
causality is difficult to establish. A number of studies found that positive emotions and optimism
had a beneficial impact on cardiovascular health and on immune functioning. Changes in mood are
also known to be associated with changes in immune and cardiovascular response. There is
evidence that interventions that are successful in improving subjective well-being can have
beneficial effects on aspects of health. For example, meditation and relaxation training have been
found to increase positive affect and to reduce blood pressure. The effect of specific types of
subjective well-being is not entirely clear. For example, how durable the effects of mood and
emotions on health are remains unclear. Whether some types of subjective well-being predict health
independently of others is also unclear.[6] Meditation has the power to increase happiness because it
can improve self-confidence and reduces anxiety, which increases your well-being.[40] Cultivating
personal strengths and resources, like humour, social/animal company, and daily occupations, also
appears to help people preserve acceptable levels of SWB despite the presence of symptoms of
depression, anxiety, and stress.[22]

Research suggests that probing a patient's happiness is one of the most important things a doctor
can do to predict that patient's health and longevity.[7] In health-conscious modern societies, most
people overlook the emotions as a vital component of one's health, while over focusing on diet and
exercise. According to Diener & Biswas-Diener, people who are happy become less sick than
people who are unhappy. There are three types of health: morbidity, survival, and longevity.[7]
Evidence suggests that all three can be improved through happiness:

1. Morbidity, simply put, is whether or not someone develops a serious illness, such as the flu or
cancer.[7] In a 30-year longitudinal study, participants who were high in positive emotions
were found to have lower rates of many health problems. Some of these illnesses/problems
include lower death rates from heart disease, suicide, accidents, homicides, mental illnesses,
drug dependency, and liver disease related to alcoholism. Additionally, results showed that
depressed participants were more likely to have heart attacks and recurrences of heart attacks
when compared to happy people.
2. Survival is the term used for what happens to a person after he/she has already developed or
contracted a serious illness.[7] Although happiness has been shown to increase health, with
survival, this may not be the case. Survival may be the only area of health that evidence
suggests happiness may actually be sometimes detrimental. It is unclear why exactly research
results suggest this is the case, however Diener & Biswas-Diener offer an explanation. It is
possible that happy people fail to report symptoms of the illness, which can ultimately lead to
no treatment or inadequate treatment. Another possible reason may be that happy people tend
to be optimistic, leading them to take their symptoms too lightly, seek treatment too late,
and/or follow the doctors instructions half-heartedly. And lastly, Diener & Biswas-Diener
suggest that people with serious illnesses may be more likely to choose to live out the rest of
their days without painful or invasive treatments.[7]
3. Longevity, the third area of health, is measured by an individual's age of death.[7] Head

8 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

researcher Deborah Danner of the University of Kentucky researched links between an

individual's happiness and that individual's longevity. Danner recruited 180 Catholic nuns
from a nearby convent as the participants of her study. She chose nuns because they live very
similar lives. This eliminates many confounding variables that might be present in other
samples, which can lead to inaccurate results. Such confounding variables could include drug
use, alcohol abuse, diet, and sexual risk-taking. Since there are few differences among the
nuns as far as the confounding variables, this sample offered the best option to match a
controlled laboratory setting. Results showed that nuns who were considered happy or
positive in their manner and language on average lived 10 years longer than the nuns who
were considered unhappy or negative in their manner and language. A follow-up study by
health researcher Sarah Pressman examined 96 famous psychologists to determine if similar
results from the nun research would be seen as well. Pressman's results showed that the
positive or happy psychologists lived, on average, 6 years longer. The psychologists who were
considered negative or unhappy lived, on average, 5 years less.[7]

Leisure
There are a number of domains that are thought to contribute to subjective well-being. In a study by
Hribernik and Mussap (2010), leisure satisfaction was found to predict unique variance in life
satisfaction, supporting its inclusion as a distinct life domain contributing to subjective
well-being.[41] Additionally, relationship status interacted with age group and gender on differences
in leisure satisfaction. The relationship between leisure satisfaction and life satisfaction, however,
was reduced when considering the impact of core affect (underlying mood state). This suggests that
leisure satisfaction may primarily be influenced by an individual's subjective well-being level as
represented by core affect. This has implications for possible limitations in the extent to which
leisure satisfaction may be improved beyond pre-existing levels of well-being and mood in
individuals.

Cultural variations
Although all cultures seem to value happiness, cultures vary in how they define happiness. There is
also evidence that people in more individualistic cultures tend to rate themselves as higher in
subjective well-being compared to people in more collectivistic cultures.[42]

In Western cultures, predictors of happiness include elements that support personal independence, a
sense of personal agency, and self-expression. In Eastern cultures, predictors of happiness focus on
an interdependent self that is inseparable from significant others. Compared to people in
individualistic cultures, people in collectivistic cultures are more likely to base their judgments of
life satisfaction on how significant others appraise their life than on the balance of inner emotions
experienced as pleasant versus unpleasant. Pleasant emotional experiences have a stronger social
component in East Asian cultures compared to Western ones. For example, people in Japan are
more likely to associate happiness with interpersonally engaging emotions (such as friendly

9 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

feelings), whereas people in the United States are more likely to associate happiness with
interpersonally disengaging emotions (pride, for example).[42] There are also cultural differences in
motives and goals associated with happiness. For example, Asian Americans tend to experience
greater happiness after achieving goals that are pleasing to or approved of by significant others
compared to European Americans. There is also evidence that high self-esteem, a sense of personal
control and a consistent sense of identity relate more strongly to SWB in Western cultures than they
do in Eastern ones. However, this is not to say that these things are unimportant to SWB in Eastern
cultures. Research has found that even within Eastern cultures, people with high self-esteem and a
more consistent sense of identity are somewhat happier than those who are low in these
characteristics. There is no evidence that low self-esteem and so on are actually beneficial to SWB
in any known culture.[42]

A large body of research evidence has confirmed that people in individualistic societies report
higher levels of happiness than people in collectivistic ones and that socioeconomic factors alone
are insufficient to explain this difference.[42] In addition to political and economic differences,
individualistic versus collectivistic nations reliably differ in a variety of psychological
characteristics that are related to SWB, such as emotion norms and attitudes to the expression of
individual needs. Collectivistic cultures are based around the belief that the individual exists for the
benefit of the larger social unit, whereas more individualistic cultures assume the opposite.
Collectivistic cultures emphasise maintaining social order and harmony and therefore expect
members to suppress their personal desires when necessary in order to promote collective interests.
Such cultures therefore consider self-regulation more important than self-expression or than
individual rights. Individualistic cultures by contrast emphasise the inalienable value of each person
and expect individuals to become self-directive and self-sufficient. Although people in collectivistic
cultures may gain happiness from the social approval they receive from suppressing self-interest,
research seems to suggest that self-expression produces a greater happiness "payoff" compared to
seeking approval outside oneself.[42]

See also
Canadian Index of Wellbeing
Positive psychology
Personality psychology
Hedonic treadmill
Flourishing
Flow (psychology)
Sonja Lyubomirsky
Ed Diener
Religion and happiness
Reasonable Person Model

External links

10 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

The Happiness Institute (http://www.thehappinessinstitute.com/)

World Values Survey web site (http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org)
The happiness show (http://thehappinessshow.com/)
Sonja Lyubomirsky's webpage (http://chass.ucr.edu/faculty_book/lyubomirsky/) about The
How of Happiness book
Martin Seligman's Authentic Happiness site (http://www.authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu
/Default.aspx)
[7]
[11]

References
1. Diener, Ed (1984). "Subjective well-being". Psychological Bulletin. 95 (3): 542575.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542. PMID 6399758.
2. Diener, Ed; Suh, E.M.; Lucas, R.E.; Smith, H.L (1999). "Subjective well-being: Three Decades of
Progress" (PDF). Psychological Bulletin. 125 (2): 276302. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.
3. Diener, Ed (2000). "Subjective well-being: The Science of Happiness and a Proposal for a National
Index" (PDF). American Psychologist. 55 (1): 3443. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34. PMID 11392863.
4. Steel, Piers; Schmidt, Joseph; Shultz, Jonas (2008). "Refining the relationship between personality and
Subjective well-being" (PDF). Psychological Bulletin. 134 (1): 138161.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.1.138. PMID 18193998.
5. Okun, M. A.; Stock, W. A.; Haring, M. J.; Witter, R. A. (1984). "Health and subjective well-being: a
meta-analysis". The International journal of aging & human development. 19 (2): 111132.
doi:10.2190/QGJN-0N81-5957-HAQD.
6. Diener, E.; Chan, M.Y. (2011). "Happy People Live Longer: Subjective Well-Being Contributes to
Health and Longevity". Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being. 3 (1): 143.
doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2010.01045.x.
7. Diener, Ed (2008). Happiness: unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth. Malden, MA: Blackwell
Pub. ISBN 9781405146616.
8. White, M; Dolan, P (2009). "Accounting for the richness of our daily activities". Psychological Science.
20 (8): 10001008.
9. Graham, Michael C. (2014). Facts of Life: ten issues of contentment. Outskirts Press.
ISBN 978-1-4787-2259-5.
10. DeNeve, Kristina M.; Cooper, Harris (1998). "The Happy Personality: A Meta-Analysis of 137
Personality Traits and Subjective Well-Being" (PDF). Psychological Bulletin. 124 (2): 197229.
doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.197. PMID 9747186.
11. Albuquerque, Brian. "Subjective Well-Being". Positive Psychology UK. Retrieved 30 November 2012.
12. van der Krieke et al., L. (2015). "HowNutsAreTheDutch (HoeGekIsNL): A crowdsourcing study of
mental symptoms and strengths". International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research. 25: 12344.
doi:10.1002/mpr.1495. PMID 26395198.
13. DeNeve, Kristina M. (1999). "Happy as an Extraverted Clam? The Role of Personality for Subjective
Well-Being". Current Directions in Psychological Science. 8 (5): 141144.
doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00033.
14. Lykken, David; Tellegen (1996). "Happiness Is a Stochastic Phenomenon" (PDF). Psychological Science.
7 (3): 186189. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00355.x.
15. McGue, Matt; Bacon, Steve; Lykken, David (1993). "Personality stability and change in early

11 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

adulthood: A behavioral genetic analysis" (PDF). Developmental Psychology. 29 (1): 96109.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.29.1.96.
16. Bouchard, Thomas J., Jr.; Loehlin, J.C. (2001). "Genes, evolution, and personality". Behavior Genetics.
31 (3): 243273. doi:10.1023/A:1012294324713. PMID 11699599.
17. Weiss, A.; Bates, T. C.; Luciano, M. (2008). "Happiness is a personal(ity) thing: The genetics of
personality and well-being in a representative sample". Psychological Science. 19 (3): 205210.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02068.x. PMID 18315789.
18. D. Archontaki, G. J. Lewis and T. C. Bates. (2012). Genetic influences on psychological well-being: A
nationally representative twin study. Journal of Personality10.1111/j.1467-6494.2012.00787.x
19. Fowler, J. H; Christakis, N. A (4 December 2008). "Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social
network: longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study". BMJ. 337 (dec04 2):
a2338a2338. doi:10.1136/bmj.a2338. PMC 2600606 . PMID 19056788.
20. Lyubomirsky, Sonja (2001). "Why are some happier than others? The role of cognitive and motivational
processes in well-being" (PDF). American Psychologist. 56 (3): 239324.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.239.
21. Seligman, Martin E. P.; Csikszentmihalyi (2000). "Positive psychology: An introduction". American
Psychologist. 55 (1): 514. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5. PMID 11392865.
22. Bos, E.H.; Snippe, E.; de Jonge, P.; Jeronimus, B.F. (2016). "Preserving Subjective Wellbeing in the
Face of Psychopathology: Buffering Effects of Personal Strengths and Resources". PLOS ONE. 11:
e0150867. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150867. PMID 26963923.
23. Rysamb, E.; Harris, J.; Magnus, P.; Vitters, J.; Tambs, K. (2002). "Subjective well-being. Sex-specific
effects of genetic and environmental factors". Personality and Individual Differences. 32: 211223.
doi:10.1016/s0191-8869(01)00019-8.
24. Lyubomirsky, Sonja (2007). The How of Happiness: A practical approach to getting the life you want.
Great Britain: Sphere. p. 20. ISBN 978-1-84744-193-5.
25. http://www.nature.com/articles/srep16891
26. Kurth, F; Luders, E; Wu, B; Black, DS (2014). "Brain Gray Matter Changes Associated with
Mindfulness Meditation in Older Adults: An Exploratory Pilot Study using Voxel-based Morphometry".
Neuro. 1: 2326. doi:10.17140/NOJ-1-106. PMC 4306280 . PMID 25632405.
27. Furnham & Argyle (1998). The psychology of money. Psychology Press.
28. Langner & Michael (1963). Life stress and mental health: The Midtown Manhattan study. Free Press of
Glencoe (New York).
29. Wilkinson (1996). Unhealthy societies: the afflictions of inequality.
30. Smith, T; Eikeseth; Klevstrand; Lovaas (1997). "Intensive behavioral treatment for preschoolers with
severe mental retardation and pervasive developmental disorder". American Journal on Mental
Retardation. 102 (3): 238249. doi:10.1352/0895-8017(1997)102<0238:IBTFPW>2.0.CO;2.
PMID 9394133.
31. Wilson, RM; Runciman, WB; Gibberd, RW; Harrison, BT; Newby, L; Hamilton, JD. (1995). "The
quality in Australian health care study". Med J Aust. 163: 458471.
32. Mayer, J. D. & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In P. Salovey & D. Sluyter (Eds).
Emotional Development and Emotional Intelligence: Implications for Educators (pp. 3-31). New York:
Basic Books.
33. Aknin, Lara B.; Norton, Dunn (2009). "From wealth to well-being? Money matters, but less than people
think". The Journal of positive psychology. 4 (6): 523527. doi:10.1080/17439760903271421.
34. "Understanding Positive Emotions". Human Science Lab. Retrieved 23 February 2017.
35. Norton, M.I., Dunn, E.W., & *Aknin, L.B. (2009). From wealth to well-being: Spending money on
others promotes happiness. Invited talk at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Tampa, FL
36. Anderson, C.; Kraus, M. W.; Galinsky, A. D.; Keltner, D. (31 May 2012). "The Local-Ladder Effect:

12 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM
Subjective well-being - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_well-being

Social Status and Subjective Well-Being". Psychological Science. 23 (7): 764771.

doi:10.1177/0956797611434537. PMID 22653798.
37. Easterlin, Richard A., 1973, Does Money Buy Happiness? The Public Interest, 30 (Winter), 3-10
38. Veenhoven, Ruut (1991). "Is Happiness Relative?". Social Indicators Research. 24 (1): 134.
doi:10.1007/bf00292648.
39. Easterlin, Richard A. (1995). " 'Will Raising the Incomes of All Increase the Happiness of All?' ".
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization. 27 (1): 3548. doi:10.1016/0167-2681(95)00003-b.
40. Jones, Howard (1953). The Pursuit of Happiness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. p. 140.
41. Hribernik, J.; Mussap, A. J. (2010). "Research note: Leisure satisfaction and subjective well-being".
Annals of Leisure Research. 13 (4): 701708. doi:10.1080/11745398.2010.9686871.
42. Suh, E.M.; Koo, J (2008). "Comparing subjective well-being across cultures and nations: the "what" and
"why" questions". In Michael Eid & Randy J. Larsen. The Science of Subjective Well-Being. New York:
Guildford Press. pp. 414430. ISBN 978-1-59385-581-9.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Subjective_well-being&

oldid=776178222"

Categories: Psychology Positive psychology Emotions Personal life Happiness Suffering

Quality of life Mental health Subjective experience

This page was last modified on 19 April 2017, at 12:31.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional
terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit
organization.

13 of 13 4/20/2017 6:40 PM