Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The study of well-being is hampered by the multiplicity of approaches, but focusing on a single approach begs the question of what “well-being” really is. We analyze how well-being is defined according to the three main kinds of theories: “Liking” approaches (generally adopted by psychologists), “Wanting” approaches (predominant among economists), and “Needing” approaches (used in both public policy and psychology). We propose an integrative framework, the engine model of well-being, drawing on Seligman (Seligman, M. E. P., 2011 , Flourish. New York, NY: The Free Press) and Sen's (Sen, A. K., 1999 , Development as freedom. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press) emphasis on the plurality of this construct by distinguishing among (a) inputs (resources that enable well-being), (b) processes (internal states of mechanisms influencing well-being), and (c) outcomes (the intrinsically valuable behaviors that reflect the attainment of well-being). We discuss implications for research, measurement, and interventions.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Eranda Jayawickreme
Marie Forgeard
Martin E. P. Seligman
Review of General Psychology
University of Pennsylvania
Wake Forest University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Jayawickreme et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0f8f789e54838161fcdd86 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027990
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: