Advertisement

Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 373–384 | Cite as

Affect Balance as Mediating Variable Between Effective Psychological Functioning and Satisfaction with Life

  • Pilar SanjuánEmail author
Research paper

Abstract

Well-being is a multidimensional construct which includes hedonic and eudaimonic aspects. Hedonic well-being is focused on happiness, while eudaimonic well-being is focused on developing of human potential. Most hedonic psychologists have used measures of subjective well-being (SWB), which have two components: a cognitive evaluation of the satisfaction with one’s life as a whole, and an affective component that refers to predominance of positive over negative affect (or affect balance). Eudaimonic well-being, sometimes labelled psychological well-being (PWB), includes subjective evaluations of effective psychological functioning. Ryff’s (1989a) model of PWB, which is included within the eudaimonic perspective, conceives well-being as a multidimensional construct made up of life attitudes like self-acceptance, positive relation with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth. Research has revealed that SWB and PWB are related, but, they are also distinguishable, since they were differentially related to various criteria. The main goal of the present study was to explore how these two different aspects of well-being are related. Two hundred and fifty-five individuals (114 male and 141 female, mean age = 36.46, standard deviation = 10.83) participated in the study. All the components of well-being were strongly interrelated, and mediational analysis showed that affect balance mediated the relationships between some positive life attitudes and satisfaction with life. Future research, using longitudinal designs, should clearly establish the causal relationships between the different aspects of well-being.

Keywords

Hedonic well-being Eudaimonic well-being Subjective well-being Psychological well-being 

References

  1. Allport, G. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  2. Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bradburn, N. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  4. Cabañero, M. J., Richart, M., Cabrero, J., Orts, M. I., Reig, A., & Tosal, B. (2004). Reliability and validity of satisfaction with life scale in a sample of pregnant women. Psicothema, 16, 448–455.Google Scholar
  5. Chamberlain, J., & Haaga, D. (2001). Unconditional self-acceptance and psychological health. Journal of Rational Emotive and Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 19, 163–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Compton, W. (1998). Measures of mental health and a five factor theory of personality. Psychological Reports, 83, 371–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Compton, W., Smith, M., Cornish, K., & Qualls, D. (1996). Factor structure of mental heath measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 406–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deaton, A. (2008). Income, health, and well-being around the world: Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22, 53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Díaz, D., Rodríguez-Carvajal, R., Blanco, A., Moreno-Jiménez, B., Gallardo, I., Valle, C., et al. (2006). Spanish adaptation of Ryff’s scales of psychological well-being. Psicothema, 18, 572–577.Google Scholar
  11. Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being. The science of happiness and proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55, 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Diener, E., Lucas, R., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 63–73). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Heine, S. J., Kitayama, S., Lehman, D. R., Takata, T., Ide, E., Leung, C., et al. (2001). Divergent consequences of success and failure in Japan and North America: An investigation of self-improving motivations and malleable selves. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 599–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holmbeck, G. (2002). Pos-hoc probing of significant moderation and mediational effects in studies of pediatric populations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 27, 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kafka, G., & Kozma, A. (2002). The construct validity of Ryff’s scales of psychological well-being (SPWB) and their relationship to measures of subjective well-being. Social Indicator Research, 57, 171–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Keyes, C., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. (2002). Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1007–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
  18. McGregor, I., & Little, B. (1998). Personal projects, happiness, and meaning: On doing well and being yourself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 494–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Myers, D. G. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people. American Psychologist, 55, 56–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rogers, C. (1961). On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  22. Rojas, M. (2006). Life satisfaction and satisfaction in domains: Is it a simple relationship? Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 467–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2002). An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In E. Deci & R. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.Google Scholar
  25. Ryan, R., Huta, V., & Deci, E. (2008). Living well: A self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonina. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 139–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ryff, C. (1989a). Beyond Ponce de León and life satisfaction. New directions in quest of successful aging. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 12, 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ryff, C. (1989b). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations of the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ryff, C., & Keyes, C. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ryff, C., & Singer, B. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 13–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sandin, B., Chorot, P., Lostao, L., Joiner, T. E., Santed, M. A., & Valiente, R. M. (1999). Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS): Factorial validity and cross-cultural convergence. Psicothema, 11, 37–51.Google Scholar
  31. Schimmack, U., & Diener, E. (1997). Affect intensity: Separating intensity and frequency in repeatedly measured affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1313–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. (1983). Moos misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. (2007). Feelings and phenomenological experiences. In E. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 385–407). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  34. Sobel, M. (1988). Direct and indirect effects in linear structural equation models. In J. Long (Ed.), Common problem/proper solutions: Avoiding error in quantitative research (pp. 46–64). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Waterman, A. S. (2007). Doing well: The relationships of identity status to three conceptions of well-being. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 7, 289–307.Google Scholar
  36. Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., & 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, 41–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect. The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad de PsicologíaUniversidad Nacional de Educación a DistanciaMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations