Journal of Happiness Studies

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 169–184 | Cite as

Comparing Three Methods to Measure a Balanced Time Perspective: The Relationship Between a Balanced Time Perspective and Subjective Well-Being

  • Jia Wei Zhang
  • Ryan T. Howell
  • Maciej Stolarski
Research Paper


The goals of this study were to determine the relations between having a balanced time perspective (BTP) with various measures of subjective well-being (SWB) and to test how various operationalizations of a BTP might impact the relation between having a BTP and SWB. We operationalized a balanced time perspective using: (a) Drake et al.’s Time Soc 17(1):47–61, (2008) cut-off-point method, (b) Boniwell et al.’s J Posit Psychol 5(1):24–40, (2010) suggestion of using a hierarchical cluster analysis, and (c) a deviation from a balanced time perspective (DBTP; Stolarski et al. Time Soc, 2011). The results demonstrated that having a BTP is related to increased satisfaction with life, happiness, positive affect, psychological need satisfaction, self-determination, vitality, and gratitude as well as decreased negative affect. Also, the DBTP was the best predictor of SWB. We discuss why individuals with a BTP are likely to be happier in life.


Time perspectives Well-being Subjective time Happiness Balanced time perspective 


  1. Anagnostopoulos, F., & Griva, F. (2011). Exploring time perspective in Greek young adults: Validation of the Zimbardo time perspective inventory and relationships with mental health disorders. Social Indicators Research, 106, 41–59.Google Scholar
  2. Apostolidis, T., & Fieulaine, N. (2004). Validation française de l’échelle de temporalité of The Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI). European Review of Applied Psychology, 54(3), 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohart, A. C. (1993). Emphasizing the future in empathy responses. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 33, 12–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boniwell, I., Osin, E., Linley, P. A., & Ivanchenko, G. V. (2010). A question of balance: Time perspective and well-being in British and Russian sample. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(1), 24–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boniwell, I., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2003). Time to find the right balance. The Psychologist, 16, 129–131.Google Scholar
  6. Boniwell, I., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). Balancing time perspective in pursuit of optimal functioning. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 165–178). New Jersey: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Boyd, J. N., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2005). Time perspective, health and risk taking. In A. Strathman & J. Joireman (Eds.), Understanding behavior in the context of time. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s mechanical turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data? Psychological Science, 6(3), 3–5.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Corral-Verdugo, V., Fraijo-Sing, B., & Pinheiro, J. Q. (2006). Sustainable behavior and time perspective: Present, past and future orientations and their relationship with water conservation behavior. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 40(2), 139–147.Google Scholar
  11. Diaz-Moralez, J. F. (2006). Estructura factorial y fiabilidad del inventario de perspective temporal de Zimbardo. Psichothema, 18, 565–571.Google Scholar
  12. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality, 49, 71–75.Google Scholar
  13. Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 213–229). New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D., Oishi, S., et al. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Drake, L., Duncan, E., Sutherland, F., Abernethy, C., & Henry, C. (2008). Time perspective and correlates of wellbeing. Time & Society, 17(1), 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Durayappah, A. (2010). The 3P model: A general theory of subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(4), 1–36.Google Scholar
  17. Gagne, M. (2003). The role of autonomy support and autonomy orientation in prosocial behavior engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 199–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gonzalez, A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1985). Time in perspective: A Psychology Today survey report. Psychology Today, (May), 21–26.Google Scholar
  19. Harber, K. D., Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2003). Participant self-selection biases as a function of individual differences in time perspective. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(3), 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Holman, E. A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2009). The social language of time: The time perspective- social network connection. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31(2), 136–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keough, K. A., Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Who’s smoking, drinking, and using drugs? Time perspective as a predictor of substance use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(2), 149–164.Google Scholar
  22. Lucas, R. E. (2005). Time does not heal all wounds: A longitudinal study of reaction and adaptation to divorce. Psychological Science, 16(12), 945–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2004). Unemployment alters the set point for life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 15(1), 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness leads to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicator Research, 46, 137–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McCullough, M. E., Emmons, R. A., & Tsang, T. (2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 112–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Meng, X. L., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing correlated correlation coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111(1), 172–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Milfont, T. L., Andrade, P. R., Pessoa, V. S., & Belo, R. P. (2008). Testing Zimbardo time perspective inventory in a Brazilian sample. Interamerican Journal of Psychology. 42(1), 49–58.Google Scholar
  29. Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well- being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 482–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., & Reis, H. (1996). What makes for a good day? Competence and autonomy in the day and in the person. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1270–1279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stolarski, M., Bitner, J. & Zimbardo, P. G. (2011). Time perspective, emotional intelligence and discounting of delayed awards. Time & Society, 20(3), 346–363.Google Scholar
  33. Suh, E., Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1996). Events and subjective well-being: Only recent events matter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 1091–1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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(6), 1063–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang, J. W., & Howell, R. T. (2011). Do time perspectives predict unique variance in life satisfaction beyond personality traits? Personality and Individual Differences, 50(8), 1261–1266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zimbardo, P. G. (2002). Time to take our time. Psychology Today. Retrieved from:
  37. Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (2008). The time paradox. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  39. Zimbardo, P. G., & Gonzalez, A. (1984). A Psychology Today reader survey. Psychology Today, (February), 53–54.Google Scholar
  40. Zimbardo, P. G., Keough, K. A., & Boyd, J. N. (1997). Present time perspective as a predictor of risky driving. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 1007–1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jia Wei Zhang
    • 1
    • 3
  • Ryan T. Howell
    • 1
  • Maciej Stolarski
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologySan Francisco State UniversitySan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Faculty of PsychologyUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations