From well-being to positive mental health: conceptualization and qualitative development of an instrument in Singapore
There is no global definition of well-being. Cultural differences in the perception of well-being and the social and behavioral contexts further limit its measurement. Existing instruments are developed in Western societies that differ in their conceptualization of well-being from Asian populations. Moreover, very few instruments address the multidimensional construct of well-being.
Literature was reviewed to develop a priori conceptual framework of mental health and well-being. Concepts were identified based on specific criteria to guide the qualitative investigations. Finally, focus group discussions were conducted among adults belonging to the three major ethnicities in Singapore to identify salient domains of mental health and well-being.
Mental well-being is a multidimensional construct constituting of positive affect, satisfaction, and psychological functioning. While well-being explains the functional and psychological components, positive mental health is a combination of these and the skills required to achieve them. Although there is an overlap between the concepts identified from the literature and those identified in Singapore, certain differences existed, particularly with the relevance attributed to family interactions and religiosity or spirituality. Similar findings were observed across the three ethnic groups.
Domains identified can be used to develop a culturally relevant instrument in Singapore.
KeywordsPositive mental health Mental well-being Focus group discussion Multidimensional Instrument development
- 3.Dalkey, N. C. (1972). The Delphi method: An experimental application of group opinion. In N. C. Dalkey, D. L. Rourke, R. Lewis, & D. Snyder (Eds.), Studies in the quality of life. Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
- 7.Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2000). Subjective emotional well-being. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 325–337). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
- 9.Gilbert, P., & Nicholls, V. (2003). Inspiring hope: Recognising the importance of spirituality in a whole person approach to mental health. London: National Institute for Mental Health in England.Google Scholar
- 10.Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- 12.Kammann, R., & Flett, R. (1983). Source book for measuring well-being with Affectometer 2, Dunedin, New Zealand: Why not? Foundation Psychologist, 35, 259–265.Google Scholar
- 15.Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: SAGE Publication.Google Scholar
- 16.Maslow, A., Robert, F., & James, F. (1987). Motivation and personality (3rd ed.). Boston: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Google Scholar
- 23.Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
- 25.Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., et al. (2007). The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): Development and UK validation. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 5(63), 1477–7525.Google Scholar
- 26.Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Sinagub, J. (1996). Focus group interviews in education and psychology. California: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- 28.World Health Organization Promoting Mental Health. (2004). Concepts emerging evidence and practice. Summary report.Google Scholar
- 29.World Health Organization. (1998). WHOQOL and spirituality, religiousness and personal beliefs: Report on WHO consultation. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar
- 30.World Health Organization. (2001). Strengthening mental health promotion.Google Scholar
- 31.www.healthscotland.com/understanding/population/mental-health-indicators.aspx. Review of scales of positive mental health validated for use with adults in the UK: Technical report. Accessed 13 Nov 2011.