A Qualitative Longitudinal Study on the Well-Being of Children and Adolescents
- 150 Downloads
The aim of this article is to identify factors influencing well-being (whether positively or negatively) reported by children and adolescents from their own perspective, in the context of focus groups and individual interviews, and variations in their answers at two different points in time (one year apart), according to: 1) their previous scores (higher or lower) measured using psychometric scales of subjective well-being (SWB) and related constructs (temperamental traits, specifically via variables related to perceptual and pleasure sensitivity and life optimism), and 2) their age (measured through school year and classified into five cohorts). Important commonalites were observed in the answers reported by participants regardless of their prior levels of SWB and related constructs, the cohort they belonged to, the two separate data collections and the data collection technique used. This finding is interpreted as being due to the existence of a shared and fairly stable bottom-up effect in children and adolescents’ well-being. However, interesting discrepances are also observed between the groups of participants, which contributes to converging theoretical explanations arising out of two different traditions in the study of well-being (the hedonic and the eudaimonic), while also furthering scientific knowledge on how to better research children and adolescents’ well-being from a qualitative point of view.
KeywordsFocus groups Individual interviews Subjective well-being Psychological well-being Qualitative analysis Children and adolescents
This project was funded by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) as part of the National Research Project Programme, within the 6th National Plan for Scientific Research, Development and Technological Innovation 2008–2011, with reference PSI2010-19404. Thanks are due to Barney Griffins for editing of the English text.
- Baltatescu, S. (2006). Comparative results and psychometric properties of the personal well-being index- Romania (old and new versions) with an adolescent sample- a preliminary analysis. Retrieved from http://www.sergiubaltatescu.info/content/comparativePWI website.
- Bardin, L. (2002). Análisis de contenido. Madrid: Ediciones Akal.Google Scholar
- Blasco, T., & Otero, L. (2008). Técnicas conversacionales para la recogida de datos en investigación cualitativa: La entrevista (II). Nure Investigación, 34, may-june.Google Scholar
- Casas, F. (1996). Bienestar social. Una introducción psicosocial. [Social well-being. A psychosocial introduction]. Barcelona: PPU.Google Scholar
- Casas, F., Sarriera, J. C., Abs, D., Coenders, G., Alfaro, J., Saforcada, E., & Tonon, G. (2012). Subjective indicators of personal well-being among adolescents. Performance and results for different scales in Latin- language speaking countries: A contribution to the international debate. Child Indicators Research, 5(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-011-9119-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Currie, C., Zanotti, C., Morgan, A., Currie, D., de Looze, M., Roberts, C., & Rasmussen, V. B. (2012). Social determinants of health and well-being among young people. Health behaviour in school-aged children (HBSC) study: International report from the 2009/2010 survey. In W. R. O. F. Europe (Ed.), Health policy for children and adolescents (Vol. 6). Copenhagen: Who Regional Office for Europe.Google Scholar
- Diener, E. (1994). El bienestar subjetivo. [Subjective well-being]. Intervención Psicosocial, 3(8), 67–113.Google Scholar
- Ellis, L. K., & Rothbart, M. K. (2001). Revision of the early adolescent temperament questionnaire. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in child development. MN: Minneapolis.Google Scholar
- Escobar, J., & Bonilla-Jimenez, F. (2009). Grupos Focales: una guía conceptual metodológica. Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos de Psicología, 9(1), 51–67.Google Scholar
- Evans, D., & Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Developing a model for adult temperament. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 868–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.11.002
- Kaplowitz, M. D., & Hoehn, J. P. (2001). Do focus groups and individual interviews reveal the same information for nature resource validation? Ecological Economics, 36, 237–247.Google Scholar
- Liu, W., Mei, J., Tian, L. & Huebner, E. S. (2015). Age and gender differences in the relation between school-related social support and subjective well-being in school among students. Social Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0873-1.
- Navarro, D. (2011). La participació social dels adolescents en el context escolar: Estudi psicosocial d’una experiència participativa. Doctoral thesis: University of Girona, Girona.Google Scholar
- Neuendorf, K. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- Rodríguez, I. (2006). Redefiniendo el trabajo metodológico cualitativo con niños: el uso de la entrevista de grupo aplicada al estudio de la tecnología. Empiria. Revista de Metodología en Ciencias Sociales, (12), 65–88.Google Scholar
- September, R., & Savahl, S. (2009). Children’s perspectives of child well-being. The Social Work Practitioner-Researcher, 21(1), 23–40.Google Scholar