Well-being Study Guide

📖 Core Concepts Well‑being: Overall quality of a person’s life; the balance of positive and negative aspects. Subjective Well‑Being (SWB): How individuals feel and evaluate their own lives (affective + cognitive). Objective Well‑Being: External, measurable factors (health, income, education, environment). Intrinsic/Final Value: Well‑being is good in itself, not merely a means to something else. Domain‑Specific Types: Physical, psychological, intellectual, spiritual, emotional, hedonic, eudaimonic, social, economic, etc. 📌 Must Remember SWB Components – Positive affect, low negative affect, life‑satisfaction judgment. Key Theories – Hedonism (pleasure‑pain balance), Desire theories (desire satisfaction), Objective‑list theories (set of valuable goods). Major Models – Diener (tripartite), Ryff (six‑factor), Keyes (social), Seligman PERMA (Positive, Engagement, Relationships, Meaning, Accomplishment). Easterlin Paradox – Beyond a modest income, more wealth yields diminishing happiness gains. Genetic Influence – Twin studies: 30‑50 % of SWB variance is heritable. Freedom = Well‑Being – Ability to choose life goals without coercion strongly predicts higher life‑satisfaction. 🔄 Key Processes Assessing SWB Administer questionnaire → rate affect (frequency of positive/negative emotions) → rate global life‑satisfaction → compute composite score. Balancing Hedonic & Eudaimonic Factors Identify pleasure‑based activities → evaluate their quality (qualitative hedonicism). Map activities to personal values/potentials → assess meaning and growth (eudaimonia). Policy Impact Evaluation Choose well‑being indicator (GDP per capita, life‑expectancy, happiness survey). Apply cost‑benefit analysis → compare pre‑ and post‑policy scores → adjust for inequality effects. 🔍 Key Comparisons Hedonic vs. Eudaimonic – Pleasure & pain balance vs. actualization of potentials & virtues. Subjective vs. Objective Well‑Being – Personal self‑reports vs. external data (health, income). Desire Theory vs. Hedonism – Satisfaction of preferences vs. balance of pleasure/pain. Individual vs. Community Well‑Being – Sum of personal scores vs. emergent group dynamics (social integration, contribution). ⚠️ Common Misunderstandings “More income always equals more happiness.” → True only up to a basic threshold; relative income matters more. “Objective factors are the same as well‑being.” → They are indicators, not the lived experience. “Pleasure alone guarantees well‑being.” → Experience‑machine critique: authenticity, meaning, and reality matter. “All virtues automatically raise well‑being.” → Virtues can require sacrifice; net effect depends on context. 🧠 Mental Models / Intuition “Balance Sheet” Model: Treat well‑being like a financial ledger – credits = positive affect, achievements, relationships; debits = pain, stress, deprivation. Net balance = overall well‑being. “Two‑Lens View”: Always ask “What does the person feel?” (subjective lens) and “What does the world provide?” (objective lens). Both must be considered for a full picture. 🚩 Exceptions & Edge Cases People with chronic illness may report high SWB (response shift, adaptation). Sadistic pleasures: Intense pleasure but socially/ethically condemned → not universally counted as well‑being. Cultural variations: Western emphasis on individual autonomy vs. collectivist focus on community harmony. 📍 When to Use Which Research on personal happiness → Use SWB questionnaires (e.g., Satisfaction with Life Scale). Policy impact studies → Combine objective indicators (HDI, income) with national happiness surveys. Clinical assessment → WHO‑5 Well‑Being Index for quick mental‑health screening. Community‑level interventions → Apply Keyes’ social‑well‑being components (integration, contribution). 👀 Patterns to Recognize Diminishing returns: Adding more of the same positive factor (e.g., friends) yields smaller well‑being gains after a point. Trade‑off signals: High achievement ↔ potential rise in anxiety or strained relationships. Cross‑domain synergy: Autonomy + meaningful work → boost both SWB and objective outcomes (income, health). 🗂️ Exam Traps Distractor: “Objective well‑being is the same as well‑being.” – Objective factors are indicators, not the lived experience. Distractor: “Eudaimonic happiness ignores pleasure.” – It adds meaning to pleasure, not excludes it. Distractor: “The Easterlin Paradox disproves any link between income and happiness.” – It shows diminishing returns, not zero link. Distractor: “All virtues increase well‑being without cost.” – Virtues can involve sacrifices; context matters. --- Use this guide to quickly recall core definitions, high‑yield theories, and decision rules before your exam. Good luck!