Challenges in defining and measuring wellbeing and their implications for policy

17Citations
Citations of this article
49Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This chapter focuses on how psychologists understand and measure well-being and the related constructs, mental health and flourishing. For psychologists, well-being is about how people experience their lives, not the objective facts of their lives. Why does well-being matter? Although the instrumental benefits of well-being are frequently cited as the reason for its importance, it is argued here that they are merely a by-product of a high level of well-being. The real reason wellbeing matters is that well-being is an end in itself - an ultimate good. However, because there is as yet no agreed definition of well-being, there is no universally agreed method for measuring well-being. It is argued here that well-being is a combination of feeling good (the hedonic view) and functioning well (the eudaimonic view), and that in order to advance well-being science, we need a multi-dimensional approach to definition and measurement. Accordingly, at this early stage in the science of well-being, policymakers would be well advised to use measures which encompass a diversity of well-being constructs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Huppert, F. A. (2017). Challenges in defining and measuring wellbeing and their implications for policy. In Future Directions in Well-Being: Education, Organizations and Policy (pp. 163–167). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56889-8_28

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free