Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Revisiting the Empirical Distinction Between Hedonic and Eudaimonic Aspects of Well-Being Using Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Happiness Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The distinction between hedonic (i.e., subjective well-being) and eudaimonic (i.e., psycho-social functioning) components of well-being is questioned by some researchers on the grounds that these two aspects of well-being are highly correlated. However, I argue that previous research has relied on confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), which is likely to overestimate interfactor correlations, because cross-loadings are constrained to be zero in CFA. In contrast, the new method of exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) does not constrain cross-ladings to zero, which results in more accurate factor intercorrelations. The present study used ESEM to reinvestigate the relationship between hedonic and eudaimonic aspects of well-being in a sample of 3986 American adults. The results showed that the ESEM model fitted the data better than the CFA model. As expected, interfactor correlations obtained with ESEM were substantially smaller than those obtained with CFA, indicating greater factor distinctiveness. These results suggest that hedonic and eudaimonic factors are correlated yet largely independent from each other. The results also suggest that ESEM is a more appropriate method than CFA in the study of multi-dimensional constructs, such as mental well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anglim, J., & Grant, S. (in press). Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from personality: Incremental prediction from 30 facets over the Big 5. Journal of Happiness Studies.

  • Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 16, 397–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bobowik, M., Basabe, N., & Páez, D. (2015). The bright side of migration: Hedonic, psychological, and social well-being in immigrants in Spain. Social Science Research, 51, 189–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, W. C. (1998). Measures of mental health and a five factor theory of personality. Psychological Reports, 83(1), 371–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, W. C. (2001). Toward a tripartite factor structure of mental health: Subjective well-being, personal growth, and religiosity. The Journal of psychology, 135(5), 486–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delle Fave, A., & Bassi, M. (2009). The contribution of diversity to happiness research. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(3), 205–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Ng, W., Harter, J., & Arora, R. (2010). Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 52–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, M. W., Lopez, S. J., & Preacher, K. J. (2009). The hierarchical structure of well-being. Journal of Personality, 77(4), 1025–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huta, V., & Waterman, A. S. (2014). Eudaimonia and its distinction from hedonia: Developing a classification and terminology for understanding conceptual and operational definitions. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(6), 1425–1456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshanloo, M. (2014). Eastern conceptualizations of happiness: Fundamental differences with western views. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(2), 475–493. (Chicago).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshanloo, M., Rostami, R., & Nosratabadi, M. (2006). Examining the factor structure of the Keyes’s comprehensive scale of well-being. Journal of Iranian Psychologists, 9, 35–51. (in Persian).

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshanloo, M., Wissing, M. P., Khumalo, I. P., & Lamers, S. (2013). Measurement invariance of the mental health continuum–short form (MHC–SF) across three cultural groups. Personality and Individual Differences, 55(7), 755–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafka, G. J., & Kozma, A. (2002). The construct validity of Ryff’s scales of psychological well-being (SPWB) and their relationship to measures of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 57(2), 171–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Preface. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of a hedonic psychology (pp. 9–12). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karaś, D., Cieciuch, J., & Keyes, C. L. (2014). The Polish adaptation of the mental health continuum–short form (MHC–SF). Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 104–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kashdan, T. B., Biswas-Diener, R., & King, L. A. (2008). Reconsidering happiness: The costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(4), 219–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 121–140.

  • Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Research, 43, 207–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M. (2007). Promoting and protecting mental health as flourishing: A complementary strategy for improving national mental health. American Psychologist, 62(2), 95–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L. M. (Ed.). (2013). Mental well-being: International contributions to the study of positive mental health. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L., & Annas, J. (2009). Feeling good and functioning well: Distinctive concepts in ancient philosophy and contemporary science. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(3), 197–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: the empirical encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 1007–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, C. L., Wissing, M., Potgieter, J. P., Temane, M., Kruger, A., & van Rooy, S. (2008). Evaluation of the mental health continuum–short form (MHC–SF) in setswana-speaking South Africans. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 15(3), 181–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, L. A. (2011). Are we there yet? What happened on the way to the demise of positive psychology. In K. M. Sheldon, T. B. Kashdan, & M. F. Steger (Eds.), Designing positive psychology: Taking stock and moving forward (pp. 439–446). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lamers, S., Westerhof, G. J., Bohlmeijer, E. T., ten Klooster, P. M., & Keyes, C. L. (2011). Evaluating the psychometric properties of the mental health continuum–short form (MHC–SF). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(1), 99–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J., Trautwein, U., & Nagengast, B. (2010). A new look at the big five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. Psychological Assessment, 22(3), 471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Morin, A. J. S., Parker, P. D., & Kaur, G. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modeling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10(1), 85–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Morin, A. J., Parada, R. H., Craven, R. G., & Hamilton, L. R. (2011). Construct validity of the multidimensional structure of bullying and victimization: An application of exploratory structural equation modeling. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 701–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morin, A. J. S., Marsh, H. W., & Nagengast, B. (2013). Chapter 10. Exploratory structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mroczek, D. K., & Kolarz, C. M. (1998). The effect of age on positive and negative affect: A developmental perspective on happiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1333–1349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robitschek, C., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2009). Keyes’s model of mental health with personal growth initiative as a parsimonious predictor. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56(2), 321–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., & Huta, V. (2009). Wellness as healthy functioning or wellness as happiness: The importance of eudaimonic thinking (response to the Kashdan et al. and Waterman discussion). The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(3), 202–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R. M., Huta, V., & Deci, E. L. (2008). Living well: A self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 139–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryff, C. et al. (2012). National survey of midlife development in the United States (MIDUS II), 2004–2006. ICPSR04652-v6. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/landing.jsp. doi: 10.3886/ICPSR04652.v6.

  • Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schimmack, U. (2008). The structure of subjective well-being. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective wellbeing (pp. 97–123). New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon, K. M. (2013). Individual daimon, universal needs, and subjective well-being: Happiness as the natural consequence of a life well lived. In A. Waterman (Ed.), The best within us: Positive psychology perspectives on eudaimonic functioning. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waterman, A. S. (2008). Reconsidering happiness: A eudaimonist’s perspective. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(4), 234–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohsen Joshanloo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Joshanloo, M. Revisiting the Empirical Distinction Between Hedonic and Eudaimonic Aspects of Well-Being Using Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling. J Happiness Stud 17, 2023–2036 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-015-9683-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-015-9683-z

Keywords

Navigation