Introduction - Wellbeing Definition:

The idea of well being is primitive, it can be dated back to ancient Greek philosophy and remains
one of the central topics in social science. There are many definitions of well being, while
scholars generally agree well being exists in both subjective experience and objective
functioning, even though the definitions may vary. Dodge et al., (2012) described well being as “
how people feel and how they function both on a personal and social level and how they evaluate
their lives as a whole”. As the definition varies, the dimensions that constitute well being also
vary based on the literature and the context it is provided.

Carol Ryff (1989) introduced six dimensions of psychological well being, they are Autonomy,
Environmental mastery, Personal growth, Positive relations with others, Purpose in life and Self-
Acceptance. According to Carol Ryff (1989), she argued that well being is not about happiness
or pleasure but it is about living a meaningful balanced and growth oriented life. While on the
other hand Deiner(1984) and Campell(1976) focused on the subjective part of the well being
(SWB). Ed Deiner defines SWB as people’s evaluations of their own lives including both
cognitive judgements(life satisfaction) and affective reactions (experiencing more positive
reactions than negative ones). In summary we can say that, SWB is how individuals feel and
think about their own lives.

Basic Concepts of Wellbeing (Hedonism vs Eudaimonism, Wellness vs Wellbeing and so

on.)

SWB can be associated with Hedonic well being. It has its roots in Greek philosophy, where a
student of Socrates, Aristippus argued that an individual's well being revolves around pleasure
and happiness comes from avoiding the pain. As it turns out there is another school of thought,
which is Eudaimonism, originated from Aristotle. The translation of eudiamonia “flourishing” or
“living well”. He proposed that true happiness ( well being is often correlated with happiness)
from practising virtues and achieving excellence. Waterman (1993) describes eudaimonic well
being as where the individual fills one’s own virtuous potentials and lives life according to one's
own nature. Both perspectives of well-being have their own advantages and disadvantages.
Instead of neglecting one and embracing another, we can use this in different ways, for example:
SWB scale can be used to measure a client's mood after therapy or medication which can give
insights into the client’s present mood and eudaimonic well being when it is applied in therapy it
can help the client to live more deep, enriching life.

Research shows eudaimonic living always produces hedonic pleasure, but not all pleasure or
enjoyment are derived from eudaimonic living (Ryan & Deci, 2001; Waterman, Schwartz, &
Conti, 2006). It shows that happiness which comes from pleasure may not last longer while on
the on the other side happiness derived from living a meaningful, authentic live is often long
lasting, for example hedonic well being connected to material possessions and eudaimonic well
being is connected with personal growth, autonomy, meaning in life (Ryff, 1989; Ryff & Singer,
2006). Eudaimonia can be studied as both a universal trait and as a specific activity trait, which
is possible through construction of various scales, one of them is Ryff’s Positive Well Being
Scale which is used to measure eudaimonic well being as a global level trait, this scale is
constructed based on Carol Ryff’s own model of psychological well being which breaks down
eudaimonia into six dimensions: autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth , positive
relations with others, purpose in life and and self acceptance (Ryff, 1989). The dimensions given
by Ryff’s are empirically linked to better health outcomes, like improved neuroendocrine
regulation, better immune functioning (Ryff & Singer, 2006).

Waterman’s Personally Expressive Activities Questionnaire (PEAQ), that measures eudaimonia

through specific activities in which the individual feels most meaningful, authentic and fulfilling
(Waterman, 1993). Bauer, McAdams, and Pals (2006) shows that life stories which are rich in
internal goals like personal development, meaningful relations with other people, community
contribution also all are associated with higher psychological well being. This highlights the fact
that eudaimonic is not only linked with traits of the individual but also the integration of one’s
identity.

Wellness and wellbeing are closely related but they are different. Well being can be seen as a
broad umbrella term, which includes emotional, physical, social, dimensions, happiness,
satisfaction, meaning and purpose (Ryff & Singer, 2006; Deci and Ryan, 2006). While on the
other side, wellness is defined as an active pursuit of health through lifestyle choices like
nutrition, exercise, sleep and management of stress, focusing more on physical health (National
Center for Complementary and Integrative Health [NCCIH], 2018). Wellness can be understood
as a process i.e. taking action to improve one’s health and well being can be understood as an
end goal or outcome or a state of growth (Dodge, Daly, Huyton, & Sanders, 2012).

Models of Wellbeing / Theories of Wellbeing (Theoretical underpinnings of the core aspects

of PWB)
There are several models of well being, their roots can be traced back to ancient philosophy, the
eudiamonic model also called Psychological Well being (PWB) places more importance on
meaning, autonomy, personal growth, purpose, autonomy which is studied scientifically through
Ryff’s six dimensional framework (Ryff, 1989). The hedonic model which is mostly refereed
with Subjective well being places importance on maximizing pleasurable activities or things
which in turn increases positive feeling and decreases negative feelings.

In positive psychology, we have Slegimans’ PERMA model as framework for wellbeing which
is explained through five core elements: Positive emotions (experiencing hope or optimism),
Engagement (can be described as being in flow state), Relationship ( building supportive social
connections) , Meaning (a sense of purpose) and accomplishment (mastery, achievement,
success). Keyes, C.L.M (2002, 2005) combined both hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives, into
what is called a flourishing model which integrates subjective,social and psychological well
being and that provides a complete picture of mental health.

The Hierarchical framework of well being which is a recent model that organizes well being at
several levels and each of them are layered. On the top we have general well being ( the overall
experience of growth/thriving), as the name general well being self implies it is a broad concept,
which can be viewed from different perspectives like subjective, psychological and social well
being. Under these perspectives we can see the contents of the well being which includes
resilience, meaning, purpose, accomplishment . These contents are broken down into measurable
contents like gratitude or optimism. HiFWB places importance on social factors when well
being is shaped like cultural factors, traditions, community belongings (Disabato, Goodman, &
Kashdan,2025).

Factors contributing to wellbeing - Enhancing and Diminishing factors

There are a lot of factors that can enhance and diminish well being. Enhancing factors like
fulfillment of basic psychological needs such as autonomy, competence and relatedness which is
essential as stated by Self determination theory for optimal functioning (Ryan & Deci,2000).
Supportive and positive relationships play a very crucial role, with research evidence showing
that social connectedness predicts high resilience and life satisfaction (Keyes, 2002; Deine &
Seligman, 2002). Engaging in meaningful activities, physical exercise, and practising
mindfulness all contributes to sustained well being by bringing forth positive emotions and
reducing stress (Fredrickson, 2001; Kuyken et al., 2016).

Diminishing factors of well being include poverty, discrimination, chronic stress, poverty,
unemployment, poor physical health all of which are a strong contribution of reduced
psychological and social well being (Marmot, 2005; Campion & Nurse, 2007). Lack of purpose,
social isolation and negative affect further increases the chances of one being vulnerable to
mental health problems which highlights the protective factors (Ryff & Singer, 2006). With all
this together, research shows that wellbeing is enhanced by satisfaction of needs, positive
relationship and engagement in meaningful work and wellbeing is diminished by factors like
poor social environments, chronic stress and poor health conditions.

Benefits of wellbeing
Higher well being often has significant benefits across psychological, physical and social
domains. Enhanced well being is often associated with improved longevity, studies showing that
individuals live longer lives and experience reduced mortality risk (Veenhoven, 2008).
Psychologically, wellbeing promotes creativity, productivity, and engagement which supports
optimal functioning in both professional and personal contexts (Lyubomirsky, King & Diener,
2005). Socially, higher wellbeing helps people to build strong relationships, shows more
prosocial behavior and contributes more to community (Keyes, 2002; Fredrickson, 2001). Well
being also has economic advantages, as people tend to be more productive in work and reduced
healthcare costs which is common in populations who have higher mental well being (Campion
& Nurse, 2007).

Interventions to promote wellbeing

There are a lot of evidence-based interventions to promote psychological well being, from
Cognitive Behavioural wellbeing programs to lifestyle approaches, in between mindfulness and
resilience. CBT principles are adapted to Cognitive Behavioural wellbeing programs towards
eudaimonic goals to build purpose, meaning, mastery and self acceptance by using cognitive
reframing, behavioral activation and goal setting modules. A meta analysis shows that these
interventions increase dimensions of psychological well being given by Ryff across random trails
(Weiss, Westerhof, & Bohlmeijer, 2016).

Mindfulness based interventions fosters nonjudgemental attention and decentring oneself which
refers to the ability of one to take a step back from thoughts and emotions and see them as
temporary mental events which can be done through structured mediation. Evidence from
Umbrella review shows that mindfulness enhances mental health and wellbeing in adults and it
also has its effects on stress reduction, emotion regulation and positive affect (Frontiers in Public
Health systematic umbrella review, 2023)

Resilience training programs, through reappraisal , problem solving, social support mapping,
strengths coping resources. Synthesis paper highlights the pathway to PWB which is resilience
building (Kubzansky et al., 2023). Positive activity interventions which include journaling,
engaging in prosocial behavior or any acts of kindness, optimism exercises are brief, mostly self
guided and easy to scale. A meta analysis of Randomized Control Trail (RCT) indicates that
these activities produced small to moderate improvements in psychological wellbeing when
these activities are practiced consistently (Weiss et al., 2016).

Lifestyle based interventions which mostly include scheduled physical activity , improves mood,
overall physical well being, vitality, self regulation which is done through resistance training or
aerobic exercises. Umbrella review findings confirms that physical activity is an effective
promotive intervention for adult mental health and wellbeing (Frontiers in Public Health, 2023)
Research studies regarding wellbeing
Deiner and Chen (2011), examined the relationship between SWB and physical health outcomes,
longevity and risk of diseases. They found that individuals with higher well-being had stronger
immune function and low occurrence of chronic illness and longer life expectancy, this was
found by using large scale epidemiological data and self report measures of life satisfaction and
positive affect, SWB was measured with Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). This research
shows that wellbeing is not only beneficial psychologically but also can be a predictor of
physical health (Diener & Chan, 2011).

Keyes (2002) examined the link between social well being and mental health outcomes by taking
a representation of us as a base. Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF) is used to
measure psychological , social, and emotional wellbeing. Keyes concluded that individuals with
high social well being tend to flourish and are less likely to experience depression or anxiety.
Results show that the critical determinant of overall well being is social connectedness with
individuals who flourish, report stronger resilience and lower risk of mental illness. This study
highlights the importance of social factors and relational factors in psychological well being.

Aim:
To measure the six aspects of wellbeing of the individual by using Psychological Wellbeing
Scale by Carol Ryff.

Materials Required:
Psychological Wellbeing Scale by Carol D. Ryff, Rating sheet, Manual and Writing Materials.

Tool Description:
Carol D. Ryff introduced Psychological Wellbeing Scale in 1989 which is intended to assess the
multidimensional nature of positive mental health which is based on Ryff's six factor model of
psychological well being. It is a self report questionnaire in which the individual rates the
statements on a seven point Likert scale from strongly agree to disagree. There are my versions
of this scale, while the original one contains about 180 items (20 items per dimension) and then
reduced to 84 items (14 items per dimension), these both are considered long forms which
contain high internal consistency and reliability for individual subscale scores. The medium form
contains 54 items (9 items per dimension). The short form which contains 42 items in total (7
items per dimension), this version is used in this assessment and the last version which contains
18 items (3 items per dimension). This scale is primarily used in psychological research and to
track the effectiveness of interventions like mindful therapy.

Item Description:
The scale which is used here contains 42 items, it has six dimensions, containing 7 items each.
The Autonomy subscale items are Q1, Q13, Q24, Q35, Q41, Q10, and Q21 which measures the
independence of the individual. The Environmental Mastery subscale items are Q3, Q15, Q26,
Q36, Q42, Q12, and Q23, it measures individual’s competence around the surroundings. The
Personal Growth subscale items are Q5, Q17, Q28, Q37, Q2, Q14, and Q25 which measures
realization of potential, openness to experience. The Positive Relations with Others subscale
items are Q7, Q18, Q30, Q38, Q4, Q16, and Q27, it measures an individual's capacity for
warmth, satisfaction and trust in interpersonal relationships. The Purpose in Life subscale items
are Q9, Q20, Q32, Q39, Q6, Q29, and Q33 which measures sense of direction and meaning in
life. The Self-Acceptance subscale items are Q11, Q22, Q34, Q40, Q8, Q19, and Q31, it
measures the individuals positive evaluation of themselves and the acceptance of past and
present selves.

Other Parallel Assessments:

Beck Depression Inventory was introduced by Dr. Aaron T. Beck (and his colleagues) in 1961
(original BDI) and 1996 (BDI-II). Both the revised and the original scale contain 21 items, it is
widely used in screening for depression and to measure behavioral manifestations and the
severity of depression. It can be used for the ages between 13 to 80. The internal consistency is
high, Cornbach's alpha 0.86 to 0.95 and it also has high test retest reliability which is
approximately 0.93. It has strong construct validity which correlates highly with other depression
scales like the Hamilton depression scale.

The Hamilton Depression Scale was introduced by Dr. Max Hamilton in 1960. The original
scale has 21 items, although the most commonly used version has 17 items, which are measured
on 5 point or a 3 point Likert scale. It measures depression in individuals during, before and after
treatment. That's been said, it is not a standalone diagnostician tool, it is intended to be used for
patients who are already diagnosed with depression. Inner rater reliability is high which is
around 0.90. Internal consistency is adequate but it faced some criticism because of its multi
dimensional nature, it contains somatic and cognitive symptoms. Construct validity and
congruent validity is strong, correlates well with other depression scales.

Psychometric Properties:
The reliability of PWBS, when it comes to internal consistency, cornbach's alpha value across
the six subscales ranges from 0.70 to 0.85 which indicates an acceptable range of reliability.
With test-retest reliability the correlation is around 0.80 which suggests the scale is consistent
over a period of time. When it comes to validity, the construct validity - the factor analysis often
supports the six factor model, and in convergent validity PWBS correlates with life satisfaction,
resilience , positive affect and correlates negatively with depression and anxiety. The 42 item
version of PWBS has been tested with diverse populations and it generally retains reliability and
which shows it has a good cross cultural validity.

Applications:
Psychological Wellbeing Scale by Carol Ryff is the one of the most cited scales in the world,
which is often used to study mental health. In academic settings and research settings it is used
for research purposes. For example to evaluate the link between well being dimensions and other
factors like personality traits (like openness, neuroticism). It is used to evaluate the effectiveness
of positive psychological interventions, mindful programs, and specific therapy like well being
therapy. In clinical and counselling settings, it is used to gain a holistic view of clients mental
health. It is used in the beginning of the therapy session and the end of the therapy session,to
evaluate the effectiveness of the therapy. Low scores on specific subscales can highlight the area
in which the individual needs attention, for example lack of purpose or difficulty in relationship,
so the therapy can be tailored to the individual needs based on this. In organization and
educational settings, it is used to identify the employees well being and if it is low, then targeted
programs are conducted to increase morale, well being and productivity of the employees. In
educational settings, it is used by administration to identify the students' development on their
career development or to evaluate the effectiveness of a particular course or a counseling service
and foster mental wellbeing among students.

Administration:
The subject is given a clear instruction on reading each statement carefully and to rate from the
scale 1 to 7, 1 being strongly agree and 7 being strongly disagree based on the subject’s view of
life or the current feeling. It is also instructed to the subject to ask questions regarding any doubts
he may have regarding understanding the questions. The subject is asked to go in order (from
1,2,3 ) instead of skipping questions in between or answering from the [Link] subject is assured
that there are no right or wrong answers and the data will be kept confidential and will only be
used for the intended purpose. It takes about 7 minutes to complete the scale.

Scoring:
Scoring is done in a straightforward way, where the individual ratings on each item are added
and few items are reverse scored. Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 13, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 27, 29, 31, 35,
36, 37, 38, and 40 should be reverse-scored. The scale has six subdomains, the items which come
under each subdomain are also counted.

Total score range Interpretation

168 & below Low well-being

Above 168 High well-being

Subject details

Initial : PP

Age : 28

Gender : Male

Religion : Hindu

Educational qualification : Employed

Marital status : Unmarried

Habitat : Urban

Family dynamic : Nuclear family

Birth order : 1st born

Socio economic status : Middle class

Individual Table:

Initial PP

Factors Raw score Interpretation

Autonomy 37 High

Environmental Mastery 44 High

 Personal growth 45 High

Positive relations with others 49 High

Purpose in life 43 High

Self-acceptance 44 High

TOTAL 262 High well-being

Introspection Report:
“The question was easy to understand, and I didn't find any difficulty with the questions”

Individual Discussion:
The subject PP overall scored 262 in PWBS which is interpreted as high psychological well
being, it is hypothesized that PP has high resilience, protective factors, perseverance and
effectiveness. The findings are inferred in this discussion using the Biopsychosocial model
framework. Biological factors, while the assessment does not directly involve any measurement
of physiological state, it can inferred to some extent from the scores of P.P on a Environmental
Mastery and self Acceptance, in which P.P scored 44 on both which is interpreted as high, from
these scores it can be hypothesized that, the individual has low allostatic load, it means there is
low wear and tear in body when it under stress, it can also be stated from this, that
neuroendocrine and immune systems are functioning efficiently. It can be stated that the clients
overall high well-being can emerge from P.P’s self care, which includes a healthy lifestyle, good
sleep schedule and a balanced intake of nutrition. The high scores further indicates that P.P
experiences less psychological tension, which suggests few somatic complaints (Eg: Headache)
related to psychological tension.
In the Psychological domain, P.P 's scores reflect a balanced emotional state, mature and self
directed individual which suggests that the P.P has internal resources and effective coping
strategies which helps him to deal with stress effectively and promotes growth. The client’s Self
Acceptance score is 44 which is interpreted as high, suggesting that P.P accepts his various
aspects of personality, this also suggests that the subject may also come in terms with himself in
accepting his own past failures and success. P.P scored 37 on autonomy which is interpreted as
high, this suggests that the subject perceives himself as independent, even though P.P lives with
his parents, there can be two schools of thought that may arise from this new information, one
this seems contrary but on the other hand this shows a conscious decision taken by the subject
which is internal psychological autonomy and external autonomy which deals with financial or
physical independence. From this it is hypothesized that the subject has his own internal
standards, and can stand against social pressures and is highly determined. This also reflects the
P.P’s high score on environment mastery indicating that the subject had control over his
environment, this shows that living with parents is his autonomous choice to do so. And it can be
inferred that choosing one’s own lifestyle is mostly related with strong well being rather than
mere financial situation.

P.P scores 45 on personal growth which is high, which shows that P.P is open to new
experiences and has a sense of continuous development. It can be hypothesized that, P.P is
motivated to realize his own potential and is goal oriented, this can also be the demands of the
external environment i.e P.P is a civil engineer who is self employed, in order to get new clients,
P.P has to go to lot of social events, and should commit himself to life along learning, which is
increases the chances of succeeding in his entrepreneurial journey. In the domain of Purpose in
Life, P.P scored 43, which is a high score, it can be inferred that an individual has a strong sense
of direction towards his goal and he perceives that the activities he is engaged in or the relations
he maintains with other people is meaningful. It can be hypothesized that the high sense of
purpose, which can be taught as a map that P.P uses to navigate this complex world, acts as a
buffer against the chaotic nature of the world. Chaos can be taught as a randomness, the
uncertainty but it is also where new things are born, all the potential (all the things that one can
be), its opposite is the order. P.P high scores on personal growth indicates that the he has enough
order to maintain what he is currently doing but he also explores chaos with an autonomous
decision to do that so, where all the potentials lurks around (this can be taught as the individual
has his one foot on order and another one on chaos).

When it comes to Social factors, P.P scored 49 in Positive relation with others, which is an
exceptionally high score. This suggests that P.P is capable of high warmth, empathy, and is also
valued highly in his social circle. It can be hypothesized that maintaining a positive relationship
with others is extremely important when it comes to psychological and social wellbeing and it is
crucial in entrepreneurial journeys, because the impressions one makes with others determines
the network of the person, through which one can get new clients and a presence of a strong
social network also acts as a protective factor. It can be further hypothesized that P.P knows how
to make a good first impression, this helps P.P to build positive relations with others which can
be explained by Halo effect ( positive aspect of one trait leads to overwhelming prediction
positive judgments of completely unrelated traits or as entirety, this is a cognitive bias but in this
case it may fall into P.P advantage). In environmental mastery, the client scored 44 which is a
high score, this suggests that the client feels highly competent, able to manage daily affairs and
work and other opportunities in the external environment. P.P perceives himself capable of
creating or selecting situations according to his own personal values and goals which indicates
P.P’s ability to manipulate the environment around him. It can be hypothesized that P.P can meet
the practical demands of life efficiently and can find opportunities to rise to the top.

Jiah Yoo and Carol [Link] (2019) conducted a longitudinal study on Japan. The focus was
primarily on investigating different models of psychological well being and which one predicted
health outcomes over time. The wellbeing of the participants was measured with Ryff’s six
factor model. The research shows that the individual who consistently scored high on these
dimensions (autonomy, environmental mastery, positive relations, personal growth, purpose in
life and self - acceptance) reported better resilience against stress related illness, better physical
health and lower depressive symptoms. Repeated assessments of well being were conducted to
keep track of changes and stability over time. The findings from this research highlights that high
well being scored (the one that is scored by P.P which is 262) not only acts as a marker for
psychological well being but also the predictors of long term health benefits (Yoo & Ryff, 2019).
Anegl De-Juanas, Teresita Bernal Romero and Rosa Goig (2020), investigate the relationship
between autonomy and psychological wellbeing among young people. This research paper
focused on how autonomy levels vary among the population and how these differences influence
the overall wellbeing. The findings were, the greater the autonomy the higher the psychological
well being which was particularly found in acceptance , environmental mastery and purpose in
life dimensions. Young individuals were surveyed with validated psychological well being scales
and the results were statistically analysed between autonomy and other well being factors. This
suggests that P.P’s high scores on autonomy - 37, self acceptance and mastery which is 44 shows
that these traits are not standalone but in fact connected markers of resilience and growth (De-
Juanas, Bernal Romero, & Goig, 2020).

In conclusion the P.P’s overall high scores on the PWBS is consistent across all six domains
which indicates that P.P is self directed, highly resilient and socially engaged and connected
which helps him to navigate the complex world. The scoring on these domains brings out a
coherent picture, the integration of external resources (social) and internal resources
(psychological) which in turn supports a healthy biological state.

Group Table:

S.n Initial Gender Age Raw Interpretation

o score

1 MK M 21 253 High

2 AS F 25 208 High

3 TT F 29 192 High

4 TN F 27 220 High
 5 D M 29 194 High

6 JQ F 30 169 High

7 KR M 31 198 High

8 PP M 28 262 High

9 MS M 23 246 High

Group Discussion:

Overall, the group scored 1924, the mean score is 215 which indicates high level of
psychological well being. In autonomy, MK and D scored 44 which reflects strong independence
and self determination. On the other hand, JQ scored 25 which is low compared to other subjects,
this indicates that the subject may face some challenges regarding asserting herself. It can be
hypothesized that participants who scored low on autonomy may have difficulty making
decisions while it may not be the same case for participants who scored high on autonomy. Self
determination theory states autonomy plays a very important role in motivation and well being
and research on self determination also confirms that (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Environmental
mastery, PP scored high 44 which shows that the subject feels very competent in the
environment and he believes he can manage the life demands. On the other hand D scored 21
which is low compared to other scores in the group in this domain, this indicated difficulty in
navigating external challenges. Environmental mastery depends on one’s ability to shape or
manipulate one’s surroundings to meet personal needs (Ryff & Singer, 2006). Participants with
high scores showed adaptive coping strategies that are effective in dealing stress and low scores
reflect maladaptive scoping strategies and limited support systems.
Personal growth, PP scored 45 which is the highest compared to other participants in this
domain, this reflects continuous personal/self development. TT scored 30 which is low compared
to others, which suggests that there is a slow process in self development. PP may actively seek
new experiences while TT may face barriers like stress or limited opportunities in the given
context. Broaden and Build theory proposed by Fredrickson (2013) which states that positive
emotions bring forth or broaden momentary though action repertories (interests sparks
exploration) which in turn can build lasting personal resources (skills, social bond) over time
which can contribute to personal growth and wellbeing. Positive Relation with others, PP scored
47 which shows PP can build strong interpersonal bonds and may also have strong social bonds
which can act as a protective factor under stress. On the other hand JQ scored 23 which suggests
that she may have struggles when it comes to interpersonal relationships and this may also lead
to social isolation. It has been found by Diener and Seligman (2002) that happy individuals have
strong social ties which contributes to positive well being.

Purpose in Life, MK scored 48 which says that the subject has career life goals which can be due
to the MK’s own personal and professional aspirations. TT scored 29 which suggests there is an
uncertainty in direction in other words TT is not clear where she wants to go. Key (2002) places
importance on a sense of direction which is a must requirement if one wants to flourish. Self
Acceptance, MS scored 46 which shows strong acceptance of one’s own self which also means
that MS embraces both his strengths and weaknesses. Accepting one’s own self is a critical
component when it comes to psychological well being (Ryff, 1989). This suggests that MS
experiences greater psychological well being compared to D and JQ scored 27 which reflects
struggles with self acceptance, and may experience pressure from the external world and self
criticism.

Conclusion:
Subject PP scored 262 with high scores across all six dimensions, this states that PP is highly
resilient and self driven and meaningfully engaged in activities or in relations and socially
connected, which helps PP to navigate the world. Autonomy, Personal Growth, Positive
Relations, Purpose in Life, Self-Acceptance are the domains where the group scored high and the
group scored low on environmental mastery. From this we can conclude that the group is strong
on internal dimensions like growth (M=37), purpose (M=36.5), relationships (M=36.5),
autonomy (M=37.11) but has some struggles on external adaptation like environmental mastery.
PP would be recommended to continue doing the activities that aligned with PP’s values and
provide opportunity for personal growth. Since PP scored high on positive relations, he is well
suited with roles that require interpersonal skills, like volunteering which can further increase his
life’s sense of purpose.

References:

Campion, J., & Nurse, J. (2007). A dynamic model for wellbeing. Australasian Psychiatry,
15(S1), S24–S28. [Link]

De-Juanas, Á., Bernal Romero, T., & Goig, R. (2020). The relationship between
psychological well-being and autonomy in young people according to age. Frontiers in
Psychology, 11, 559976. [Link]

Diener, E., & Chan, M. Y. (2011). Happy people live longer: Subjective well-being
contributes to health and longevity. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 3(1), 1–43.
[Link]

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13(1),
81–84. [Link]

Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The

broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226.
[Link]

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to
face stress, pain, and illness. Delacorte.

Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in

life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), 207–222. [Link]
Kubzansky, L. D., Kim, E. S., Boehm, J. K., Davidson, R. J., Huffman, J. C., Loucks, E. B.,
Lyubomirsky, S., Picard, R. W., Schueller, S. M., Trudel-Fitzgerald, C., VanderWeele, T. J.,
Warran, K., Yeager, D. S., Yeh, C. S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2023). Interventions to modify
psychological well-being: Progress, promises, and an agenda for future research. Affective
Science, 4, 174–184. [Link]

Kuyken, W., Warren, F., Taylor, R. S., Whalley, B., Crane, C., Bondolfi, G., Hayes, R.,
Huijbers, M., Ma, H., Schweizer, S., Segal, Z., Speckens, A., & Dalgleish, T. (2016).
Efficacy of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy in prevention of depressive relapse: An
individual patient data meta-analysis from randomized trials. JAMA Psychiatry, 73(6), 565–
574. [Link]

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

Marmot, M. (2005). Social determinants of health inequalities. The Lancet, 365(9464),

1099–1104. [Link]

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
[Link]

Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (2006). Best news yet on the six-factor model of well-being. Social
Science Research, 35(4), 1103–1119. [Link]

Schotanus-Dijkstra, M., Drossaert, C. H. C., Pieterse, M. E., Boon, B., Walburg, J. A., &
Bohlmeijer, E. T. (2017). An early intervention to promote well-being and flourishing and
reduce anxiety and depression: A randomized controlled trial. Internet Interventions, 9, 15–
24. [Link]

Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., & Teasdale, J. D. (2002). Mindfulness-based cognitive

therapy for depression: A new approach to preventing relapse. Guilford Press.
Veenhoven, R. (2008). Healthy happiness: Effects of happiness on physical health and the
consequences for preventive health care. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(3), 449–469.
[Link]

Weiss, L. A., Westerhof, G. J., & Bohlmeijer, E. T. (2016). Can we increase psychological
well-being? The effects of interventions on psychological well-being: A meta-analysis of
randomized controlled trials. PLOS ONE, 11(6), e0158092.
[Link]

Yoo, J., & Ryff, C. D. (2019). Longitudinal profiles of psychological well-being and health:
Findings from Japan. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2746.
[Link]

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13(1),
81–84. [Link]

Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The

broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226.
[Link]

Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in

life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), 207–222. [Link]

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
[Link]

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), 1069–1081.
[Link]

Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (2006). Best news yet on the six-factor model of well-being. Social
Science Research, 35(4), 1103–1119. [Link]
De-Juanas, Á., Bernal Romero, T., & Goig, R. (2020). The relationship between
psychological well-being and autonomy in young people according to age. Frontiers in
Psychology, 11, 559976. [Link]

Yoo, J., & Ryff, C. D. (2019). Longitudinal profiles of psychological well-being and health:
Findings from Japan. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2746.
[Link]