Support for a general factor of well-being

Abstract

Abstract. Well-being is typically defined as positive feeling (e.g. happiness), positive functioning (e.g. competence, meaning) or a combination of the two. Recent evidence indicates that well-being indicators belonging to different categories can be explained by single "general" factor of well-being (e.g. Jovanovic, 2015). We further test this hypothesis using a recent well-being scale, which includes indicators of positive feeling and positive functioning (Huppert & So, 2013). While the authors of the scale originally identified a two-factor structure, in view of recent evidence, we hypothesize that the two-factor solution may be due to a method effect of different items being measured with different rating scales. In study 1, we use data from the European Social Survey round 3 (n = 41,461) and find that two factors have poor discriminant validity and, after using a bifactor model to account for different rating scales, only the general factor is reliable. In study 2, we eliminate method effects by using the same rating scale across items, recruit a new sample (n = 507), and find that a onefactor model fits the data well. The results support the hypothesis that well-being indicators, typically categorized as "positive feeling" and "positive functioning," reflect a single general factor.

Development and Initial Validation of a Multidimensional Scale Assessing Subjective Well-Being: The Well-Being Scale (WeBS)

“…Specifying a higher-order factor structure that consisted of five lower-order factors did not improve the model fit. These findings suggested that SWB as measured by the 29-item WeBS should not be considered as comprising a single general factor, contrary to preliminary results from a recent study (Longo et al, 2016). Rather, our results showed that the confirmatory bifactor structure was a more appropriate fit with the data.…”

“…These five domains of SWB are theorized to be orthogonal to each other; for example, people who enjoy high levels of social well-being can have either high or low levels of eudaimonic well-being and hedonic well-being. Consistent with emerging evidence, this organization of SWB suggests a bifactor structure of this variable, in which a general factor of overall well-being as well as five domain-specific factors can be extracted (Chen, Bai, Lee, & Jing, 2016;de Bruin & du Plessis, 2015;Jovanovic´, 2015;Longo et al, 2016). Conceptually, such a complex representation of SWB implies that the construct can be conceptualized not only as a broad representation of people's overall psychological functioning but that it also can manifest in several domains of people's lives.…”

Psychometric Evaluation of the Mental Health Continuum–Short Form in French Canadian Young Adults

“…9 However, the structure of well-being has been debated recently, 10,11 and empirical research suggests that these are distinct approaches to well-being but not distinct constructs; thus, they are better represented by single 'general' factor of well-being. [12][13][14] Accordingly, mental health and illness are not extremes of one continuum but distinct (although correlated) continua. 4 The two-continua model posits one continuum indicating level of mental health, while the other refers to the presence or absence of mental illness.…”

Buying what people like you buy: Personality Homophily and Well-being in Consumer Behaviour

“…both on a scale of 0-10. Similar to Longo, Coyne, Joseph, and Gustavsson (2016), the happiness and satisfaction measures used were highly correlated (r=0.79), and were therefore averaged to create a single well-being variable. To measure income, respondents reported whether their annual household income fell into one of eight categories: Less than £25,000, £25,000 to £34,999, £35,000 to £49,999, £50,000 to £74,999, £75,000 to £99,999, £100,000 to £149,999, £150,000 or more, or "Prefer not to say".…”