[Downloaded free from http://www.ijoyppp.org on Wednesday, December 25, 2019, IP: 210.160.217.

69]

Original Article

Relationship between Triguna theory and well-being indicators

Pulkit Khanna, Kamlesh Singh, Surbhi Singla, Vivek Verma
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi, India

Address for Correspondence: Ms. Pulkit Khanna,

Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology – Delhi,
Hauz Khas, New Delhi - 110 016, India.
E-mail: pulkit1007@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

The Indian perspective of personality deals with the tri‑dimensional classification of Gunas (Sattva,
Rajas, and Tamas) entailing physical, mental, and spiritual elements of personality. The present study
aims to examine the relationship between Gunas and well‑being indicators such as psychological capital,
personality, life satisfaction, and subjective happiness. The study was conducted on two samples.
Vedic Personality Inventory[1] and Mental Health Continuum‑Short Form[2] were administered to both
samples. The first sample consisted of 80 Indian professionals (males = 51 and females = 29) with mean
age = 28.8 years (SD = 7.19) who were administered Psychological Capital Questionnaire[3] and Big‑Five
Personality Inventory[4] and the second sample consisted of 110 students (males = 82 and females = 28)
with mean age = 21 years (SD = 2.72) who were administered Satisfaction with Life Scale[5] and Subjective
Happiness Scale.[6] Across both studies, Sattva was found to be positively correlated with well‑being.
Rajas and Tamas were negatively correlated with well‑being. Higher levels of Sattva and well‑being were
reported in the older age‑group. Males scored higher on Rajas while no gender differences were found
in well‑being.
Key words: Big‑Five, Gunas, PsyCap, well‑being

INTRODUCTION speculative, practical and ritualistic, and of course,

Psychologists over the years have defined human
personality using many models and theories. The
Guna theory of tri‑dimensional classification of human
personality emanates from Indian psychology (IP). The
manifestation of the Gunas and their influence on the
human mind and behavior has interested psychologists
and researchers across the world.[7]
Indian psychology and perspective of personality
While IP is indigenous in origin, its appeal is universal.
It has been said that IP is a “complex subject variously
viewed as esoteric and spiritual, philosophical and
Access this article online
Quick Response Code
Website:
www.ijoyppp.in
DOI:
10.4103/2347-5633.157888
systematic and scientific understanding of human
nature.”[8]
The Indian perspective of personality refers to both the
biological and psychological system. The psychological
system dealing with the Trigunas was the focus of the
present study. This system incorporates the physical,
mental, and spiritual aspects of personality.[9] The inherent
richness of the triadic language of the Gunas offers a wider
scope to understand human nature as contrasted with the
bipolar descriptions of Western psychology.[9] With its focus
on the innate qualities of the three Gunas whose varying
balance embodies personality, the Indian perspective
offers a deeper, holistic, and spiritual understanding of
human nature.[9]
Understanding the three Gunas
The Guna theory originates from the Sankhya school
of Indian philosophy which states that the entire
physical universe or “prakriti” is made up of three
constituents – Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas.[10] These Gunas

International Journal of Yoga - Philosophy, Psychology and Parapsychology  Vol. 1  Jul-Dec-2013 69

[Downloaded free from http://www.ijoyppp.org on Wednesday, December 25, 2019, IP: 210.160.217.69]
Khanna, et al.: Gunas and well-being
interact with the environment and are expressed as
personality traits. In the absence of accurate English
translations for the Gunas, Chakraborty equated the word
“illumination” for Sattva, “movement” for Rajas, and
“obstruction” for Tamas.[11] Gunas encompass all existence
and actions, and there is a dynamic transformation of
energy among them.
An individual’s mood at any given time is a manifestation
of the Gunas; each of which embodies a different way of
internal feeling and outwardly relation with the world.[9]
Each Guna can dominate other Gunas at all times. However,
each moment is characterized by the dominance of one
Guna over the others. It is also possible for a combination
of Gunas to pervade a person.
Sattva Guna
Sattva is characterized by balance, peace, equanimity, and
qualities such as cleanliness, truthfulness, dutifulness,
detachment, discipline, contentment, and staunch
determination.[12] Sattvic quality has been described as
being “free from attachment and vanity and absolutely
unruffled in success and failure.”[13]
Rajas Guna
Prabhupada has described Rajas as an intermediary
between Tamas and Sattva.[14] Rajas is intense, dynamic,
passionate and is marked by agitation, anxiety, nervousness.
Attributes of Rajas include intense activity, desire for sense
gratification, little interest in spiritual elevation, envy of
others, and materialistic mentality.[12]
Tamas Guna
It is manifested in dullness, lethargy, fatigue, and even
depression. Qualities associated with Tamas include
mental imbalance, anger, ignorance, arrogance, and
helplessness.[12] Dasgupta explains “the quality of Tamas
overcomes the illumination of knowledge and leads to
many errors. Tamas, being a product of ignorance, blinds
all living beings and binds them down with carelessness,
idleness and sleep.”[13]
“Triguna” and its correlates
In the Indian psychological literature, Guna theory is
empirically tested and accepted.[15] The Guna constructs
are backed by strong psychometric evidence such as
reliability and validity which renders them compatible
with empirical studies influenced by the Western
style.[1,12,16,17]
Further, the Guna theory is echoed in the Western
categorization of values. Brown and Chatterjee[18] have
focused on the similarity between Kohlberg’s three
level sequential model of cognitive development in
70 International Journal of Yoga - Philosophy, Psychology and Parapsychology  Vol. 1  Jul-Dec-2013
socialization and the Guna theory. Kohlberg’s work
on the stages of moral development beginning from
“Preconventional Morality” up to “Postconventional
Morality” deals with the concepts of values, morality,
justice, etc., which also find a mention in the Guna
theory.[19] Maslow’s reference to the presence of a certain
degree of “sainthood” across all people is strongly
reminiscent of the omnipresence of the three Gunas
across all individuals.[20]
Mental health and well‑being
Well‑being has been understood as the process of pain
avoidance and pleasure attainment (hedonism) and also
in terms of focus on meaning and pursuit of fulfillment of
the true individual nature (eudaimonia).[21,22]
Although the clinical tradition views well‑being through
the lens of disorders, the psychological tradition focuses
on the area of “subjective well‑being” ‑ a multi‑dimensional
evaluation of a person’s life and includes cognitive
satisfaction and affective evaluations of moods and
emotions.[23]
The present study deals with well‑being with reference
to Keyes model encompassing three aspects of well‑being
under the same umbrella.[24,25]
Hedonic/emotional well‑being (EWB) primarily deals
with pleasure attainment and pain avoidance, taking into
account one’s emotional experiences in a typical month.
The concept of social well‑being (SWB) broadly includes
the aspects of social integration, social contribution, social
coherence, social actualization, and social acceptance
which indicate an individual’s well‑being about his social
setting. Another integral component - Ryff’s[26] model of
psychological well‑being (PWB) that includes autonomy,
environmental mastery, personal growth, positive
relations with others, purpose in life and self‑acceptance
is considered in the present study. This multi‑component
model of well‑being was assessed by the Mental Health
Continuum‑Short Form (MHC‑SF) [2] and used in the
present study.
Rationale of this study
While substantial work has been done to explore the
Western modules of personality; there exists a need
to explore the indigenous Vedic theory of Triguna
personality in relation with popular concepts such
as Big‑Five, well‑being, PsyCap, life satisfaction, and
subjective happiness. Different cultures have reported
that characteristics associated with the three Gunas
correlate with well‑being (though using different models)
in ways similar to those that are supported by this study.
[Downloaded free from http://www.ijoyppp.org on Wednesday, December 25, 2019, IP: 210.160.217.69]
Khanna, et al.: Gunas and well-being
Greater the presence of Sattva, greater is the experience of
Ananda (bliss).[27] Fruit and vegetable rich diets (a Sattvic
quality) have been found to correlate with well‑being.[28]
The present study aimed to bridge this gap by focusing on
the human temperament from a more holistic perspective.
Further, this study attempted to address the shortcoming
of relying only on Western psychological constructs for
understanding the psychology of indigenous peoples.[27]
Instead of creating a forced equivalence with constructs
borrowed from Western thought, studying human nature
in terms of Guna classification may offer the scope to deal
with some nuances inherent to nonWestern cultures.
Based on the review of the literature, it was hypothesized
that Sattva would be positively correlated with well‑being
indicators, while Rajas and Tamas would be negatively
correlated with well‑being indicators.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Participants
The present study was conducted in two parts involving
different samples as explained below:
• Sample 1: The first sample consisted of 80 Indian
professionals from different organizations, including
51 males and 29 females (mean age = 28.8 years and
SD = 7.19). Of them, 28 were married, 49 single, 1 separated,
and 2 did not share their marital status
• Sample 2: The second sample included 110 Indian
students ‑ 82 males and 28 females (mean age = 21 years
and SD = 2.72). These participants were enrolled in
undergraduate, postgraduate or doctoral courses.
Tests used
Separate booklets containing tests, demographic
information sheet and consent letter were prepared
for sample 1 and sample 2. The following tests were
administered to sample 1.
Mental health continuum‑short form
The MHC‑SF[2] contains 14 items, and it assesses three
dimensions namely: EWB, SWB, and PWB on a 6‑point
Likert type scale. The internal consistency for this
instrument was originally estimated to be > 0.80.[25] The
present study found an overall test consistency of α =0.88,
ranging from α =0.75 to 0.84 for the three aspects of
well‑being.
The Vedic personality inventory
The Vedic Personality Inventory (VPI) is the most
extensively researched and validated psychological
assessment tool based on the three Gunas.[1] It contains
International Journal of Yoga - Philosophy, Psychology and Parapsychology  Vol. 1  Jul-Dec-2013
56 items including 15 Sattva items, 19 Rajas items,
and 22 Tamas items. Wolf reported that VPI has good
internal consistency ranging from α =0.70 to 0.92 for
the three Gunas.[1] Reliability values of α =0.74–0.79
were reported in the present study.
Psychological capital questionnaire
Psychological Capital Questionnaire‑24[3] has 24 items that
include six items for each of hope, efficacy, resilience,
and optimism. Reliability ranging from α =0.88 to 0.89
has been originally obtained for this instrument.[29] The
present study reported the alpha reliability for total
PsyCap at α =0.84; ranging from α =0.63 to 0.84 for the
constituent factors with the exception of “optimism” for
which α =0.42.
Big‑five inventory
The 44‑item self‑rating version of the Big‑Five
Inventory (BFI)[4] was used. It contained statements for
the five personality factors (openness, conscientiousness,
extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) to assess
the respondent’s perceptions about his/her self. Typical
internal consistency coefficients for the BFI trait scores
have been reported to range from α = 0.75 to 0.90.[30] In the
present study, internal consistency ranged from α = 0.88
to α =0.95 for different personality factors.
In addition to the MHC‑SF and VPI explained above, the
following tests were administered to sample 2.
Satisfaction with life scale
Satisfaction with Life Scale[5] is a 5‑item self‑report scale
that measures global life satisfaction. While the scale was
originally reported to have a coefficient alpha of α =0.87,
the present study found the alpha reliability of the test to
be α =0.75.
Subjective happiness scale
Subjective Happiness Scale [6] is a self‑report scale
comprising four items that measure global subjective
happiness. Alpha reliability ranging from α = 0.79 to 0.94
has been previously reported for this instrument.[6] The
present study found this instrument to have an alpha
reliability of α = 0.79.
RESULTS
Correlation analysis between Guna and well‑being
scores across both samples was employed. Correlation
wa s also studie d a t the le ve l of both s a m pl e s
individually in terms of Guna scores and the other
tests administered. Differences in mean scores on Guna
and well‑being across the variables of age and gender
were also studied.
71
[Downloaded free from http://www.ijoyppp.org on Wednesday, December 25, 2019, IP: 210.160.217.69]

Khanna, et al.: Gunas and well-being

Table 1 shows the correlation among the Gunas and Sattva than younger group [Table 2]. This finding indicated
different aspects of well‑being based on the results a rise in Sattvic element of personality with age.
of VPI and MHC‑SF across both samples. Significant
positive intra‑test correlation was seen among all The older group scored significantly higher than younger
aspects of well‑being. As regards VPI, Sattva was found group on EWB, PWB as well as total MHC.
to be negatively correlated with both Rajas (r = −0.19,
p < 0.01) and Tamas (r = −0.41, p < 0.01) while Rajas
The positive correlation between Sattva and well‑being
and Tamas were positively correlated (r = 0.63, p < 0.01).
[Table 1] was reinforced by the finding that both were
Further, Sattva was positively correlated with each of
EWB (r = 0.40, p < 0.01), SWB (r = 0.29, p < 0.01), PWB found to be significantly higher in the older group.
(r = 0.51, p < 0.01) as well as total well‑being (r = 0.48,
p < 0.01). On the other hand, both Rajas and Tamas were Table 3 shows no significant difference in Sattva and Tamas
negatively correlated with all aspects of well‑being. between males and females. However, Rajas was found
to be significantly higher in case of males as compared to
Relation between Gunas and other well‑being indicators in females. There was no significant gender difference in
scores of mental health (well‑being) and its constituent
In sample 1, Sattva was positively correlated with factors.
PsyCap as a whole (r = 0.36, p < 0.01) as well as with
efficacy (r = 0.27, p < 0.05) and hope (r = 0.49, p < 0.01).
DISCUSSION
Rajas and Tamas were not significantly correlated with
any aspect of PsyCap. As regards the relation between the Our findings about the correlation between Gunas and
Indian and Western model of personality, the correlations well‑being across both studies supported literature
between Gunas and Big‑Five reflected an interesting reporting that EWB was positively correlated with PWB
picture. Sattva was positively correlated with extraversion
and SWB.[31] In the case of VPI, Tamas was correlated
(r = 0.27, p < 0.05), agreeableness (r = 0.28, p < 0.05),
negatively with Sattva and positively with Rajas across
conscientiousness (r = 0.40, p < 0.01), openness (r = 0.33,
both samples. These findings were aligned with Vedic
p  < 0.01) and negatively correlated with neuroticism
(r = −0.30, p < 0.01). Rajas was negatively correlated with
agreeableness (r = −0.41, p < 0.01), conscientiousness Table 1: Mean, SD, alpha reliability, and correlation
(r = −0.38, p < 0.01), openness (r = −0.26, p < 0.05) and between VPI and MHC‑SF across both samples
positively correlated with neuroticism (r = 0.41, p < 0.01). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
EWB 0.76#
Tamas too showed a similar pattern of correlation, being
SWB 0.50** 0.75#
negatively correlated with agreeableness (r = −0.27, PWB 0.62** 0.53** 0.84#
p  < 0.05), conscientiousness (r = −0.41, p < 0.01), Total 0.77** 0.84** 0.88** 0.88#
Openness (r = −0.30, p < 0.01) and positively correlated MHC
with neuroticism (r = 0.36, p < 0.01). Both Rajas and Sattva 0.40** 0.29** 0.51** 0.48** 0.74#
Rajas −0.29** −0.15* −0.26** −0.26** −0.19** 0.76#
Tamas were not significantly correlated with extraversion.
Tamas −0.31** −0.24** −0.34** −0.35** −0.41** 0.63** 0.79#
Mean 10.64 13.43 21.36 45.43 76.37 69.46 68.05
In sample 2, Sattva showed positive correlation with SD 2.77 5.21 5.49 11.35 10.14 13.89 16.59
both life satisfaction (r = 0.24, p < 0.01) and subjective n=190. **p<0.01, *p<0.05, #Alpha reliability coefficients. SD=Standard
deviation, MHC‑SF=Mental Health Continuum‑Short Form, VPI=Vedic
happiness (r = 0.24, p < 0.05). Subjective happiness was Personality Inventory, EWB=Emotional well‑being, SWB=Social well‑being,
negatively correlated with Rajas (r = −0.38, p < 0.01) and PWB=Psychological well‑being, MHC=Mental Health Continuum
with Tamas (r = −0.42, p < 0.01). However, life satisfaction
was not found to be significantly correlated with Rajas Table 2: Difference between Gunas and well‑being
and Tamas. based on age
Dimension ≤25  years (mean  (SD)) t value
Table 2 represents the results of the t‑test to study if there Group  1 (younger Group  2 (older
were any significant differences in Gunas and well‑being group) n=130 group) n=57
Sattva 71.65 (9.69) 74.72 (8.49) −2.07*
scores based on age of the participants. For ease of analysis,
Rajas 53.02  (10.19) 51.21 (11.29) 1.08
the participants from both studies were divided into two Tamas 43.63 (9.79) 44.65  (12.30) −0.60
categories, up to 25 years (younger group) and over 25 years EWB 10.22  (2.77) 11.44 (2.58) −2.82**
of age (older group). Since the information about age was SWB 12.88 (5.13) 14.33  (5.04) −1.80
not available for three participants from the total sample of PWB 20.34  (5.41) 23.58 (4.94) −3.87**
Total MHC 43.44  (10.99) 49.35  (10.8) −3.40**
190, “N” in this analysis was 187. No significant difference
n=187, **p<0.01, *p<0.05. SD=Standard deviation, EWB=Emotional
was reported between the two groups on Rajas and Tamas. well‑being, SWB=Social well‑being, PWB=Psychological well‑being,
However, the older group scored significantly higher on MHC=Mental Health Continuum

72 International Journal of Yoga - Philosophy, Psychology and Parapsychology  Vol. 1  Jul-Dec-2013

[Downloaded free from http://www.ijoyppp.org on Wednesday, December 25, 2019, IP: 210.160.217.69]
Khanna, et al.: Gunas and well-being
Table 3: Difference in Gunas and well‑being between
males and females
Dimension Mean  (SD)
Males  (n=133) Females  (n=57)
Sattva 72.92 (9.2) 72.21  (10.24)
Rajas 54.46  (10.01) 48.00  (10.51)
Tamas 44.6  (10.89) 41.93  (9.70)
EWB 10.48  (2.74) 11.02  (2.85)
SWB 13.28 (5.23) 13.77 (5.19)
PWB 21.29 (5.44) 21.51 (5.65)
Total MHC 45.05  (11.01) 46.30  (12.16)
n=190, **p<0.01. SD=Standard deviation, EWB=Emotional well‑being,
SWB=Social well‑being, PWB=Psychological well‑being, MHC=Mental Health
Continuum
knowledge that Sattva is related positively to well‑being,
while Tamas is largely antagonistic to well‑being. The
inverse relationship between Sattva and Tamas found in
our study has also been reported in other research on the
Gunas.[16,12,31] Sattva has been reported to be positively
correlated with EWB, PWB and SWB while Rajas and
Tamas were negatively correlated with all well‑being
indicators.[31]
The finding of the present study wherein the older group
scored significantly higher on Sattva when compared to
the younger group can be understood better in the light
of existing literature that supports universal maturational
changes in adult personality. A decline in aggression and
an increase in control has been reported on the basis of a
longitudinal study of twins over 10 years period.[32] There
appears to be a decline in neuroticism and enhancement
of positive personality traits from early adulthood to
midlife.[33] Older adults have been found to differ from
younger adults in terms of better impulse control and
moral responsibility. [34] While these findings do not
emanate from IP per se, the personality characteristics
like positivity, impulse control and morality in which they
report an increase from younger to older adults correspond
with Sattvic personality characteristics. In this sense, the
present study provided a culturally sensitive reinforcement
to existing evidence in the area. Further support for
this finding came from the use of VPI in the Western
context which showed that the scores on VPI goodness
subscale (goodness was substituted for Sattva to make it
more relevant for Western sample) correlated positively
with increased age.[35] Herein, test–retest reliability ranging
from 0.73 to 0.89 was obtained for the subscales of VPI.[35]
This reinforces the stability of assessment of these traits.
As regards the older group being higher on well‑being
as compared to the younger group, these findings were
aligned with research[36] that suggests that the cognitive
aspect of subjective well‑being is positively correlated with
age. Some studies have reported that with increasing age,
adults feel greater happiness and satisfaction with their
lives and also report higher levels of some dimensions of
International Journal of Yoga - Philosophy, Psychology and Parapsychology  Vol. 1  Jul-Dec-2013
PWB.[37,38] Older adults tend to find their activities more
enjoyable and less stressful than younger people.[39] It was
t found that males scored higher on Rajas as compared to
females. Bem’s sex role inventory classified characteristics
0.47 like “aggressive,” “ambitious” and “competitive” (all of
4.02**
1.60
which correspond to Rajas) as being masculine as opposed
−1.22 to feminine.[40] Gender differences on account of adopting
−0.60 socially appropriate gender roles could potentially explain
−0.25 why males scored significantly higher than females on
−0.69
Rajas. The conventional Indian gender role stereotype
of the male assuming the characteristics of aggression,
ambition and pursuing material goals (dimensions of
Rajas) and the consequent self‑fulfilling prophecies in
social behavior could explain higher Rajas in males as
compared to females in the present study.[41] Reinforcement
for this explanation came from research that the country or
environmental context of the study influences the gender
differences in competitiveness and risk‑taking ‑ both
of which are attributes associated with the Rajasic
personality.[42‑45] Thus, there is a need to be careful so as to
not generalize the findings from Western culture to other
different cultural contexts and vice versa.
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE DIRECTION
The present study was a step ahead towards integrating
the holistic Indian approach of personality with widely
used Western concepts. However, this study had certain
limitations. The predominance of males in both samples
hindered a fair gender‑based comparison of test scores.
Moreover, all participants were limited to urban, educated
population.
Future research involving more diverse and representative
samples is required to attain conclusive evidence about the
relation between Gunas and well‑being indicators and its
trends across different segments of the population. Existing
literature pertaining to Guna profiles of participants
showed that mean Guna scores were different across
different cultures. The American sample [35] showed
significantly higher Sattva score and lower scores on
Rajas and Tamas in comparison to Indian and Czech
samples.[31] Since Sattva and well‑being were found to be
highly correlated, they plausibly shared some percentage
of variance. Further, America has been ranked higher on
happiness (which is related to well‑being) than Czech
Republic and India.[46] The moderating and mediating
variables accounting for such trends remain to be studied
by future research. The Indian module may potentially
emerge as another model to understand human nature and
personality. Future work in the area can look at a holistic
picture integrating different indigenous components,
including Ayurveda, Yoga, folk medicines, etc., and their
impact on body‑mind processes.
73
[Downloaded free from http://www.ijoyppp.org on Wednesday, December 25, 2019, IP: 210.160.217.69]

Khanna, et al.: Gunas and well-being

REFERENCES 27. Gergen KJ, Gulerce A, Lock A, Misra G. Psychological science in cultural

1. Wolf D. The Vedic Personality Inventory: A study of the Gunas. J Indian
Psychol 1998;16:26‑43.
2. Keyes CL. Brief description of the mental health continuum‑short
form (MHC‑SF), 2009. Available from: http://www.sociology.emory.edu/
ckeyes. [Last cited on 2012 Jun 22].
3. Luthans F, Youssef CM, Avolio BJ. In: Psychological Capital. New York:
Oxford University Press; 2007. p. 237‑8.
4. Benet‑Martínez V, John OP. Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic
groups: Multitrait multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and
English. J Pers Soc Psychol 1998;75:729‑50.
5. Diener  E, Emmons  RA, Larsen  RJ, Griffin  S. The Satisfaction With Life
Scale. J Pers Assess 1985;49:71‑5.
6. Lyubomirsky S, Lepper H. A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary
reliability and construct validation. Soc Indic Res 1999;46:137‑55.
7. Shilpa S, Murthy CG. Development and standardization of Mysore Triguna
scale. Sage Open 2012;2:1‑10.
8. Rao KR, Paranjpe AC, Dalal AK. In: Handbook of Indian Psychology.
New Delhi: Cambridge University Press; 2008.
9. Wilberg P. Gunas: The triadic key to yogic psychology. In: Selected Writings
on the New Yoga. Vol. 1. 2007. p. 5-17. Available from: http://www.
Peterwilberg.org. [Last retrieved on 2013 Mar 5].
10. Chakraborty SK. In: Managerial Effectiveness and Quality of Work Life:
Indian Insights. New Delhi: Tata McGraw‑Hill; 1987.
11. Chakraborty SK. In: Human Response in Organizations: Towards the Indian
Ethos. Calcutta: Vivekananda Nidhi; 1985.
12. Wolf DB. A psychometric analysis of the three gunas. Psychol Rep
1999;84:1379‑90.
13. Dasgupta S. In: A History of Indian Philosophy. Great Britain: Cambridge
University Press; 1961.
14. Prabhupada AC. In: Srimad Bhagavatam. Hong Kong: Bhaktivedanta Book
Trust; 1976.
15. Murthy PK, Kumar SK. Concept triguna: A critical analysis and synthesis.
Psychol Stud (Mysore) 2007;52:103‑13.
16. Pathak NS, Bhatt ID, Sharma R. Manual for classifying personality on
tridimensions of Gunas‑An Indian approach. Indian J Behav 1992;16:1‑14.
17. Rao PV, Harigopal K. The three Gunas and ESP: An exploratory investigation.
J Indian Psychol 1979;2:63‑8.
18. Brown MI, Chatterjee S. The relevance of the Guna theory in the congruence of
eastern values and western management practice. J Hum Values 1999;5:93‑102.
19. Kohlberg L. In: Stages in the Development of Moral Thought and Action.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1969.
20. Pandey A, Gupta RK. Spirituality in management: A review of contemporary
and traditional thoughts and agenda for research. Glob Bus Rev 2008;9:65.
21. Kahneman D. Objective happiness. In: Kahneman D, Diener E, Schwarz N,
editors. Well‑being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. New York: Russell
Sage Foundation Press; 1999. p. 3‑25.
22. Waterman AS. Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal
expressiveness (Eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. J Pers Soc Psychol
1993;64:678‑91.
23. Younes MS. Positive mental health, subjective vitality and satisfaction with
life for French physical education students. World J Sports Sci 2011;4:90‑7.
24. Keyes CL. Social well‑being. Soc Psychol Q 1998;61:121‑40.
25. Keyes CL. Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the
complete state model of health. J Consult Clin Psychol 2005;73:539‑48.
26. Ryff CD. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of
psychological wellbeing. J Pers Soc Psychol 1989;57:1069‑81.
context. Am Psychol 1996;51:496‑503.
28. Martin A, Cherubini A, Andres‑Lacueva C, Paniagua M, Joseph J.
Effects of fruits and vegetables on levels of vitamins E and C in the brain
and their association with cognitive performance. J Nutr Health Aging
2002;6:392‑404.
29. Luthans F, Avolio BJ, Avey JB, Norman SM. Positive psychological capital:
Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Pers Psychol
2007;60:541‑72.
30. John OP, Srivastava S. The big‑five trait taxonomy: History, measurement,
and theoretical perspectives. In: John OP, Robins RW, Pervin LA, editors.
Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. 2nd ed. New York: Guilford
Press; 1999. p. 102‑39.
31. Singh K, Slezackova A. Relationship between Gunas and mental health,
flourishing, positive and negative experience: An Indian and Western
perspective. Presented at 2nd International Conference on Positive Psychology
in the Czech Republic, Brno, Czech Republic, May 22‑24, 2013.
32. McGue M, Bacon S, Lykken DT. Personality stability and change in early
adulthood: A behavioural genetic analysis. Dev Psychol 1993;29:96‑109.
33. Aldwin CM, Levenson MR. Aging and personality assessment. Annu Rev
Gerontol Geriatr 1994;14:182‑209.
34. McCrae RR, Costa PT Jr, Pedroso de Lima M, Simões A, Ostendorf F,
Angleitner A, et al. Age differences in personality across the adult life span:
Parallels in five cultures. Dev Psychol 1999;35:466‑77.
35. Stempel HS, Cheston SE, Greer JM, Gillespie CK. Further exploration of the
Vedic Personality Inventory: Validity, reliability and generalizability. Psychol
Rep 2006;98:261‑73.
36. Shmotkin D. Subjective well‑being as a function of age and gender:
A multivariate look for differentiated trends. Soc Indic Res 1990;23:201‑30.
37. Heidrich SM, Ryff CD. The self in later years of life. In: Sperry L, Prosen H,
editors. Aging in the Twenty‑First Century: A Developmental Perspective.
New York: Garland; 1996. p. 73‑102.
38. Ryff CD, Keyes CL. The structure of psychological well‑being revisited.
J Pers Soc Psychol 1995;69:719‑27.
39. Lavery J, Horley J. Lifestyle, activity, and prevention. Paper Presented at the
11th Annual Meeting of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, Chicago, April,
1990.
40. Bem SL. The measurement of psychological androgyny. J Consult Clin
Psychol 1974;42:155‑62.
41. Major B, Carnevale PJ, Deaux K. A different perspective on androgyny:
Evaluations of masculine and feminine personality characteristics. J Pers
Soc Psychol 1981;41:988‑1001.
42. Booth AL, Nolen PJ. Choosing to compete: How different are girls and boys?
IZA Discussion Paper No. 4027, 2009.
43. Booth AL, Nolen PJ. Gender differences in risk behaviour: Does nurture
matter? IZA Discussion Paper No. 4026, 2009.
44. Gneezy U, Rustichini A. Gender and competition at a young age. Am Econ
Rev 2004;94:377‑81.
45. Sutter M, Rützler D. Gender differences in competition emerge early in life.
IZA Discussion Paper No. 5015, 2010.
46. Helliwell JF, Layard R, Sachs J, editors. World Happiness Report 2013.
New York: UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network; 2013.
How to cite this article: Khanna P, Singh K, Singla S, Verma V.
Relationship between Triguna theory and well-being indicators. Int J
Yoga - Philosop Psychol Parapsychol 2013;1:69-74.
Source of Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None declared

74 International Journal of Yoga - Philosophy, Psychology and Parapsychology  Vol. 1  Jul-Dec-2013