Personality and Social Psychology

Review http://psr.sagepub.com/

A Review of the Tripartite Structure of Subjective Well-Being: Implications for Conceptualization,

Operationalization, Analysis, and Synthesis
Michael A. Busseri and Stan W. Sadava
Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2011 15: 290 originally published online 3 December 2010
DOI: 10.1177/1088868310391271

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://psr.sagepub.com/content/15/3/290

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Society for Personality and Social Psychology

Additional services and information for Personality and Social Psychology Review can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://psr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://psr.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://psr.sagepub.com/content/15/3/290.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jun 28, 2011

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Dec 3, 2010

What is This?

Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014

 Personality and Social Psychology Review

A Review of the Tripartite Structure of 15(3) 290­–314

© 2011 by the Society for Personality
and Social Psychology, Inc.
Subjective Well-Being: Implications for Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Conceptualization, Operationalization, DOI: 10.1177/1088868310391271

http://pspr.sagepub.com

Analysis, and Synthesis

Michael A. Busseri1 and Stan W. Sadava1

Abstract
Subjective well-being (SWB) comprises a global evaluation of life satisfaction and positive and negative affective reactions to
one’s life. Despite the apparent simplicity of this tripartite model, the structure of SWB remains in question. In the present
review, the authors identify five prominent structural conceptualizations in which SWB is cast variously as three separate
components, a hierarchical construct, a causal system, a composite, and as configurations of components. Supporting evidence
for each of these models is reviewed, strengths and weaknesses are evaluated, and commonalities and discrepancies among
approaches are described. The authors demonstrate how current ambiguities concerning the tripartite structure of SWB
have fundamental implications for conceptualization, measurement, analysis, and synthesis. Given these ambiguities, it is
premature to propose a definitive structure of SWB. Rather, the authors outline a research agenda comprising both short-
term and longer-term steps toward resolving these foundational, yet largely unaddressed, issues concerning SWB.

Keywords
well being, individual differences, structure

In 1984, an article by Ed Diener was published in Psycho-
logical Bulletin that reviewed a (then) nascent body of
research concerned with people’s subjective evaluations of
their lives, which he referred to as “subjective well-being”
(SWB). According to Diener, this growing area of inquiry
had three hallmarks. First, the study of SWB was concerned
with individuals’ subjective evaluations of their own lives
using whatever criteria they deemed appropriate. Second,
SWB included people’s global assessment of their life over-
all. Third, the study of SWB encompassed both positive and
negative appraisals rather than focusing exclusively on indi-
cators of distress and dysfunction. Consistent with these
hallmarks, Diener proposed that SWB composed two types
of components. The first component was a cognitive judg-
ment concerning one’s overall level of life satisfaction. The
second type of component composed affective experiences,
reflecting people’s positive and negative emotional reactions
to their lives. Thus, in Diener’s (1984) original formulation,
the three primary components of SWB were life satisfaction
(LS), positive affect (PA), and negative affect (NA).
This tripartite formulation of SWB has been widely
adopted. According to the PsycINFO database, the Diener
(1984) article has been cited close to 1,000 times and thou-
sands of empirical works have investigated SWB with
respect to LS, PA, and NA, including more than 200 pub-
lished works on SWB from Diener himself. This rapidly
expanding body of research has provided a rich database
addressing many important issues, including the reliability
and validity of self-report measures of SWB,1 stability and
malleability of SWB, correlates and predictors of SWB, and
national and societal-level differences in SWB (Eid &
Larsen, 2008). Studies indicate that higher (relative to lower)
levels of SWB are associated with fewer symptoms of men-
tal illness, stronger interpersonal relations, more functional
health status, more adaptive dispositions and temperaments,
more prosocial functioning, and more self-enhancing cogni-
tive styles (e.g., Diener, 1984, 1994, 2000; Diener, Suh,
Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, & Schkade,
2005; Pressman & Cohen, 2005). Consequently, a high level
of SWB has been conceptualized as an indicator of optimal
human functioning (e.g., Keyes, 2005; Ryan & Deci, 2001)
and is considered an important personal and societal goal by
both researchers and lay persons alike (Diener, 2000; Seligman,
2000). Researchers have also advocated for the creation of
national accounts of well-being to facilitate monitoring SWB
1
Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
Corresponding Author:
Michael Busseri, Brock University, Department of Psychology, 500
Glenridge Avenue, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1
Email: mbusseri@brocku.ca

Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014

Busseri and Sadava 291
within and across nations, the results of which could be used
to inform government policy and priorities (e.g., Carlisle &
Hanlon, 2007; Diener, Kesebir, & Lucas, 2008; Dolan &
White, 2006). Such signs are evidence that the study of SWB
is thriving, and with impact.2
Despite the large volume of SWB research based on
Diener’s (1984) tripartite model, several fundamental issues
remain in question, including the issue of primary focus in
the present work—the structure of SWB. By structure, we
are referring to how SWB is internally organized with respect
to its three primary components, LS, PA, and NA. Simply
stated, our principal concern is how these three primary com-
ponents constitute, reflect, and/or combine to produce the
hypothetical construct called SWB. Insights concerning
structure are critical to our understanding of SWB. At the
most basic level, knowledge concerning how the three SWB
components interrelate informs our understanding of what
SWB is. As we discuss in subsequent sections, various
answers to this foundational issue have been proposed,
including conceptualizing SWB as a global propensity to
evaluate one’s life in a positive fashion, as a heterogeneous
composite of ingredients, and even as a broad research area
encompassing three distinct components. The structure of
SWB also has important implications for operationalization
and measurement (i.e., What should researchers be measur-
ing to assess SWB?), analysis (i.e., How should SWB be
treated statistically with respect to its components?), and
conceptualization (i.e., What type of phenomenon is SWB?).
Furthermore, clarity concerning the structure of SWB is crit-
ical to facilitating accurate interpretation and meaningful
synthesis of SWB-related research findings.
Although structure-related reviews of SWB have been
reported over the years concerning issues such as the relation
between global LS and domain-specific satisfaction (e.g.,
Schimmack, 2008) and the link between PA and NA (e.g.,
Schimmack & Crites, 2005), a systematic review of the
structure of SWB with respect to all three components has
not been reported. In the present article, we review five alter-
native models of the structure of SWB as presented in the
empirical literature spanning the past 40 years of research
related to SWB. Empirical evidence pertaining to these
structural models, strengths and weaknesses of each approach,
and commonalities and discrepancies among the five con-
ceptualizations of SWB are delineated. Implications of the
current state of ambiguity concerning the structure of SWB
are then described with respect to several issues of funda-
mental importance to the study of SWB: measurement, anal-
ysis and interpretation, and integration and synthesis of
SWB-related findings. We then present a programmatic
research agenda composing short-term and longer-term steps
that we anticipate will help resolve the ambiguity concerning
the structure of SWB.
Given the wide-ranging nature of these issues, coupled
with a general lack of attention from researchers to clarifying
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
the structure of SWB, it is not possible at present to propose
a single, optimal structure for SWB. Indeed, it is unlikely
that any single study could achieve such a goal. Nonetheless,
we believe that a nuanced review is timely and valuable for
several reasons. First, researchers engaged in the study of
SWB appear to be generally unaware that multiple diverging
structural conceptualizations exist and that uncertainty
regarding the structure of SWB has major implications for
the study of SWB. Even if some are aware of this issue, in
general SWB investigators have not attended to the unre-
solved ambiguities and discrepancies we describe. Rather, in
the typical empirical report investigators (including our-
selves in previously published works) adopt a particular
structural conceptualization of SWB without justification for
or explicit consideration of the implications of this choice.
Consequently, research literatures based on each of the five
structural models have proliferated largely independent of
each other. The most important justification for the present
work, therefore, is the pressing need to heighten awareness
among SWB researchers, reviewers, and journal editors of
the fundamental importance of these issues to our under-
standing of SWB.
Second, it is our view that a review and evaluation of
prominent structural models as well as the delineation of
unanswered questions and recommendations for directions
for future research will be of considerable heuristic value to
investigators new to the study of SWB. Third, investigation
of multidimensional phenomena and multifaceted constructs
(e.g., attitudes, self-concept, personality) is not unique to the
study of SWB, and the heterogeneity of structural approaches
to SWB is in many ways consistent with ambiguities noted
in other domains of personality and social psychological
research (e.g., Anderson & Sedikides, 1991; Carver, 1989;
Marsh & Yeung, 1998). Thus, although our primary goal is
to advance knowledge concerning the tripartite structure of
SWB, we anticipate that the issues examined in the present
work will be informative to readers interested in a wide array
of topics.
Prominent Structural Models of SWB
Our literature review proceeded in an iterative fashion. We
began with the structure of SWB proposed by Diener (1984).
Using the PsycINFO database, we searched for all published
research on SWB authored or coauthored by Diener. Con-
ceptualizations concerning the structure of SWB and closely
related concepts proposed by researchers prior to, and fol-
lowing, the publication of Diener’s (1984) seminal review
also were reviewed. To identify these relevant published
works, we searched the PsycINFO database for all published
research containing the following two combinations of key-
words: subjective well-being and structure or life satisfac-
tion and positive affect and negative affect. This aspect of the
literature search was supplemented by a review of the works
292 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
SWB
LS
PA
NA
Figure 1. Model 1—Subjective well-being (SWB) as three
separate components
Note: In this structural model, SWB refers to a domain of research
inquiry, comprising life satisfaction (LS), positive affect (PA), and negative
affect (NA) as separate components. Correlations among the three SWB
components, shown using dotted, double-headed arrows, are not of
primary interest in this model.
cited by Diener and colleagues as well as in the additional
publications from other investigators. Several hundred arti-
cles were identified.
Below we describe five prominent structural models of
SWB identified from this collective body of published work.
In Model 1, SWB is conceptualized as a broad research
domain composing three separate topics: LS, PA, and NA. In
Model 2, SWB is cast as a hierarchical construct spanning
three primary components and is modeled as a higher order
latent factor. In Model 3, SWB is approached as a composite
experience reflected in the combination of LS, PA, and NA.
In Model 4, SWB is conceptualized as a causal system in
which PA and NA are treated as inputs to LS. Finally, in
Model 5, SWB is treated as an integrated system of compo-
nents configured in distinct ways within individuals.
Model 1: SWB as Three
Separate Components
Description and Supporting Evidence. Diener (1984) described
LS, PA, and NA as different aspects that should be assessed
and examined separately to provide a full description of
SWB (see Figure 1). This conceptualization has been
espoused by Diener in numerous publications over the past
25 years. Diener and Biswas-Diener (2002), for example,
suggested that “life satisfaction, pleasant affect, and lack
of unpleasant affect are separable constructs that must be
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
independently examined” (p. 127; also see Balatsky & Diener,
1993; Chwalisz, Diener, & Gallagher, 1988; Diener, 1994, 1996,
2008; Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002; Diener & Emmons,
1985; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985; Diener
et al., 1999; Diener, Gohm, Suh, & Oishi, 2000; Diener &
Lucas, 2000b; Diener, Lucas, & Napa Scollon, 2006; Diener,
Oishi, & Lucas, 2003; Diener & Suh, 1999; Diener, Suh,
Smith, & Shao, 1995; Lucas, Diener, & Suh, 1996; Oishi, Die-
ner, & Lucas, 2007; Pavot & Diener, 1993, 2004, 2008;
Pavot, Diener, Colvin, & Sandvik, 1991; Pavot, Diener, &
Fujita, 1990; Suh, Diener, Oishi, & Triandis, 1998).
Diener’s (1984) tripartite division among SWB compo-
nents was consistent with early research on well-being in
which emphasis was given to the separability among what
were believed to be the primary components of well-being.
For example, based on results from large-scale social sur-
veys Campbell (1976, 1981) was among the first to pro-
pose that a sense of well-being encompassed LS, PA, and
NA, which were later reconceptualized as two major com-
ponents: satisfaction–dissatisfaction and happiness,
defined as the balance between PA and NA.4 According to
Campbell, although these two dimensions were moderately
interrelated (i.e., r = .50), each tapped different aspects of
life experience that do “not always move together” (Camp-
bell, 1981, p. 38) and thus should be treated separately
(also see Andrews & Withey, 1976; Carp & Carp, 1982,
1983).
Consistent with the proposed separation among SWB
components, Diener and colleagues demonstrated that when
multiple measures of LS, PA, and NA were examined jointly
in exploratory factor analysis, measures of each component
loaded strongly onto three separate components. For exam-
ple, Diener and Emmons (1985) reported that in a varimax-
rotated factor analysis, multiple PA items (e.g., happy,
pleased, joy) loaded onto a separate factor from multiple NA
items (e.g., angry, depressed), both of which loaded onto a
separate factor from LS items (e.g., “the conditions of my life
are excellent”; also see Balatsky & Diener, 1993). Additional
factor analytic evidence has accumulated over the past sev-
eral decades in support of the separability of LS, PA, and NA
(e.g., Adler & Fagley, 2005; Heller, Komar, & Lee, 2007;
Lucas, 2008; Lynn & Steel, 2006; McCullough, Huebner, &
Laughlin, 2000; Pavot, 2008; Sagiv & Schwartz, 2000; Sirgy
et al., 2006; Suh, 2002; Watkins, Woodward, Stone, & Kolts,
2003; Westerhof & Keyes, 2006). According to Westerhof,
Thissen, Dittman-Kohli, and Stevens (2006), therefore, SWB
is a multidimensional construct in which LS, PA, and NA
“are related but clearly separable dimensions” (p. 100).
The proposed differentiation between the two affective
components of SWB was also consistent with Bradburn’s
(1969; Bradburn & Caplovitz, 1965) pioneering research
suggesting that PA and NA were orthogonal dimensions
rather than polar opposites. This conclusion was supported
by subsequent early research from Diener and colleagues
Busseri and Sadava 293
(e.g., Diener & Emmons, 1985; Diener, Larsen, Levine, &
Emmons, 1985; Diener, Sandvik, & Pavot, 1991) as well as
more recent conceptual and empirical work concerning the
structure of affective experience in which PA and NA are delin-
eated as orthogonal dimensions (e.g., Cacioppo, Gardner, &
Berntson, 1999; Fredrickson, 2001; Tellegen, 1985; Watson,
Weise, Vaidya, & Tellegen, 1999). Relevant evidence also
emerges from research in which the relation between PA and
NA is found to differ in both degree and direction as a function
of Western versus Eastern cultural identification (e.g., Peru-
novic, Heller, & Rafaeli, 2007; Schimmack, Diener, & Oishi,
2002; Scollon, Diener, Oishi, & Biswas-Diener, 2005). Other
investigators have provided evidence suggesting that there may
be fundamental differences between individuals with respect to
their dispositional tendencies toward joint or opposing experi-
ences of PA and NA (e.g., Bood, Archer, & Norlander, 2004;
Norlander, Bood, & Archer, 2002) and that positive and nega-
tive affective experiences may have dissociable implications for
cognition, motivation, and behavior (e.g., Ashby, Isen, &
Turken, 1999; Fredrickson, 2001; Storbeck & Clore, 2008).
Commentary. From the perspective of the separate compo-
nents model, the broad goals of research on SWB are to
delineate the causes and correlates of LS, PA, and NA as
separate phenomena, such that as our knowledge of these
issues grows, so too does our understanding of SWB. Conse-
quently, each of the three primary dimensions of SWB can
be examined separately (Pavot, 2008). Consonant with this
logic, a large volume of empirical information has accrued
concerning the correlates and predictors of LS, PA, and NA
(DeNeve & Cooper, 1998; Diener, 1984, Diener et al., 1999;
Steel, Schmidt, & Shultz, 2008). This research includes
some studies suggesting that LS, PA, and NA may have dif-
ferent nomological networks. For example, in studies exam-
ining all three SWB components jointly, extraversion and
positive social interactions are uniquely positively related to
PA and LS (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1980; DeNeve & Cooper,
1999; Heller, Watson, & Ilies, 2006), whereas neuroticism
and depression typically show more substantial relations
with NA (DeNeve & Cooper, 1999; Watson, Clark, & Tel-
legen, 1988). Related, Schimmack, Schupp, and Wagner
(2008) showed that socioeconomic conditions (e.g., unem-
ployment) had a stronger predictive effect on LS than on PA
and NA, whereas personality traits (e.g., extraversion, neu-
roticism) had a stronger effect on PA and NA than on LS. A
recent addition to this literature is studies examining all three
SWB components as separate but simultaneous predictors of
other outcomes. Zelenski, Murphy, and Jenkins (2008), for
example, found that worker productivity was uniquely pre-
dicted by PA, rather than NA or LS.
There are important challenges attending the separate
components model of SWB. One issue pertains to the status
of SWB as a psychological phenomenon. Defining a psycho-
logical construct requires specification of both the conceptual
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
content of the construct and a strategy for operationalization
(Borsboom, Mellenbergh, & van Heerden, 2003; Edwards &
Bagozzi, 2000). Operationalizing a psychological construct
typically requires specifying a set of observable (albeit
imperfect) indicators of the construct, the pattern of interre-
lations among which is used to infer the underlying latent
construct (Bollen, 2002; Kline, 1998). Although the content
of the SWB construct is well defined in terms of its three
primary components, the emphasis on the separateness of
these components suggests that SWB is not a typical con-
struct as its existence cannot be inferred from the relations
among its three primary indicators. One possibility, there-
fore, is that SWB is simply a term that refers to a domain of
research interest rather than a psychological construct.
Indeed, SWB has been described as a general domain of
inquiry (Diener et al., 1999; Diener, Napa Scollon, & Lucas
2003), as a broad category of phenomena (Pavot, 2008;
Pavot & Diener, 2004), and as a “generic term” with LS, PA,
and NA as different variants of SWB (Howell & Howell, 2008,
p. 537). Such explanations, however, do not explain why and
in what manner LS, PA, and NA are to be considered pri-
mary components if SWB is not a psychological construct.
A second and related issue concerns the meaning of the
associations among LS, PA, and NA. As we review in subse-
quent sections, ample empirical evidence shows that these
associations are often substantial and robust. It is unclear
from the perspective of the separate components model,
however, what is to be made of these correlations among LS,
PA, and NA. One possibility is that the shared variance
among SWB components is simply a methodological artifact
resulting from the use of self-report ratings. Alternatively,
the covariance among LS, PA, and NA may index a global
cognitive bias or predisposition toward viewing one’s life is
a positive manner (Cummins & Nistico, 2002; Robinson et al.,
2003). Proponents of the separate components model (e.g.,
Andrews & Robinson, 1991; Argyle & Martin, 1991; Eid,
1997; Elliot, Gable, & Mapes, 2006; Larsen & Eid, 2008)
have not addressed the implications of the correlations
among components with respect to the meaning and struc-
ture of SWB. It is unclear, therefore, how to interpret asso-
ciations among LS, PA, and NA from the perspective of the
separate components model. Consequently, it is uncertain
whether an exclusive emphasis on the distinctiveness of
these components can be reconciled with other prominent
structural models (presented below) in which associations
among the three SWB components are a defining feature.
Model 2: SWB as Hierarchical Construct
Description and Supporting Evidence. Despite the regularity
with which the separability of LS, PA, and NA components
has been emphasized, the commonality among SWB com-
ponents also has been highlighted. In early research on
well-being, some investigators reported strong positive
294 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
correlations between global ratings of LS and positive (vs.
negative) affective experience (e.g., Campbell, Converse, &
Rodgers, 1976; Kammann, Farry, & Herbison, 1984), sug-
gesting the presence of a “common underlying construct”
(Lohmann, 1977, p. 74). In support of this notion, Larsen,
Diener, and Emmons (1985) reported factor analytic evi-
dence indicating that measures of LS, happiness,3 and affect
loaded moderately to strongly onto a single factor (ls rang-
ing in magnitude from .40 to .87). Other investigators also
have employed exploratory factor analysis to show that mea-
sures of LS, PA, and NA all load strongly onto a single latent
component (e.g., McNeil, Stones, & Kozma, 1986; Sheldon
et al., 2004; Sheldon & Hoon, 2007; Sheldon & Lyubomirsky,
2006). Collectively, these studies suggest that the satisfaction
and affect components of SWB are “two sides of the same
coin” (Biswas-Diener, Vitterso, & Diener, 2005, p. 221) that
form “a strong, general, subjective well-being factor” (Suh et
al., 1998, p. 484; also see Diener, 1994, 1995; Diener, Diener,
& Diener, 1995; Diener et al., 1999; Diener, Sandvik, Pavot, &
Gallagher, 1991; Diener, Suh, & Oishi, 1997; Kim-Prieto,
Diener, Tamir, Scollon, & Diener, 2005; Pavot & Diener, 1993,
2008; Seidlitz, Wyer, & Diener, 1997; Tov & Diener, 2007).
Consistent with this view, a composite SWB score is some-
times derived as the combination of LS, PA, and reverse-
scored NA (e.g., Elliot et al., 2006; Malka & Chatman, 2003;
Nes, Roysamb, Tambs, Harris, & Reichborn-Kjennerud,
2006; Sheldon et al., 2004; Sheldon & Hoon, 2007; Sheldon &
Lyubomirsky, 2006; Vitterso, 2001, 2004).
Expanding this conceptualization of a unitary SWB,
researchers have advocated for a hierarchical structure com-
prising a higher order SWB factor and three lower order
components (see Figure 2). For example, in early research on
well-being, Liang (1984, 1985) provided confirmatory factor
analytic evidence of a higher order latent well-being factor
with strong loadings from latent first-order factors, including
LS and affect (also see L. K. George, 1981; Lawton, 1982,
1983a, 1983b; Liang & Bollen, 1983, 1985; Stones & Kozma,
1980, 1985). The hallmark of these early hierarchical models
was a superordinate well-being construct thought to be respon-
sible for the correlations among various first-order compo-
nents that typically included LS, PA, and NA. Similarly,
Diener and colleagues have described SWB in terms of both
global well-being and distinguishable LS, PA, and NA com-
ponents (e.g., Diener, Napa Scollon, & Lucas, 2003; Diener &
Tov, 2007; Larsen et al., 1985; Oishi et al., 2007).
In support of these notions, confirmatory factor analysis
has been employed to show that a latent second-order SWB
factor can explain the covariance among the three latent first-
order factors. For example, Arthaud-Day, Rode, Mooney,
and Near (2005) demonstrated that in multiple samples, a
higher order latent SWB factor had factor loadings from first-
order LS, PA, and NA factors ranging in absolute magnitude
from .18 to .77 (Mdn = .32; also see Lawrence & Liang,
1988; Linley, Maltby, Wood, Osborne, & Hurling, 2009;
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
LS +
+
PA SWB
–
NA
Figure 2. Model 2—Subjective well-being (SWB) as a hierarchical
construct
Note: In this structural model, SWB is conceptualized as a latent higher
order factor, reflected in three first-order indicators: life satisfaction
(LS), positive affect (PA), and negative affect (NA). Associations among
the three first-order components are assumed to be a result of (and
thus explained by) latent SWB. Factor loadings of the three indicators on
the latent SWB construct, shown by directional arrows, are assumed to
be substantive. + indicates an anticipated positive loading; – indicates an
anticipated negative loading.
Molnar, Busseri, Perrier, & Sadava, 2009; Vitterso, 2001).
Based on such evidence, many other researchers also have
endorsed a hierarchical conceptualization of SWB (e.g., Busseri,
Sadava, & DeCourville, 2007; Chamberlain, 1988; Ho &
Cheng, 2007; Kozma, Stone, & Stones, 2000; Malka &
Chatman, 2003; McCulloch, 1991; McNeil et al., 1986; Nes
et al., 2006; Robinson, Crawford Solberg, Vargas, & Tamir,
2003; Sheldon & Hoon, 2007; Sheldon & Lyubomirsky,
2006; Shmotkin & Hadari, 1996; Vitterso, 2004; Vitterso &
Nilsen, 2002; Wallace & Bergeman, 2007; Wiese, 2007).
Importantly, although substantial loadings of the first-
order components on the higher order SWB factor are typi-
cally observed, the magnitudes of these factor loadings often
fall well short of unity, suggesting substantial variance spe-
cific to LS, PA, and NA (i.e., independent of the higher order
SWB factor), as demonstrated in the example provided above
from Arthaud-Day et al. (2005; also see Busseri et al., 2007;
Vitterso, 2004). Consequently, rather than focusing exclu-
sively on the latent higher order SWB factor, some research-
ers employing a hierarchical construct approach have emphasized
the importance of examining both the higher order SWB fac-
tor and the lower order LS, PA, and NA components (e.g.,
Arthaud-Day et al., 2005; Busseri et al., 2007; Chamberlain,
1988; McCulloch, 1991).
Commentary. From the perspective of a contemporary hierar-
chical construct structural conceptualization, a complete
account of SWB requires attention to both a global SWB fac-
tor and three first-order factors. In several studies, researchers
Busseri and Sadava 295
have examined correlates or predictors of a composite SWB
score or a latent higher order SWB factor along with separate
LS, PA, and NA scores (e.g., Elliot et al., 2006; Sheldon et al.,
2004; Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2006; Vitterso, 2001, 2004;
Wallace & Bergeman, 2007). For example, Vitterso (2001)
found that extraversion (controlling for neuroticism) was
uniquely related to PA but not with LS, NA, or a composite
SWB score. If such a hybrid structural approach was investi-
gated systematically across studies, the nomological net-
works of the higher order SWB factor and each of the three
first-order components could be evaluated simultaneously
(Busseri et al., 2007). Ultimately, the tabulation of such find-
ings across studies could provide extensive information con-
cerning the commonalities and dissociations between a
higher order SWB factor and its first-order LS, PA, and NA
components.
An important unresolved issue concerning the hierarchi-
cal construct conceptualization pertains to the nature of the
associations among SWB components. Without positive
relations between LS and PA and negative relations between
NA and both LS and PA, a latent factor model of SWB is not
tenable. Although reviewers have commented on SWB-
related findings concerning associations between PA and
NA (Schimmack, 2008), an empirical review encompassing
relations among all three SWB components has yet to be
reported. In some studies, including the factor analytic stud-
ies summarized above, substantive positive correlations
between LS and PA and substantive negative correlations
between LS and NA have been observed. However, the asso-
ciation between PA and NA varies across studies and appears
to be moderated by several factors including the rating scale
employed, affect descriptors used, age of the sample, and
cultural group surveyed (Schimmack & Crites, 2005). Con-
sequently, the viability and generalizability of a hierarchical
conceptualization would appear to hinge on demographic
and methodological factors, including the type of measure-
ment instrument employed and the culture of the respon-
dents. More generally, a long-standing debate persists
concerning the structure of positive and affective experience
as orthogonal factors (e.g., Cacioppo et al., 1999; Fredrickson,
2001; Watson et al., 1999) versus opposing ends of a single
affect valence continuum (e.g., Russell & Barrett, 1999). At
present, therefore, the tenability of a hierarchical SWB con-
struct based on a consistent pattern of correlations among
LS, PA, and NA is uncertain.
An additional issue is the causal status of a higher order
latent SWB factor. A hierarchical construct model assumes
that the higher order latent factor is responsible for produc-
ing the common variance among LS, PA, and NA and should
determine (at least in part) the variability in all three compo-
nents. To date, however, these implications have not been
systematically tested despite their fundamental importance
to establishing the validity of a hierarchical conceptualiza-
tion of the tripartite structure of SWB.
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
Even if consistent evidence concerning the generaliz-
ability of a latent higher order SWB factor were found,
such evidence would not clarify the meaning of the latent
factor. A higher order factor spanning LS, PA, and NA
components has been interpreted as an underlying, global
sense of satisfaction and happiness with one’s life (e.g.,
Andrews & Withey, 1976; Arthaud-Day et al., 2005; Liang,
1985; Seidlitz et al., 1997), a personal tendency toward
positive (vs. negative) appraisals for one’s life along a
global good–bad dimension (Cummins & Nistico, 2002;
Diener, Napa Scollon, Oishi, Dzokoto, & Suh, 2000; Oishi
& Diener, 2001; Vitterso, 2004; Vitterso & Nilsen, 2002)
similar to a positivity halo (Schimmack et al., 2008), and a
reflection of one’s beliefs about oneself and one’s emotions
rather than an accurate portrayal one’s life to date (Robin-
son et al., 2003; Robinson et al., 2004). The variety of these
proposals highlights an ambiguity concerning the meaning
of the common variance among SWB components—argu-
ably the central feature of the hierarchical construct struc-
tural conceptualization.
Model 3: SWB as a Causal System
Description and Supporting Evidence. Another prominent struc-
tural approach conceptualizes SWB as a system of causally
related components. Specifically, LS is treated as an out-
come of PA and NA, wherein PA and NA make independent
contributions to LS (see Figure 3). For example, Bradburn
(1969) conceptualized well-being as resulting from the rela-
tive strengths of orthogonal PA and NA factors, such that the
joint experience of high PA and low NA was anticipated to
result in the most positive life evaluations. Similarly, Costa
and McCrae (1980) proposed that positive and negative
affective experiences are “subjectively balanced by an indi-
vidual to arrive at a net sense of subjective well-being” (p. 675;
also see Brenner, 1975; Kozma & Stones, 1980). Further-
more, according to Diener and colleagues, people use infor-
mation about positive and negative affective experiences
when constructing global SWB judgments such that long-
term affect “accounts for half of the variability” in LS
(Kim-Prieto et al., 2005, p. 284; also see Diener, 1994;
Diener, Napa Scollon, & Lucas, 2003; Diener, Lucas, Oishi,
& Suh, 2002; Emmons & Diener, 1985). For example,
Schimmack et al. (2002) reported that across samples of var-
ious cultural groups, PA and NA each contributed to a “hedonic
balance” factor, which then predicted LS (standardized path
coefficients ranged from .48 to .76).
Other researchers also employ a causal system approach
in which PA and NA are treated as predictors of LS (e.g.,
Cheng, 2004; Davern & Cummins, 2006; Davern, Cummins,
& Stokes, 2007; J. M. George, 1991; Klonowicz, 2001;
Kozma, Stone, Stones, Hannah, & McNeil, 1990; Larsen &
Prizmic, 2008; Lent, 2004; McKennell, 1978; Schimmack,
2008; Schimmack et al., 2002, 2008; Singh & Jha, 2008). In
296 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
SWB
PA
+ Despite these apparent advantages of conceptualizing the
LS
– nents creates several ambiguities. For example, it is unclear
NA
Figure 3. Model 3—Subjective well-being (SWB) as a causal
system
In this structural model, SWB comprises a series of causal relations
among components. Specifically, positive affect (PA) and negative affect
(NA) are conceptualized as inputs to life satisfaction (LS), as indicated
by the pair of directional arrows. + indicates an anticipated positive
path coefficient; – indicates an anticipated negative path coefficient. The
correlation between PA and NA, shown by a dotted, double-headed
arrow, is not a key feature of the model.
some versions of this model, satisfaction with one’s life is
considered to be “the essence” of SWB (Davern al., 2007, p.
432; also see Oishi & Koo, 2008). In other models, SWB is
used in reference to the system of variables rather than just
the LS component (e.g., Schimmack et al., 2002). A com-
mon rationale for a causal system approach is the proposition
that people rely on affective information (e.g., how they feel
about their lives and/or the balance of positive versus nega-
tive emotions reactions or memories) when forming assess-
ments of overall LS (e.g., Kozma et al., 1990; Kuppens,
Realo, & Diener, 2008; Schimmack, 2008; Schimmack
et al., 2002, 2008). Other researchers have cast PA and NA as
indicators of basic affective dispositions that influence the
types of personal experiences and reactions to life events
and, ultimately, affect LS judgments (J. M. George, 1991;
Kozma et al., 1990). Thus, across causal system structural
conceptualizations, PA and NA are thought to directly influ-
ence LS, either because of the impact of affective informa-
tion on satisfaction judgments or as a result of dispositional
tendencies toward positive and negative affective experi-
ences and reactions to one’s life.
Commentary. A potential advantage of this structural model is
the delineation of just one key criterion: a highly satisfying
life. Accordingly, much could be learned about SWB from
studying the correlates and predictors of LS. In addition to
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
this parsimony, the causal system model does not require or
constrain the PA–NA correlation to a particular direction or
magnitude and, therefore, is unhindered by the ongoing
debate concerning PA and NA as opposing versus orthogo-
nal dimensions of affective experience. Rather, the relative
contributions of PA and NA to predicting LS can be esti-
mated simultaneously, regardless of the nature of the relation
between the two predictors.
tripartite structure of SWB in terms of a causal system,
important implications remain unaddressed. Using the term
SWB to refer to a system of relations among three compo-
whether all three components need to be included in a given
study or whether research examining LS without PA and NA
would adequately inform SWB. It is not uncommon for
investigators to frame their studies as explorations of SWB
when only the LS component is measured (e.g., Lucas, 2007;
Napier & Jost, 2008), suggesting that some researchers view
SWB as interchangeable or synonymous with LS judgments.
Perhaps, therefore, the causal system conceptualization is
not actually a three-component model of SWB in which LS,
PA, and NA are primary indicators of SWB per se but rather
a single-component model comprising LS in which PA and
NA are secondary (predictive) factors. Thus, it is unclear
what SWB refers to in the causal system model and what
status PA and NA have with respect to SWB in this model
(e.g., as indicators vs. predictors).
Another limitation is that researchers affirming the causal
system model have not provided evidence that PA and NA
cause LS. Instead, studies examining PA and NA as predic-
tors of LS have employed cross-sectional correlational
designs in which all three SWB components are measured
concurrently. Direct evidence has yet to be provided show-
ing that PA and NA cause LS or even predict changes in LS
over time or across situations. Consequently, the defining
feature of the causal system structural model of SWB
remains unsubstantiated.
Model 4: SWB as a Composite
Description and Supporting Evidence. A fourth structural model
specifies all three components as inputs to SWB. Beiser
(1974), for example, proposed that one’s general sense of
well-being is determined by positive and negative affective
reactions as well as a cognitive judgment concerning overall
contentment with one’s life. In this study, measures of LS,
PA, and NA each contributed uniquely to the prediction of a
global sense of well-being (prs = .30, .31, and –.30, respec-
tively, ps < .001). Andrews and Crandall (1976) advanced a
similar model and delineated three separate factors to explain
variance in evaluations about one’s life as a whole: PA, NA,
and cognition (Andrews & McKennell, 1980; Andrews &
Withey, 1976; McKennell & Andrews, 1980). Thus, in these
Busseri and Sadava 297
early models, global life assessments were thought to result
from affective experiences and cognitive evaluations.
Structural models of this sort are consistent with a com-
posite view of SWB. A composite approach assumes that the
combination of LS, PA, and NA is needed to fully capture
the notion of SWB because LS, PA, and NA are joint con-
tributors to one’s overall sense of well-being. From this per-
spective, all three components (LS, PA, and NA) are required
to assess SWB as the absence of any one component would
necessarily omit a key ingredient. Thus, a composite
approach conceptualizes the structure of SWB in terms of a
simple recipe composing a blend of LS, PA, and NA.
Commentary. Composite scores are appropriate in several situ-
ations, including those in which the assumptions of the stan-
dard latent factor approach do not hold (Bollen & Lennox,
1991). Typically, a latent factor is modeled as if it were the
cause of its indicators, that is, the indicators are assumed to
reflect the latent factor and the covariance among indicators is
used to infer the underlying latent factor (Kline, 1998). In the
study of personality traits, for example, extraversion is typi-
cally conceptualized as a latent (i.e., unmeasured) tendency
inferred from the co-occurrence of observable behaviors and
characteristics such as talkativeness and excitement seeking
(McCrae & John, 1992). However, this standard approach
assumes that the indicators are interchangeable manifesta-
tions of the latent construct, that a change in the latent con-
struct would change each indicator in a similar fashion, and
that the indicators share the same set of antecedents and con-
sequences (Jarvis, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, 2003). As we
have seen, there is no consensus among SWB researchers
concerning the appropriateness of these assumptions.
In contrast, a “latent composite variable” (Bollen & Lennox,
1991; MacCallum & Browne, 1993) is thought to be pro-
duced by a set of “causal indicators” (Bollen & Lennox,
1991). That is, the indicators are thought to produce the
latent variable, rather than vice versa. A latent composite
approach assumes that the indicators are not equivalent man-
ifestations of the same latent construct, that a change in the
composite would not necessarily change the indicators, that
the indicators do not necessarily share the same set of ante-
cedents and consequences, and that change in any one causal
indicator would create a change in the composite (Edwards
& Bagozzi, 2000; MacCallum & Browne, 1993). For exam-
ple, higher (vs. lower) socioeconomic status (SES) can be
thought of as emerging from a combination of education
level, occupation type, and income level such that a change
in any one of these three causal indicators produces a change
in SES level, rather than vice versa (Bollen & Lennox, 1991).
Importantly, if paths from each causal indicator to the latent
composite variable are given equal weights (assuming a com-
mon scaling metric across indicators), then the resulting latent
composite variable is identical to a measured composite score
formed by averaging or summing the same set of unit-weighted
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
LS +
+
PA SWB
–
NA
Figure 4. Model 4—Subjective well-being (SWB) as a composite
Note: In this structural model, SWB is conceptualized as a recipe, formed
through the combination of three causal indicators (i.e., ingredients), life
satisfaction (LS), positive affect (PA), and negative affect (NA), as reflected
by the three directional arrows. + indicates an anticipated positive
path coefficient; – indicates an anticipated negative path coefficient.
Correlations among the three causal indicators, shown by the dotted,
double-headed arrows, are not of primary interest in this model.
indicators (Bollen & Lennox, 1991; MacCallum & Browne,
1993; MacKenzie, Podsakoff, & Jarvis, 2005). Accordingly, a
latent composite SWB variable could be modeled as resulting
from the combination of its three primary ingredients, that is,
LS, PA, and NA (see Figure 4). If the latent composite SWB
variable were estimated using constrained path coefficients of 1,
1, and -1 from standardized scores for LS, PA, and NA, respec-
tively, the resulting latent composite variable would be mathe-
matically equivalent to a measured composite score formed by
averaging or summing standardized LS, PA, and (reverse-
scored) NA scores.
As we have noted, however, investigators assuming a
hierarchical construct structural model (Model 2) have
employed composite SWB scores (typically a unit-weighted
combination of standardized scores for LS, PA, and reverse-
scored NA) as stand-ins for a higher order latent SWB factor
(e.g., McNeil et al., 1986; Sheldon & Hoon, 2007). Method-
ologists have emphasized that composites of this sort do not
provide consistent or valid estimates of an underlying latent
factor assumed by the hierarchical construct approach (e.g.,
Bentler & Kano, 1990; Bollen & Lennox, 1991; Grice, 2001;
Steiger, 1990). Therefore, although studies examining cor-
relates and predictors of measured composite SWB scores
are typically based on the assumption of a hierarchical SWB
construct (i.e., Model 2), such investigations actually pro-
vide information concerning a composite structural model
(i.e., Model 4) in which SWB is produced by (rather than
manifested in) its three main causal ingredients.
Another consideration is that through the use of structural
equation modeling (SEM), both the latent composite SWB
298 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
variable and each of the three causal indicators can be exam-
ined in relation to other variables of interest. Because the
composite can be estimated as a latent variable created by its
indicators rather than as a measured computed score (which
would be statistically dependent on the set of its indicators if
analyzed in the same analytic model), both the latent com-
posite variable and the set of causal indicators can be exam-
ined in the same model. Consequently, predictors of a latent
composite SWB variable could be assessed and unique rela-
tions with each of the causal indicators (i.e., LS, PA, and
NA) could be tested simultaneously. Through employing
such a method, information concerning the nomological net-
work of SWB as a composite could be explored alongside
LS, PA, and NA as separate ingredients.
Furthermore, although a latent composite variable model
assumes that LS, PA, and NA each contribute to the SWB
composite in a particular statistical direction (i.e., positivity,
positivity, and negativity, respectively), this model makes no
claims concerning the nature of the correlations among the
three causal indicators themselves. Indeed, the common
variance among components is not important in this particu-
lar conceptualization; rather, emphasis is given to the combi-
nation of components irrespective of the degree to which
these components are themselves interrelated. Consequently,
a composite conceptualization of the structure of SWB can
accommodate various patterns of correlation among LS, PA,
and NA—rather than assuming independence (as in Model 1)
or requiring substantial correlations among at least some
components (as in Model 2 and Model 3).
The flip side to this flexibility, however, is that it is unclear
how to interpret the observed correlations among LS, PA, and
NA components with respect to a latent composite SWB. As
with the separate components model (Model 1), although this
common variance may simply reflect naturally occurring
covariation, it could also be interpreted as a methodological
artifact (e.g., resulting from exclusive reliance on self-report)
or a positive self-evaluation halo reflecting a general tendency
toward evaluating one’s life positively. Both interpretations,
however, assume that the meaning of the covariation among
LS, PA, and NA in a composite model of SWB (i.e., Model 4)
is not informative with respect to SWB.
Furthermore, a potentially confusing implication of a
composite model is that a latent composite SWB variable in
which the paths from standardized scores for LS, PA, and
NA were fixed to 1, 1, and –1, respectively, would be statis-
tically equivalent to a unit-weighted measured SWB com-
posite score. As we have seen, this latter approach is
typically employed by researchers conceptualizing SWB as
a hierarchical construct (Model 2), despite cautions from
methodologists. Thus, utilization of a latent composite
SWB approach by proponents of a composite structural
conceptualization (Model 4) may create confusion regard-
ing the meaning and interpretation of results based on a
composite SWB score.
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
High SWB Low LS
high LS low LS
high PA moderate PA
low NA moderate NA
Figure 5. Model 5—Subjective well-being (SWB) as a
configuration of components
Note: In this structural model, SWB is conceptualized as an integrated
system of components, organized within individuals in terms of
distinct configurations of life satisfaction (LS), positive affect (PA), and
negative affect (NA). No particular pattern of correlations among SWB
components is assumed. Rather, individuals, or subgroups of individuals,
are expected to differ with respect to their SWB configurations, which
could include congruous and incongruous profiles, examples of which are
illustrated, respectively, by the “high SWB” and “low LS” configurations.
Model 5: SWB as a Configuration
of Components
Description and Supporting Evidence. A fifth structural concep-
tualization focuses on how LS, PA, and NA are configured
within individuals. Since the beginning of research on SWB,
“high SWB” has been described as the within-individual
combination of high LS, frequent PA, and infrequent NA
(e.g., Andrews & Withey, 1976; Diener, 1984). Various
other combinations of SWB components also have been pro-
posed. Diener and Lucas (1999), for example, speculated
that although persons reporting high levels of pleasant affect
and little unpleasant affect could be described as “happy,”
someone experiencing high levels of both pleasant and
unpleasant affect might be labeled “highly emotional.” Oth-
ers might be satisfied with their lives despite experiencing
infrequent PA and frequent NA or dissatisfied with their
lives despite frequent PA and infrequent NA (Arthaud-Day
et al., 2005). Even individuals reporting similar overall lev-
els of SWB may be characterized by distinct hedonic profiles
(Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). These proposals all emphasize
combinations of SWB components as they occur within
individuals.
Consistent with these notions, Shmotkin (2005) defined
SWB as an integrated system of components in which LS,
PA, and NA are organized within individuals in terms of dis-
tinct configurations (see Figure 5). Rather than fixed disposi-
tions, SWB configurations are conceptualized in Shmotkin’s
model as flexible and adaptive modes of experience that
allow individuals to maximize positive functioning in the face
of adversity or threat. In support of a configuration model, a
Busseri and Sadava 299
small number of studies has differentiated distinct subgroups
of individuals using cross-tabulations of pairs of SWB rat-
ings, typically global assessments of LS and happiness (e.g.,
McKennell, 1978; Michalos, 1980; Shmotkin, 1998; Shmotkin,
Berkovich, & Cohen, 2006). Other researchers have used
cut scores to define high versus low SWB groups based on
measured composite SWB scores. For example, Diener and
Seligman (2002) used a composite measure of SWB formed
from the combination of various measures of LS, PA, and NA
to identify and compare participants in the top and bottom
10% of the distribution on the composite SWB score. Investi-
gators have also examined SWB configurations using empiri-
cal means to identify individuals characterized by unique
combinations of LS, PA, and NA. For example, Busseri,
Sadava, Molnar, and DeCourville (2009) used cluster analy-
sis to identity five distinct SWB configurations that replicated
across two large samples. As anticipated by Shmotkin (2005),
the configurations identified by Busseri et al. included pat-
terns of high SWB (i.e., high LS, high PA, low NA) and low
SWB, as well as various “incongruous” profiles, including a
profile of low LS despite moderate PA and NA (also see
Bergman & Daukantaite, 2009).
A configuration approach thus emphasizes the idiographic
nature of SWB in which various SWB structures characterize
particular individuals rather than one structure applying to all
individuals. A configuration approach is also “person centered”
(e.g., Bergman & El-Khouri, 2003; Bergman, Magnusson, &
El-Khouri, 2001; Magnusson, 2003) in that emphasis is given
to organized patterns of SWB as an integrated system func-
tioning within individuals rather than simply to the individual
differences in LS, PA, and NA. From this perspective differ-
ences in SWB configurations should have adaptive signifi-
cance such that knowledge concerning SWB should accrue
from better understanding how individuals characterized by
distinct configurations of LS, PA, and NA differ with respect
to personality characteristics and life circumstances and in
various domains of functioning (Bergman & Daukantaite,
2009; Busseri et al., 2009; Shmotkin et al., 2006).
Commentary. One advantage of treating SWB as a configuration
of components is a supporting conceptual framework (Shmot-
kin, 2005) from which hypotheses concerning the structure and
function of SWB can be derived and tested empirically. A con-
figural conceptualization may also provide avenues for new
insights concerning, for example, the unique functional signifi-
cance of distinct SWB profiles and the possibility that a high
SWB profile may not be the only configuration indicative of
optimal human functioning. For example, according to Busseri
et al. (2009), individuals characterized by the combination of
moderate LS, low PA, and low NA reported levels of psycho-
logical, physical, and interpersonal functioning that were com-
parable in several ways to people characterized by the
combination of high LS, high PA, and low NA (i.e., high SWB).
Another advantage is that a configuration approach to the
structure of SWB requires no assumptions concerning the
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
nature of the relations among LS, PA, and NA. Rather, a
configural perspective is consistent with a growing body of
evidence suggesting that the relation between PA and NA,
and thus the structure of SWB, may vary both between indi-
viduals and within individuals over time. According to the
evaluative space model (Cacioppo et al., 1999), for example,
all potential combinations of activated and deactivated posi-
tive and negative affective experiences are possible, with the
specific activation pattern depending on the situation and
eliciting stimuli. Similarly, in the dynamic model of affect
(Reich, Zautra, & Davis, 2003), PA and NA are thought to be
independently functioning systems and the relation between
them is expected to become increasingly stronger and more
negative as stress levels increase.
Despite these advantages, a configural structural concep-
tualization requires several assumptions concerning the
underlying nature of SWB that are likely to be contentious.
As we have seen, research on SWB has focused almost
exclusively on relations involving LS, PA, and NA as dimen-
sional variables with interpretive emphasis given to individ-
ual differences in rank ordering on each SWB component.
Identifying SWB configurations, in contrast, requires the
classification of individuals into different patterns based on
distinct combinations of LS, PA, and NA. To date, research-
ers have employed ad hoc cut scores and exploratory cluster
analysis to identify distinct SWB configurations (e.g., Bergman
& Daukantaite, 2009; Busseri et al., 2009; Shmotkin, 1998)
rather than confirmatory techniques. Furthermore, ongoing
debates in other areas of psychological research concerning
the dimensional versus categorical nature of related phenom-
ena such as personality traits (e.g., Asendorpf, 2003; Markon
& Krueger, 2005) attest to the difficulty in establishing
unequivocally the utility of a person-centered approach.
An additional limitation of the configural approach is
that there is little clarity concerning which SWB configura-
tions should be observed according to supporting concep-
tual models (e.g., Bergman & Daukantaite, 2009; Shmotkin,
2005). More generally, it is also uncertain which of the
various potential configurations best captures the notion of
SWB, or whether SWB refers to a general system of com-
ponents rather than to a particular configuration of LS, PA,
and NA.
Commonalities and Discrepancies
Among Prominent Structural Models
Despite the many differences among the five models of the
tripartite structure of SWB that have been advanced over the
past four decades (see Table 1 for summary), there appears
to be widespread agreement among SWB researchers con-
cerning the importance of examining global life evaluations
and affective reactions to one’s life in terms of LS, PA, and
NA. Indeed, all five structural conceptualizations of SWB
specify LS, PA, and NA as the primary components of SWB.
This commonality provides an important starting point for
300 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)

Table 1. Summary of the Five Prominent Models of the Tripartite Structure of Subjective Well-Being (SWB)

Model Description of SWB Emphasis Key strengths Key weaknesses

1. Separate Three separate components Separateness of LS, PA, Simplicity Status of SWB unclear
components (LS, PA, and NA) and NA as distinct
components
No assumptions Interpretation of
concerning associations correlations among
among components components unclear
2. Hierarchical Higher order factor Commonality among Informs nomological Requires negative
construct with three first-order LS, PA, and NA as networks of higher correlation between
indicators (LS, PA, and manifestations of latent order SWB and first- PA and NA
NA) SWB order components
Meaning of higher order
SWB unclear
Lack of evidence
concerning SWB as
common cause of LS,
PA, and NA
3.  Causal system LS is key criterion, Causal relations among Parsimony (single Referent for SWB
influenced by PA and NA components: PA and NA criterion) unclear
as inputs to LS
No constraint on PA–NA Lack of evidence
relation concerning causal
effect of PA and NA
on LS
4.  Composite Combination of three SWB as a composite score Informs nomological Meaning of associations
primary ingredients (LS, (i.e., LS + PA – NA) networks of composite among components
PA, and NA) SWB and ingredients unclear
No restrictions on Confusion with
associations among composite scores
components employed by
proponents of Model 2
5.  Configural Components (LS, PA, and Configurations or patterns Clear framework linking Lack of evidence
NA) organized in distinct of SWB components conceptualization and concerning categorical
ways within individuals operationalization nature of SWB
Flexibility concerning Number and nature
nature of associations of hypothesized
among components configurations unclear
Note: LS = life satisfaction; PA = positive affect; NA = negative affect.

comparison among structural models, as detailed below (see
summary in Table 2).
Status of SWB. A primary point of divergence among the promi-
nent structural models concerns the best way to conceptualize
SWB. In the separate components model (Model 1), SWB is
considered to be a research domain and no causal connection
among components is implied. In the hierarchical construct
conceptualization (Model 2), SWB is a higher order latent fac-
tor assumed to be responsible for producing the correlations
among components. In the causal system model (Model 3),
SWB refers to a network of relations in which PA and NA are
thought to affect LS. In the composite conceptualization (Model
4), SWB is created by the combination of LS, PA, and NA. In
the configuration model (Model 5), SWB is an integrated sys-
tem manifested within individuals as distinct configurations
rather than a specific configuration of LS, PA, and NA.
Emphasis of Separability Versus Commonality Among SWB
Components. Another important issue concerns the relative
emphasis on the separability versus commonality among
SWB components. The separate components approach
(Model 1) focuses exclusively on the distinctiveness of LS,
PA, and NA. In contrast, both the hierarchical construct
(Model 2) and causal system (Model 3) conceptualizations
emphasize the interconnections among SWB components,
although these latter two models differ in their respective
focus on the common variance among versus directional
relations between LS, PA, and NA. Between these extremes,
the composite approach (Model 4) treats LS, PA, and NA as
separate causal indicators which, together, produce SWB,
whereas the configuration approach (Model 5) emphasizes
the joint examination of within-individual combinations of
LS, PA, and NA to fully capture the organized, integrated
nature of the SWB system.

Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014

Busseri and Sadava 301

Table 2. Summary of Commonalities and Discrepancies Among Prominent Models of the Tripartite Structure of Subjective Well-Being
(SWB)

Separability vs. Meaning of shared

commonality of variance among Nature of PA–NA
Model Status of SWB components components relationship Role of components
1. Separate Research domain Separateness ? Not central Separate aspects of broad
components research domain
2. Hierarchical Hierarchical Commonality Underlying (latent) At least moderate in Reflective indicators of
construct (latent) SWB magnitude; negative higher order SWB; that
construct is, latent SWB causes
correlations among
components
3.  Causal system Network of Commonality Causal impact of PA, Not central PA and NA as causal
relations NA on LS predictors of LS (key
criterion)
4.  Composite Amalgam of LS, PA, ? ? Not central Causal indicators of a
and NA composite SWB; that is, LS,
PA, and NA produce SWB
5.  Configural Integrated system; ? ? Not central Separate aspects of
typology integrated system
Note:  LS = life satisfaction; PA = positive affect; NA = negative affect; ? = a lack of clarity in the model.

Interpretation of the Shared Variance Among SWB Components.
A related source of disagreement pertains to the interpretation
of the shared versus unique variance among components. The
hierarchical construct approach (Model 2) assumes that an
underlying sense of SWB is the cause of the positive correla-
tions between LS and PA and the negative correlations
between both of these components and NA. In contrast, under
the causal system approach (Model 3), relations between LS
and PA and between LS and NA are interpreted as evidence
for the predictive roles of PA and NA as inputs to LS rather
than treating all three SWB components as indicators of the
same underlying phenomenon. For the other three models
(Model 1, Model 4, and Model 5), the meaning of shared vari-
ance among SWB components is not clear.
Association Between PA and NA. A related issue concerns the
magnitude and direction of the relation between PA and NA.
A substantive negative correlation between PA and NA is
critical to the viability of the hierarchical construct model
(Model 2). In contrast, in the separate components, causal sys-
tem, composite, and configural models (Models 1, 3, 4, and 5,
respectively) the relation between PA and NA is not central to
understanding SWB. Indeed, these models can be tested and
results interpreted regardless of the PA–NA relation. With
respect to the ongoing debate concerning the fundamental
structure of affective experience, therefore, all of the models
except Model 2 are viable regardless of whether PA and NA
are orthogonal dimensions of affective experience or opposing
ends on a bipolar affect valence continuum.
Roles of LS, PA, and NA. The structural models also differ with
respect to the roles specified for the three components of
SWB. The separate components, hierarchical construct,
composite, and configuration models (Models 1, 2, 4 and
5, respectively) each ascribe to LS, PA, and NA equivalent
conceptual roles (within a given model) as indicators of
SWB. However, the roles played by these three components
differ across models: separate aspects of a research domain
(Model 1), reflective indicators of a higher order latent
factor (Model 2), causal indicators of a latent composite
variable (Model 4), and separate aspects of an integrated sys-
tem (Model 5). In contrast, the causal system model (Model 3)
does not ascribe comparable roles to the three SWB compo-
nents but rather delineates PA and NA as predictor variables
and LS as the key criterion.
Dimensional Versus Categorical Nature of SWB. A final point of
divergence among structural models concerns the assumption of
an underlying dimensional versus categorical nature of SWB. In
the first four models, emphasis is given to associations involving
LS, PA, and NA as dimensional variables, each ranging from
low to high values. In contrast, the configuration approach
(Model 5) requires categorizing individuals based on unique pat-
terns of LS, PA, and NA rather than emphasizing individual dif-
ferences in the level or amount on each dimension.
Implications
The emergence of five structural conceptualizations has
important implications for the study of SWB. As we describe
below, improving our understanding of the structure of SWB
will have wide-ranging benefits with respect to measurement,
analysis and interpretation, and integration and synthesis.
Measurement. Diener and colleagues have repeatedly empha-
sized the importance of measuring LS, PA, and NA in

Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014

302 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
studies examining SWB. The availability of well-studied,
nonproprietary, and relatively brief self-report instruments
for assessing all three SWB components (e.g., Diener,
Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985; Watson et al., 1988)
makes this recommendation feasible in a wide range of
research situations. Studies continue to be published, how-
ever, in which the authors claim to have examined SWB
while measuring only one component. The question can be
raised, therefore, as to whether assessment of all three com-
ponents is necessary to advance our understanding of SWB.
In large part, the answer to this question depends on the
researcher’s conceptualization of the structure of SWB. From
the perspective of the separate components model (Model 1),
studying any of the three components of SWB, either together
or isolation, will advanced knowledge of SWB—particularly
if the term SWB is used to refer to a broad area of inquiry
rather than a psychological construct (e.g., Pavot, 2008). Simi-
larly, proponents of the causal systems model (Model 3) might
argue that knowledge of SWB could accrue from studies
examining LS even in isolation of PA and NA, given that LS
is sometimes considered to be the ultimate or key criterion of
interest in SWB research (e.g., Davern al., 2007; Oishi & Koo,
2008). With respect to the other three prominent structural
models, however, assessment of all three SWB components is
required to inform SWB: Consistent with the hierarchical con-
struct model (Model 2), a latent SWB factor is estimated from
the covariation among LS, PA, and NA; a composite SWB
score (Model 4) requires all three components to be treated as
ingredients to the SWB; and the configuration approach
(Model 5) can be best informed by considering how LS, PA,
and NA are organized in unique ways within individuals. With
respect to these latter three structural models, therefore, SWB
cannot be studied without attention to all three components.
Therefore, the first implication of the present review is that
for at least three of the five tripartite structural models of SWB
assessing all three components (LS, PA, and NA) is neces-
sary. Furthermore, given the current state of ambiguity con-
cerning the most appropriate structural model, we urge
researchers interested in studying SWB by examining LS, PA,
and NA as separate components or LS as the ultimate criterion
of interest to address the implications of this decision, recog-
nizing that from the perspective of the other structural concep-
tualizations, focusing on any individual component may not
inform SWB. Indeed, we recommend that researchers, review-
ers, and editors discontinue publishing works nominally
examining SWB when, in fact, all three components have not
been addressed in the same study unless a compelling ratio-
nale is provided for why this approach is appropriate and
explicit consideration is given to what the implications may be
of focusing on individual SWB components.
Analysis and Interpretation. Even if one has collected data on
all three components of SWB, some structural conceptual-
izations require the specification of a fourth variable to index
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
SWB. The separate components and causal system models
(Model 1 and Model 4, respectively) require only three vari-
ables—LS, PA, and NA. In contrast, the remaining three
structural approaches specify a fourth variable, including a
higher order factor (Model 2), a composite (Model 4), and a
categorical marker of distinct configurations (Model 5). Thus,
the required number of analysis variables differs across
structural conceptualizations.
Furthermore, the most appropriate type of analysis will
vary depending on the structural conceptualization one
adopts. The separate components model (Model 1) requires
researchers to examine the correlates, predictors, or potential
outcomes of LS, PA, and NA as separate outcomes. Such an
approach should also seek to control for the other two com-
ponents (e.g., PA and NA) when determining relations involv-
ing the third component (e.g., LS) to identify associations
and isolate variance that is unique to each SWB component.
In contrast, a hierarchical conceptualization (Model 2) requires
researchers to employ an SEM approach and estimate SWB
as a latent factor, manifested in the common variance among
its three indicators. Correlates, predictors, and potential out-
comes of this latent SWB factor could then be explored
along with simultaneous assessment of any residual links
involving the individual SWB components independent of
the higher order latent SWB factor. We urge proponents of a
hierarchical conceptualization to discontinue the use of a
composite SWB index as a stand-in for a higher order latent
SWB factor; as we have outlined above, an index score is
consistent, both statistically and conceptually, with a com-
posite conceptualization (Model 4) rather than a hierarchical
construct model of SWB.
To continue, proponents of the causal systems model
(Model 3) need to employ a multiple regression, path analy-
sis, or a SEM approach to test PA and NA as simultaneous
predictors of LS. Additional predictors (or correlates) of LS
could then be explored after first accounting for the hypoth-
esized proximal effects of PA and NA.
Further still, a basic approach to testing the composite
conceptualization (Model 4) would require researchers to
compute an SWB index (e.g., an aggregate of standardized
scores for LS, PA, and reverse-scored NA), which is then
explored in relation to other variables. Although less com-
monly employed, a more sophisticated approach would be to
employ SEM to estimate SWB as a latent composite variable
resulting from its three primary causal indicators. An impor-
tant advantage of this latter approach, compared to the use of
only a single SWB index, is that the correlates, predictors,
and potential outcomes of the latent composite SWB could
be explored simultaneously with the assessment of potential
unique relations involving LS, PA, and NA.
Finally, researchers examining a configural conceptual-
ization of the structure of SWB (Model 5) need to employ
a person-centered statistical approach to identify and then
compare among individuals characterized by distinct
Busseri and Sadava 303
configurations of LS, PA, and NA. Correlates, predictors,
and potential outcomes predicted by SWB configurations
could then be evaluated.
In light of these issues, the second major implication of
the present review is the need for careful consideration of and
explicit justification for the analytic approach employed to
examine SWB-related data. We realize that given the current
state of ambiguity regarding the structure of SWB, determin-
ing the best analytic approach is a choice that researchers
must make based on incomplete information. Regardless,
paralleling the need for researchers to explicitly identify the
structural conceptualization employed in a given study, the
choice of analytic strategy also needs to be justified explicitly
rather than simply reported, and consideration should be
given to potential repercussions of the analytic choice.
Integration and Synthesis. A prerequisite for facilitating accurate
interpretation of SWB-related findings is unambiguous speci-
fication of which structural conceptualization of SWB is being
considered. Several nuanced and informative empirical
reviews of the characteristics, correlates, and predictors of
SWB have been published (e.g., DeNeve & Cooper, 1999;
Diener, 1984; Diener et al., 1999; Howell & Howell, 2008;
Steel et al., 2008). However, these works have considered LS,
PA, and NA separately—consistent with the separate compo-
nents model of the structure of SWB (Model 1). In contrast,
little is known about the correlates, predictors, and potential
consequences of SWB as a hierarchical construct based on
reviews of research in which SWB is treated as a higher order
latent factor (Model 2), as a causal system based on reviews of
research in which PA and NA are treated as predictors of LS
(Model 3), as a composite of three primary ingredients based
on a review of research examining SWB as a composite index
or latent composite variable (Model 4), or as configurations of
components based on research examining SWB from a per-
son-centered perspective (Model 5).
Consequently, researchers employing one of these latter
four structural configurations (i.e., Models 2 through 5) nec-
essarily rely on reviews of the research literature treating
SWB as three separate components. However, it is not clear
how (and in what cases) the accumulated knowledge con-
cerning the nomological networks of LS, PA, and NA as
separate components applies to a latent higher order SWB
factor, to a composite SWB index, to the causal links among
PA, NA, and LS, or to SWB configurations. At present,
therefore, few integrative or summary statements can be
offered about SWB as a higher order latent factor, causal
system, composite, or configuration of components.
Given this situation, a third major implication of the pres-
ent review is that integration of SWB-related results may
require separate reviews of different research literatures
based on each of the five structural conceptualizations. Such
steps will aid in the integration and synthesis of existing
model-specific knowledge as well as knowledge about SWB
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
that may generalize across structural conceptualizations.
Until such steps have been undertaken, we believe it prudent
to emphasize that researchers should not assume that find-
ings based on one structural conceptualization of SWB apply
to alternative conceptualizations.
Steps Toward Deciding
Among Structural Models
Research addressing the disparities, inconsistencies, and
unanswered questions concerning the tripartite structure of
SWB is overdue. To our knowledge, no systematic attempt
has been made to compare competing structural models of
SWB or to consider the conceptual and theoretical implica-
tions for understanding SWB more generally. Consequently,
the combination of compelling theoretical and empirical
arguments for adopting one structural conceptualization of
SWB over the others has yet to be offered, and it is not clear
that such a proclamation would be supportable at present
given the ambiguities we have described. Similarly, in light
of the numerous differences among structural conceptualiza-
tions, integration of the five models into a single structural
framework for SWB may not be realistic. Our view is that
SWB researchers instead need to evaluate the viability of all
five models with the ultimate goal of deciding among the
various structural accounts based on a combination of con-
ceptual and empirical grounds. To these ends, there are sev-
eral valuable steps that should be given high priority.
Meta-Analysis. To date, hundreds of published empirical studies
have reported correlations among global self-reports of LS,
PA, and NA. A meta-analysis of these correlations would pro-
vide information central to the claims of several of the promi-
nent SWB structural models. For example, consistent with the
separate components model (Model 1) in which the relations
among SWB components are not considered consequential,
population estimates of the relations among all three SWB
components may reveal insignificant or significant but small
correlations among LS, PA, and NA. It is also conceivable that
there are too many conditionalizing factors and too much vari-
ability across studies to estimate a single, generalizable, and
reliable pattern of correlations among LS, PA, and NA (Diener,
1994, 2008; Pavot & Diener, 2008). Furthermore, with respect
to the viability of the hierarchical construct model (Model 2), if
the population estimates of the relations among global mea-
sures of LS, PA, and NA are not substantive, the generalizabil-
ity of a higher order latent SWB factor would be called into
question. Similarly, regardless of the estimated PA–NA rela-
tion, population estimates for the LS–PA and LS–NA relations
would also inform the viability of the causal system model
(Model 3) in which PA and NA are assumed to be significant
positive and negative predictors of LS, respectively. Clearly,
without both pairs of substantive relations, it would be hard to
justify a structural model of SWB treating PA and NA as inputs
304 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
to LS. Thus, a meta-analysis would provide information criti-
cal to understanding the structure of SWB, particularly with
respect to key assumptions in the separate components, hierar-
chical construct, and causal system models.
Compare and Contrast. As researchers have demonstrated with
respect to other multifaceted psychological phenomena (Carver,
1989; Marsh & Yeung, 1998; Wallace & Bergeman, 2007),
adopting one structural conceptualization and accompanying
analytic strategy rather than a comparative approach may result
in a loss of important information, create ambiguity concerning
the nature of relations with other variables of theoretical inter-
est, and lead to erroneous conclusions. In the present context,
some researchers have reported findings based on measured
composite SWB scores or latent higher order SWB factors
alongside the individual SWB components (e.g., Romero, Vil-
lar, Luengo, & Gomez-Fraguela, 2009; Sheldon et al., 2004;
Vitterso, 2004), and one study has compared results based on a
configuration approach against findings derived from treating
LS, PA, and NA as separate components (Bergman & Daukan-
taite, 2009). We are aware of no previously published studies,
however, in which all five structural models of SWB have been
contrasted with respect to associations and predictive relations
with other variables. Consequently, it is unclear the extent to
which results based on one structural approach and accompany-
ing analytic strategy would be similar to findings determined
based on any of the other conceptualizations. For example, it is
uncertain whether the five structural models would produce
similar or differing results concerning the correlates, predictors,
and potential consequences of SWB.
Yet an important consequence of the commonality among
structural conceptualizations in delineating LS, PA, and NA
as the components of SWB is that data from a study based on
one structural approach can be used to evaluate each of the
other structural models, assuming that all three SWB compo-
nents are assessed. For example, researchers examining the
association between a factor such as income and SWB could
evaluate the claim from the separate components model
(Model 1) that LS, PA, and NA are distinct components with
discriminable sets of associations with other variables. This
claim could be tested directly against the claim that SWB is
most appropriately structured as a hierarchical construct
(Model 2) by determining whether any of the individual
components have unique relations with income, independent
of a latent higher order SWB factor. Consistent with the
causal system approach (Model 3), PA and NA could also be
evaluated as potential mediating factors of the effect of
income on LS. In addition, a latent composite SWB variable
(Model 4) could be estimated as a product of LS, PA, and
NA, and relations could be evaluated between income and
the latent composite SWB variable as well as the unique
variance in each of the individual SWB components. Finally,
SWB configurations (Model 5) could be identified and
examined with respect to differences in income, which may
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
reveal important similarities and differences between con-
figurations not evident from treating SWB in a purely dimen-
sional manner. Thus, a compare and contrast approach will
elucidate the extent to which varying the structural concep-
tualization leads to different (or similar) results and conclu-
sions concerning SWB.
Furthermore, although empirical tests of the configuration
approach (Model 5) have employed cut scores or exploratory
cluster analyses to categorize individuals into distinct configu-
ration groups, more advanced statistical techniques are avail-
able that allow researchers to compare directly statistical
models composing dimensions versus categories (Muthén &
Muthén, 2000; Ruscio & Ruscio, 2008; Vermunt & Magidson,
2003). Consequently, as demonstrated in research on personal-
ity disorders (e.g., Krueger, Markon, Patrick, & Iacono, 2005),
dimensional and categorical models could be compared using
latent trait and latent class approaches to provide a direct test
of a structural conceptualization for SWB composing catego-
ries of SWB configurations versus SWB dimensions.
In the short term, applying these strategies would help
raise awareness among SWB researchers concerning the
implications of adopting any particular structural conceptu-
alization of SWB. As an immediate step toward this goal, the
abundant data sets that have already been reported in studies
of SWB in which all three components have been assessed
could be profitably reconsidered by comparing and contrast-
ing the five structural models of SWB. In the longer term, the
accumulation of findings from comparisons among alterna-
tive structural models based on both existing and newly col-
lected data will provide valuable insights concerning the
advantages and disadvantages of one structural conceptual-
ization of SWB over the others.
Longitudinal Studies. Another method for evaluating the five
prominent structural models of SWB is to conduct longitudinal
studies in which LS, PA, and NA are tracked over repeated
assessments. Reports of large-scale long-term panel studies
typically focus on LS (e.g., Lucas & Donnellan, 2007; Luh-
mann & Eid, 2009) rather than all three SWB components.
Even in studies examining longitudinal relations among LS,
PA, and NA (e.g., Busseri et al., 2008; Lyubomirsky et al.,
2005; Molnar et al., 2009), comparative evaluations among
structural conceptualization have not been undertaken. The
existence of such data sets, however, raises the possibility that
researchers could reexamine these data and comparatively eval-
uate the five structural models in a longitudinal context. In addi-
tion to informing the viability of each structural conceptualization,
the use of longitudinal designs would allow for important tests
concerning relations between SWB and other variables.
For example, consistent with the separate components
model (Model 1), prospective linkages among SWB compo-
nents (e.g., LS at one time point predicting changes in NA at
a subsequent assessment) should not be substantive. Further-
more, researchers should be able to identify prospective
Busseri and Sadava 305
associations involving other variables of interest (e.g., per-
sonality traits, demographic factors) that are unique to each
of the three SWB components. In contrast, according to the
hierarchical construct model (Model 2), a latent higher order
SWB factor should predict changes in LS, PA, and NA over
time, independent of stability unique to the individual com-
ponents. In addition, predictive effects of other variables
should be strongest on the latent SWB factor, and prospec-
tive effects on LS, PA, and NA should be indirect via effects
on the latent SWB factor (e.g., Molnar et al., 2009). Alterna-
tively, according to the causal system model (Model 3), both
PA and NA should predict changes in LS over time, rather
than vice versa. Furthermore, PA and NA could be tested as
mediators to determine whether prospective effects of other
factors (e.g., extraversion and neuroticism) on changes in LS
are mediated by or independent of PA and NA (see Klonowicz,
2001; Schimmack et al., 2002; Urry et al., 2004).
From the perspective of the composite model (Model 4),
changes in the latent composite SWB variable should be esti-
mated through the combination of changes in its three causal
indicators. In addition, prospective relations of other factors on
the latent SWB composite should be indirect over time, via
changes in all or some of the three causal indicators. Finally, to
evaluate the configuration approach (Model 5), both sample-
level structural stability and intraindividual stability in SWB
configuration over time could be determined. Furthermore, pro-
spective connections between SWB configurations and other
indicators of functioning could be evaluated to assess whether
SWB configurations respond to changes in life circumstances
and adversity (Shmotkin, 2005). In summary, the opportunity to
evaluate several issues fundamental to each of the structural
models makes the analysis of longitudinal SWB data, including
reanalysis of existing data sets, an important future direction.
Experimental Studies. Complementing the naturalistic study
of variability in SWB via longitudinal designs, valuable
information concerning the internal structure of SWB could
also come from experimental studies. Interest in SWB-
related interventions is growing, and a variety of potentially
effective techniques to alter levels of LS, PA, and NA have
been reported (see Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005;
Sin & Lyubomirsky, 2009). What is needed, however, are
investigations tracking participants over long enough peri-
ods of time to monitor both short-term and longer-term
impacts on all three SWB components (see Okun, Olding, &
Cohn, 1990) and to evaluate observed impacts from the per-
spective of all five structural models.
According to the separate components model (Model 1),
researchers should be able to independently manipulate each
SWB component. The hierarchical construct model (Model 2),
in contrast, predicts that induced changes in LS, PA, or NA
resulting from a change in participants’ underlying sense of
well-being may also lead to changes in the other components.
Furthermore, attempts to manipulate change in SWB via LS,
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
PA, or NA should be mediated by the higher order latent
SWB factor. Alternatively, consistent with the causal system
model (Model 3), interventions designed to change PA or
NA should lead indirectly to changes in LS. It may also be
possible to design interventions to manipulate LS indepen-
dent of PA and NA, thereby informing LS-specific (vs.
affect-mediated) causal relations involving other theoreti-
cally informative factors (e.g., Schimmack et al., 2008).
A composite conceptualization (Model 4) predicts that
induced changes to any one SWB component should also
lead to changes in the latent composite SWB variable, even
if changes in the other SWB components were not observed.
In addition, consistent with the assumption that SWB is
manifest as a combination of components, it should be pos-
sible to identify factors that, when manipulated experimen-
tally, have their greatest impact on the composite SWB
variable compared to the resulting impact on any of the indi-
vidual causal indicators. Finally, according to the configura-
tion approach (Model 5), induced changes in one SWB
component should affect the entire SWB system, potentially
resulting in the reorganization of one’s SWB components.
The nature of this potential reorganization may depend on
both the type of manipulation employed (i.e., the SWB com-
ponent targeted) and the person’s SWB configuration prior
to the experiment. Thus, although relatively rarely employed
in SWB research, experimental approaches could be profit-
ably employed to address issues concerning the structure
of SWB.
Summary and Conclusion
A tripartite account of SWB encompasses global life evalua-
tions and positive and negative affective experiences. Over
the past four decades, researchers have adopted various con-
ceptualizations concerning the structure of SWB with respect
to its primary components: LS, PA, and NA. We have
reviewed five structural models found in contemporary
research on SWB. One model treats SWB as three separate
components and emphasizes the relative distinctiveness of
LS, PA, and NA (Model 1). A second approach conceptual-
izes SWB as a hierarchical construct composing a higher
order SWB factor and LS, PA, and NA as three first-order
indicators (Model 2). A third structural conceptualization
specifies a causal system in which LS, the key criterion of
interest, is directly influenced by PA and NA (Model 3). A
fourth model casts the structure of SWB in terms of a com-
posite, resulting from the combination of LS, PA, and NA
(Model 4). A fifth conceptualization (Model 5) emphasizes
SWB as an organized system in which LS, PA, and NA are
configured in distinctive ways within individuals.
These five models share the assumption that LS, PA, and
NA compose the core components of SWB. However, little
consensus exists concerning how these components should
be treated. Rather, structural models are characterized by
306 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
conflicting assumptions concerning several fundamental
issues, including the status of SWB as a psychological con-
struct versus domain of inquiry, the causal connections
between SWB and its components, the importance of the sep-
arateness versus commonality among components, the mean-
ing of the relations among SWB components, the nature of
the PA–NA relation, the roles played by each SWB compo-
nent, and the dimensional versus categorical nature of SWB.
The commonality and differences among structural
accounts have important implications. First, from the per-
spective of at least three of the five structural models, mea-
surement of LS, PA, and NA within the same study is crucial
to build a knowledge base concerning SWB based on joint
consideration of all three components. Second, models differ
in the number of analysis variables required to study SWB
(i.e., three components vs. three components plus a separate
SWB variable). Furthermore, because the most appropriate
analytic approach for SWB-related data differs according to
the presumed structural model, and given the absence of
clarity at present concerning the “correct” structure of SWB,
researchers should clearly specify the underlying structural
model assumed in a given study and justify their decisions
concerning analytic approach. Third, with respect to integra-
tion and synthesis, whereas existing reviews of SWB-related
research primarily inform the separate components model in
which LS, PA, and NA are treated as distinct components,
whether these reviews inform the correlates, predictors, or
consequences of SWB as a hierarchical construct, a compos-
ite or causal system, or distinct configurations has not been
determined. Consequently, researchers should not assume
that the current SWB knowledge base necessarily applies to
each structural conceptualization.
Given these implications, improvement in our under-
standing of the structure of SWB will have wide-ranging
benefits. Toward this goal, we have described a broad agenda
for research on the structure of SWB, constituting both short-
term and longer-term strategies. Several steps were delin-
eated, including meta-analyzing the relations among LS, PA,
and NA; systematically and empirically comparing the five
models; tracking SWB components longitudinally over time;
and employing experimental studies designed to manipulate
components of SWB to observe changes in the other compo-
nents and, perhaps, the relations among (or configurations
created by) these components. No single study addressing
any of these goals will provide definitive answers. Rather,
each of these steps will require a targeted program of research
involving both the collection of new SWB-related data as
well as the reanalysis of existing data sets.
Importantly, although we hope that the present review
will stimulate new research, we are not simply calling for
“additional research” to be added to the fast-growing moun-
tain of empirical work on SWB. Rather, we wish to call
attention to the need for systematic investigation of the struc-
ture of SWB given the foundational implications of this
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
issue. We anticipate that an immediate benefit of undertak-
ing any of these steps will be heightened awareness among
SWB researchers of the existence of multiple diverging
structural perspectives on SWB and greater sensitivity to the
importance of addressing unresolved discrepancies and
ambiguities concerning the structure of SWB.
In conclusion, the tripartite structure of SWB has yet to be
determined. Over two decades ago Diener (1984) observed
that the relations among SWB components had not been
thoroughly researched and thus recommended “a continuous
interchange between data and theoretical positions” (p. 569).
Although hundreds of studies are now published on SWB
each year, Diener’s advice appears to have gone largely
unheeded with respect to the structure of SWB. Although it
is premature to propose a definitive structure for SWB,
improving our understanding of the structure of SWB will
have wide-ranging benefits. Greater clarity concerning
whether and (if so) how LS, PA, and NA fit together will
increase the likelihood that the database of SWB-related
research findings can be synthesized accurately and effec-
tively. More immediate, illuminating the structure of SWB
will help SWB researchers address practical issues concern-
ing analysis and interpretation of SWB-related findings.
Ultimately, therefore, resolving the structure of SWB is cru-
cial to our understanding of SWB and what it means to expe-
rience and evaluate life in positive ways.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect
to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Financial Disclosure/Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or
authorship of this article.
Notes
1. Consonant with its subjective focus, subjective well-being
(SWB) is measured almost exclusively using self-report ratings
of life satisfaction (LS), positive affect (PA), and negative affect
(NA). Furthermore, although Diener’s (1984) tripartite model
was subsequently expanded to encompass domain-specific sat-
isfaction judgments, such as satisfaction with one’s job or mar-
riage (e.g., Diener, 2000; Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999;
Diener, Tamir, & Napa Scollon, 2006), the typical study of SWB
examines all three components at a global level, based on the
overall evaluation of one’s life and positive and negative affec-
tive experiences in general (Diener, 2008; Schimmack, 2008).
Among the earliest SWB measures was a single-item self-
anchoring ladder developed by Kilpatrick and Cantril (1960).
This approach and other single-item measures of global life eval-
uations (e.g., “How satisfied are you with your life, overall?”)
are still widely employed. Another popular LS measure is the
multi-item Satisfaction With Life Scale, developed by Diener,
Emmons, Larsen, and Griffin (1985), which comprises five
Busseri and Sadava 307
items concerning overall evaluations of one’s life (e.g., “The
conditions of my life are excellent”). With respect to global
affective reactions, the most widely used measure is the Positive
and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), developed by Watson,
Clark, and Tellegen (1988), which comprises 10 items assessing
a general tendency toward positive affectivity and 10 items
assessing a tendency toward negative affectivity. Although both
state and trait versions of the PANAS have been employed, the
trait measure, in which respondents indicate their affective
experiences “in general,” is most commonly used (Schimmack
& Crites, 2005).
2. Although a tripartite model of SWB has served as the founda-
tion for a large volume of research, other major models of well-
being also have been proposed. Waterman (1993) differentiated
between hedonic well-being, which pertains to enjoyment and
satisfaction, and eudaimonic well-being, which addresses self-
actualization and personal growth (also see Ryan & Deci, 2001;
Ryff, 1989). Although there have been debates concerning the
most appropriate model of well-being (e.g., Diener, Sapyta,
& Suh, 1998; Ryff & Singer, 1998), researchers have consis-
tently found strong positive correlations between the two types
of well-being (e.g., Compton, 2001; Keyes, Shmotkin, & Ryff,
2002; King, Hicks, Krull, & Del Gaiso, 2006; van Dierendonck,
2005; Vitterso, 2003). An emerging body of research seeks to
understand this relation between hedonic and eudaimonic well-
being (Diener, Oishi, & Lucas, 2003; Keyes, 1998; King &
Napa, 1998; Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005; Westerhof,
Dittman-Kohli, & Thissen, 2001). Clearly, SWB is not the only
conceptualization of interest to well-being researchers, nor does
it provide a complete account of positive quality of life (Keyes,
2003; Keyes et al., 2002). An important priority for future
research is to develop a “more elaborate, yet more precise, under-
standing of the interrelations of SWB with other faculties of
well-being” (Shmotkin, Berkovich, & Cohen, 2006, p. 140).
3. Consistent with early formulations (e.g., Bradburn, 1969; Costa &
McCrae, 1980), researchers sometimes combine PA and NA into
an “affect balance” score (i.e., PA minus NA), also referred to as
“hedonic level” or “hedonic balance” (Basabe et al., 2002; Chwal-
isz, Diener, & Gallagher, 1988; Diener, 1994; Diener & Biswas-
Diener, 2002; Diener, Sandvik, Pavot, & Gallagher, 1991; Diener
et al., 1993; Diener, Lucas, Oishi, & Suh, 2002; Diener, Sandvik,
Pavot, & Fujita, 1992; Diener, Wolsic, & Fujita, 1995; Larsen
et al., 1985; Pavot & Diener, 1993; Pavot et al., 1990; Pavot et
al., 1997; Schimmack et al., 2002; Suh, Diener, Oishi, & Tri-
andis, 1998; Tov & Diener, 2007). In other reports, however,
researchers have stressed that measures of PA and NA should
not be combined into a single score in light of the loss of valu-
able information concerning the two types of affect (e.g., Die-
ner, 2000; Diener & Suh, 1999). In the present work, we fo-
cus on the structure of SWB with respect to LS, PA, and NA
rather than based on the combination of PA and NA into an
affect balance score.
4. Diener (1984) suggested that SWB is typically what people
have in mind when they refer to “happiness.” The relationship
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
between SWB and happiness, however, has been specified in
various ways. For example, some researchers have promoted
the position that global happiness is synonymous with SWB
(e.g., Biswas-Diener, Vitterso, & Diener, 2005; Diener &
Fujita, 1995; Diener, Sandvik, & Pavot, 1991; Diener, Sand-
vik, Pavot, & Gallagher, 1991; Diener, Sandvik, Seidlitz,
& Diener, 1993; Gohm, Oishi, Darlington, & Diener, 1998;
Larsen, Diener, & Emmons, 1985; Pavot & Diener, 1993;
Pavot, Diener, Colvin, & Sandvik, 1991). This view is conso-
nant with other research in which global happiness is consid-
ered to be interchangeable with a higher order latent well-being
factor (e.g., Stones & Kozma, 1980, 1985). In such accounts,
happiness and SWB are assumed to “share a common core of
meaning” (Stones & Kozma, 1989, p. 526; also see Larsen &
McKibban, 2008; van Praag, Frijters, & Ferrier-i-Carbonell,
2003). In other models, happiness is specified as one of sev-
eral lower order indicators of a higher order SWB factor (e.g.,
Arthaud-Day, Rode, Mooney, & Near, 2005; Kozma, Stone,
Stones, Hannah, & McNeil, 1990; McKennell, 1978; McNeil,
Stones, & Kozma, 1986; Oishi & Koo, 2008; Schyns, 1998).
Diener and colleagues have also equated happiness with the
affective components of SWB only (e.g., Diener & Diener, 1996;
Seidlitz & Diener, 1993), consonant with Bradburn’s (1969) in-
fluential early formulation (also see Stones & Kozma, 1986).
Other researchers have conceptualized happiness as a person-
ality trait that is more general than, and thus subsumes, SWB
(e.g., Lyubomirsky, 2001; Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999). Fur-
ther still, it has also been proposed that global measures of hap-
piness “cannot be neatly mapped onto the components of SWB”
(Diener et al., 1999, p. 277). At present, therefore, the rela-
tion between SWB and happiness is unclear.
References
Adler, M. G., & Fagley, N. S. (2005). Appreciation: Individual dif-
ferences in finding value and meaning as a unique predictor of
subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 73, 79–114.
Anderson, C. A., & Sedikides, C. (1991). Thinking about people:
Contributions of a typological alternative to associationistc and
dimensional models of person perception. Journal of Personal-
ity and Social Psychology, 60, 203–217.
Andrews, F. M., & Crandall, R. (1976). The validity of measures of
self-reported well-being. Social Indicators Research, 3, 1–19.
Andrews, F. M., & McKennell, A. C. (1980). Measures of self-
reported well-being: Their affective, cognitive, and other com-
ponents. Social Indicators Research, 8, 127–155.
Andrews, F. M., & Robinson, J. P. (1991). Measures of subjective
well-being. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightman
(Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological atti-
tudes (pp. 61–114). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976). Social influences of well-
being. New York, NY: Plenum.
Argyle, M., & Martin, M. (1991). The psychological causes of hap-
piness. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Subjective
well-being (pp. 77–100). London, England: Pergamon.
308 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
Arthaud-Day, M. L., Rode, J. C., Mooney, C. H., & Near, J. P.
(2005). The subjective well-being construct: A test of its con-
vergent, discriminant, and factorial validity. Social Indicators
Research, 74, 445–476.
Asendorpf, J. B. (2003). Head-to-head comparison of the predictive
validity of personality types and dimensions. European Journal
of Personality, 17, 327–346.
Ashby, F. G., Isen, A. M., & Turken, A. U. (1999). A neuropsycho-
logical theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition.
Psychological Review, 106, 529–550.
Balatsky, G., & Diener, E. (1993). Subjective well-being among
Russian students. Social Indicators Research, 28, 225–243.
Basabe, N., Paez, D., Valencia, J., Gonzalez, J. L., Rime, B., &
Diener, E. (2002). Cultural dimensions, socioeconomic devel-
opment, climate, and emotional hedonic level. Cognition and
Emotion, 16, 103–125.
Beiser, M. (1974). Components and correlates of mental well-
being. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 15, 320–327.
Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1990). On the equivalence of factors
and components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 67–74.
Bergman, L. R., & Daukantaite, D. (2009). Stability of typical pat-
terns of subjective well-being in middle-aged Swedish women.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 10, 293–311.
Bergman, L. R., & El-Khouri, B. M. (2003). A person-oriented
approach: Methods for today and methods for tomorrow. New
Directions in Child and Adolescent Development, 101, 25–38.
Bergman, L. R., Magnusson, D., & El-Khouri, B. M. (2001). Studying
individual development in an interindividual context. Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Biswas-Diener, R., Vitterso, J., & Diener, E. (2005). Most people
are pretty happy, but there is cultural variation: The Inughuit, the
Amish, and the Maasai. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6, 205–226.
Bollen, K. (2002). Latent variables in psychology and the social
sciences. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 605–634.
Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on mea-
surement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bul-
letin, 110, 305–314.
Bood, S.-A., Archer, T., Norlander, T. (2004). Affective personal-
ity in relation to general personality, self-reported stress, cop-
ing, and optimism. Individual Differences Research, 2, 26–37.
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2003). The
theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 110,
203–219.
Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being.
Oxford, England: Aldine.
Bradburn, N. M., & Caplovitz, D. (1965). Reports on happiness.
Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Brenner, B. (1975). Quality of affect and self-evaluated happiness.
Social Indicators Research, 2, 315–331.
Busseri, M. A., Sadava, S. W., & DeCourville, N. (2007). A hybrid
model for research on subjective well-being: Examining common-
and component-specific sources of variance in life satisfaction,
positive affect, and negative affect. Social Indicators Research,
83, 413–445.
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
Busseri, M. A., Sadava, S. W., Molnar, D. S., & DeCourville, N.
(2009). A person-centered approach to subjective well-being.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 10, 161–181.
Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1999). The
affect system has parallel and integrative processing compo-
nents: Form follows function. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 76, 839–855.
Campbell, A. (1976). Subjective measures of well-being. American
Psychologist, 31, 117–124.
Campbell, A. (1981). The sense of well-being in America. New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The qual-
ity of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfaction.
New York, NY: Russell Sage.
Carlisle, S., & Hanlon, P. (2007). Well-being and consumer cul-
ture: A different kind of public health problem? Health Promo-
tion International, 22, 261–268.
Carp, F. M., & Carp, A. C. (1982). Test of a model of domain satis-
factions and well-being. Research on Aging, 4, 503–522.
Carp, F. M., & Carp, A. C. (1983). Structural stability of well-being
factors across age an gender, and development of scales of well-
being unbiased for age and gender. Journal of Gerontology, 38,
572–581.
Carver, C. S. (1989). How should multifaceted personality con-
structs be studied? Issues illustrated by self-monitoring, attri-
butional style, and hardiness. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 56, 577–585.
Chamberlain, J. (1988). On the structure of subjective well-being.
Social Indicators Research, 20, 581–604.
Cheng, S.-T. (2004). Age and subjective well-being revisited: A
discrepancy perspective. Psychology and Aging, 19, 409–415.
Chwalisz, K., Diener, E., & Gallagher, D. (1988). Autonomic
arousal feedback and emotional experience: Evidence from the
spinal cord injured. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 54, 820–828.
Compton, W. C. (2001). Toward a tripartite factor structure of men-
tal health: Subjective well-being, personal growth, and religios-
ity. Journal of Psychology, 135, 486–500.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion
and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy
people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38,
668–678.
Cummins, R. A., & Nistico, H. (2002). Maintaining life satisfac-
tion: The role of positive cognitive bias. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 3, 37–69.
Davern, M., & Cummins, R. A. (2006). Is life dissatisfaction the
opposite of life satisfaction? Australian Journal of Psychology,
58, 1–7.
Davern, M., Cummins, R. A., & Stokes, M. A. (2007). Subjective
wellbeing as an affective-cognitive construct. Journal of Happi-
ness Studies, 8, 429–449.
DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A
meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-
being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229.
Busseri and Sadava 309
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin,
95, 542–575.
Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and
opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31, 103–157.
Diener, E. (1995). A value based index for measuring national qual-
ity of life. Social Indicators Research, 36, 107–127.
Diener, E. (1996). Traits can be powerful, but are not enough: Les-
sons from subjective well-being. Journal of Research in Per-
sonality, 30, 389–399.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness
and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55,
34–43.
Diener, E. (2008). Myths in the science of happiness, and direc-
tions for future research. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The
science of subjective well-being (pp. 493–514). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2002). Will money increase sub-
jective well-being? Social Indicators Research, 57, 119–169.
Diener, E., & Diener, C. (1996). Most people are happy. Psycho-
logical Science, 7, 181–185.
Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting the
subjective well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 69, 851–864.
Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). Personality correlates of sub-
jective well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
11, 89–97.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The
Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,
49, 71–75.
Diener, E., Gohm, C. L., Suh, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Similarity of the
relations btween martial status and subjective well-being across
cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 419-436.
Diener, E., Kesebir, P., & Lucas, R. (2008). Benefits of accounts of
well-being: For societies and for psychology science. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 57, 37–53.
Diener, E., Larsen, R. J., Levine, S., & Emmons, R. A. (1985).
Intensity and frequency: Dimensions underlying positive and
negative affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
48, 1253–1265.
Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (1999). Personality and subjective well-
being. In Kahneman, Diener, & Schwartz (Eds.). Well-being:
The foundation of hedonic psychology (pp.213–229). New York,
NY: Russell Sage.
Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2000a). Explaining differences in soci-
etal levels of happiness: Relative standards, need fulfillment,
culture, and evaluation theory. Journal of Happiness Studies,
1, 41–78.
Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2000b). Subjective emotional well-
being. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of
emotions (pp. 325–337). New York, NY: Guilford.
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Napa Scollon, C. (2006). Beyond the
hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being.
American Psychologist, 61, 305–314.
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., Oishi, S., & Suh, E. M. (2002). Looking
up and looking down: Weighing good and bad information in
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
life satisfaction judgments. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 28, 437–445.
Diener, E., Napa Scollon, C. K., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). The evolv-
ing concept of subjective well-being: The multifaceted nature
of happiness. Advances in Cell Aging and Gerontology, 15,
187–219.
Diener, E., Napa Scollon, C. K., Oishi, S., Dzokoto, V., & Suh, E. M.
(2000). Positivity and the construction of life satisfaction judg-
ments: Global happiness is not the sum of its parts. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 1, 159–176.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture,
and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations
of life. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 403–425.
Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (1991). Happiness is the fre-
quency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. In
F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Subjective well-
being (pp. 119–139). London, England: Pergamon.
Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Pavot, W., & Fujita, F. (1992). Extraver-
sion and subjective well-being in a U.S. national probability
sample. Journal of Research in Personality, 26, 205–215.
Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Pavot, W., & Gallagher, D. (1991).
Response artifacts in the measurement of subjective well-being.
Social Indicators Research, 24, 35–56.
Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Seidlitz, L., & Diener, M. (1993). The rela-
tionship between income and subjective well-being: Relative or
absolute? Social Indicators Research, 28, 195–223.
Diener, E., Sapyta, J. J., & Suh, E. (1998). Subjective well-being is
essential to well-being. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 33–37.
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psy-
chological Science, 13, 81–84.
Diener, E., & Suh, E. M. (1999). National differences in subjective
well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.),
Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 434–450).
New York, NY: Russell Sage.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Sub-
jective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological
Bulletin, 125, 276–302.
Diener, E., Suh, E., & Oishi, S. (1997). Recent findings on subjective
well-being. Indian Journal of Clinical Psychology, 24, 25–41.
Diener, E., Suh, E., Smith, H., & Shao, L. (1995). National differ-
ences in reported subjective well-being: Why do they occur?
Social Indicators Research, 34, 7–32.
Diener, E., Tamir, M., & Napa Scollon, C. (2006). Happiness, life
satisfaction, and fulfillment: The social psychology of subjective
well-being. In P. A. M. Van Lange (Ed.), Bridging social psychol-
ogy: Benefits of transdisciplinary approaches (pp. 319–324).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Diener, E., & Tov, W. (2007). Subjective well-being and peace.
Journal of Social Issues, 63, 421–440.
Diener, E., Wolsic, B., & Fujita, F. (1995). Physical attractiveness
and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 69, 120–129.
Dolan, P., & White, M. (2006). Dynamic well-being: Connecting
indicators of what people anticipate with indicators of what they
experience. Social Indicators Research, 75, 303–333.
310 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
Edwards, J. R., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). On the nature and direc-
tion of relationships between constructs and measures. Psycho-
logical Methods, 5, 155–174.
Eid, M. (1997). Happiness and satisfaction: An application of
a latent state-trait model for ordinal variables. In J. Rost &
R. Langehein-Munster (Eds.), Applications of latent trait and
latent class models in the social sciences (pp. 148–154). New
York, NY: Waxmann.
Eid, M., & Larsen, R. J. (2008). The science of subjective well-
being. New York, NY: Guilford.
Elliot, A. J., Gable, S. L., & Mapes, R. R. (2006). Approach and
avoidance motivation in the social domain. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 378–391.
Emmons, R. A., & Diener, E. (1985). Personality correlates of sub-
jective well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
11, 89–97.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in posi-
tive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emo-
tions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226.
George, J. M. (1991). Time structure and purpose as a mediator of
work-life linkages. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21,
296–314.
George, L. K. (1981). Subjective well-being: Conceptual and meth-
odological issues. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriat-
rics, 2, 345–382.
Gohm, C. L., Oishi, S., Darlington, J., & Diener, E. (1998). Cul-
ture, parental conflict, parental marital status, and the subjective
well-being of young adults. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60,
319–334.
Grice, J. W. (2001). Computing and evaluating factor scores. Psy-
chological Methods, 6, 430–450.
Heller, D., Komar, J., & Lee, W. B. (2007). The dynamics of per-
sonality states, goals, and well-being. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 33, 898–910.
Heller, D., Watson, D., & Ilies, R. (2006). The role of person versus
situation in life satisfaction: A critical examination. Psychologi-
cal Bulletin, 130, 574–600.
Ho, S. M. Y., & Cheng, M. W. L. (2007). Using the combined
etic-emic approach to develop a measurement of interpersonal
subjective well-being in Chinese populations. In A. D. Ong &
M. H. van Dulmen (Eds.), Oxford handbook of methods in posi-
tive psychology (pp. 139–152). New York, NY: Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Howell, R. T., & Howell, C. J. (2008). The relation of economic
status to subjective well-being in developing countries: A meta-
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 536–560.
Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A criti-
cal review of construct indicators and measurement model mis-
specification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of
Consumer Research, 30, 199–218.
Kammann, R., Farry, M., & Herbison, P. (1984). The analysis and
measurement of happiness as a sense of well-being. Social Indi-
cators Research, 15, 91–115.
Keyes, C. L. M. (1998). Social well-being. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 61, 121–140.
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
Keyes, C. L. M. (2003). Complete mental health: An agenda for
the 21st century. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourish-
ing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (pp. 293–312).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2005). Mental health and/or mental illness? Inves-
tigating axioms of the complete state model of health. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 539–548.
Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002). Opti-
mizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two tradi-
tions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82,
1007–1022.
Kilpatrick, F. P., & Cantril, H. (1960). Self-anchoring scaling: A
measure of individuals’ unique reality worlds. Journal of Indi-
vidual Psychology, 16, 158–173.
Kim-Prieto, C., Diener, E., Tamir, M., Scollon, C., & Diener, M. (2005).
Integrating the diverse definitions of happiness: A time-sequential
framework of subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies,
6, 261–300.
King, L. A., Hicks, J. A., Krull, J. L., & Del Gaiso, A. K. (2006).
Positive affect and the experience of meaning in life. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 179–196.
King, L. A., & Napa, C. S. (1998). What makes life good? Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 156–165.
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation
modeling. New York, NY: Guilford.
Klonowicz, T. (2001). Discontented people: Reactivity and locus
of control as determinants of subjective well-being. European
Journal of Personality, 15, 29–47.
Kozma, A., & Stone, S. (1980). The measurement of happiness:
Development of the Memorial University of Newfoundland
Scale of Happiness (MUNSH). Journal of Gerontology, 35,
906–912.
Kozma, A., Stone, S., & Stones, M. J. (2000). Stability in compo-
nents and predictors of subjective well-being (SWB): Implica-
tions for SWB structure. In E. Diener & D. R. Rahtz (Eds.),
Advances in quality of life theory and research (pp. 13–30).
London, England: Kluwer.
Kozma, A. Stone, S., Stones, M. J., Hannah, T. E., & McNeil, K.
(1990). Long- and short-term affective states in happiness:
Model, paradigm and experimental evidence. Social Indicators
Research, 22, 119–138.
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., & Iacono, W. G. (2005).
Externalizing psychopathology in adulthood: A dimensional-
spectrum conceptualization and its implications for DSM-V.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114, 537–550.
Kuppens, P., Realo, A., & Diener, E. (2008). The role of positive and
negative emotions in life satisfaction judgments across nations.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 66–75.
Larsen, R. J., Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1985). An evaluation
of subjective well-being measures. Social Indicators Research,
17, 1–17.
Larsen, R. J., & Eid, M. (2008). Ed Diener and the science of
subjective well-being. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The
science of subjective well-being (pp. 1–13). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Busseri and Sadava 311
Larsen, R. J., & McKibban, A. R. (2008). Is happiness having what
you want, wanting what you have, or both? Psychological Sci-
ence, 19, 371–377.
Larsen, R. J., & Prizmic, Z. (2008). Regulation of emotional well-
being: Overcoming the hedonic treadmill. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen
(Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp. 258–289).
New York, NY: Guilford.
Lawrence, R. H., & Liang, J. (1988). Structural integration of the
Affect Balance Scale and the Life Satisfaction Scale Index A: Race,
sex, and age differences. Psychology and Aging, 3, 375–384.
Lawton, M. P. (1982). The well-being and mental health of
the aged. In T. M. Field, A. Huston, H. C. Quay, L. Troll, &
G. E. Finley (Eds.), Review of human development (pp. 614–628).
New York, NY: Wiley.
Lawton, M. P. (1983a). Environment and other determinants of
well-being in older people. Gerontologist, 23, 349–357.
Lawton, M. P. (1983b). The varieties of wellbeing. Experimental
Aging Research, 9, 65–72.
Lent, R. W. (2004). Toward a unifying theoretical and practical per-
spective on well-being and psychological adjustment. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 51, 482–509.
Liang, J. (1984). Dimensions of the Life Satisfaction Index A: A
structural formulation. Journal of Gerontology, 39, 613–622.
Liang, J. (1985). A structural integration of the Affect Balance
Scale and the Life Satisfaction Index A. Journal of Gerontol-
ogy, 40, 552–561.
Liang, J., & Bollen, K. A. (1983). The structure of the Philadelphia
Geriatric Center Morale Scale: A reinterpretation. Journal of
Gerontology, 38, 181–189.
Liang, J., & Bollen, K. A. (1985). Sex differences in the structure
of the Philadelphia Geriatric Center Morale Scale. Journal of
Gerontology, 40, 468–477.
Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Wood, A. M., Osborne, G., & Hurling, R.
(2009). Measuring happiness: The higher order factor structure
of subjective and psychological well-being measures. Personal-
ity and Individual Differences, 47, 878–884.
Lohmann, N. (1977). Correlations of life satisfaction, morale and
adjustment measures. Journal of Gerontology, 32, 73–75.
Lucas, R. E. (2007). Using structural equation models to validate
measures of positive emotions. In A. D. Ong & M. H. van Dulmen
(Eds.), Oxford handbook of methods in positive psychology
(pp. 111–125). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Lucas, R. E. (2008). Personality and subjective well-being. In M.
Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being
(pp. 171–194). New York, NY: Guilford.
Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1996). Discriminant validity
of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 71, 616–628.
Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2007). How stable is happiness?
Using the STARTS model to estimate the stability of life sat-
isfaction. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1091–1098.
Luhmann, L., & Eid, M. (2009). Does it really feel the same?
Changes in life satisfaction following repeated life events. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 363–381.
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
Lynn, M., & Steel, P. (2006). National differences in subjective
well-being: The interactive effects of extraversion and neuroti-
cism. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 155–165.
Lyubomirsky, S. (2001). Why are some people happier than others?
American Psychologist, 56, 239–249.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjec-
tive happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation.
Social Indicators Research, 46, 137–155.
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursu-
ing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change. Review
of General Psychology, 9, 111–131.
MacCallum, R. C., & Browne, M. W. (1993). The use of causal
indicators in covariance structure models: Some practical issues.
Psychological Bulletin, 114, 533–541.
MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Jarvis, C. B. (2005). The
problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral
and organizational research and some recommended solutions.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 710–730.
Magnusson, D. (2003). The person-centered approach: Concepts,
measurement models, and research strategy. New Directions in
Child and Adolescent Development, 101, 3–23.
Malka, A., & Chatman, J. A. (2003). Intrinsic and extrinsic orienta-
tions as moderators of the effect of annual income on subjective
well-being: A longitudinal study. Personality and Social Psy-
chology Bulletin, 29, 737–746.
Markon, K. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2005). Categorical and continuous
models of liability to externalizing disorders: A direct comparison
in NESARC. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62, 1352–1359.
Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1998). Top-down, bottom-up, and
horizontal models: The direction of causality in multidimen-
sional hierarchical self-concepts. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 75, 509–527.
McCrae, R. M., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-
factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60,
175–215.
McCulloch, B. J. (1991). A longitudinal investigation of the factor
structure of subjective well-being: The case of the Philadelphia
Geriatric Center Morale Scale. Journal of Gerontology: Psycho-
logical Sciences, 46, P251–P258.
McCullough, G., Huebner, E. S., & Laughlin, J. E. (2000). Life
events, self-concept, and adolescents’ positive subjective well-
being. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 281–290.
McKennell, A. C. (1978). Cognitive and affect in perceptions of
well-being. Social Indicators Research, 5, 389–426.
McKennell, A. C., & Andrews, F. M. (1980). Models of cogni-
tion and affect in perceptions of well-being. Social Indicators
Research, 8, 257–298.
McNeil, J. K., Stones, M. J., & Kozma, A. (1986). Subjective well-
being in later life: Issues concerning measurement and predic-
tion. Social Indicators Research, 18, 35–70.
Michalos, A. C. (1980). Satisfaction and happiness. Social Indica-
tors Research, 8, 385–422.
Molnar, D., Busseri, M. A., Perrier, C. P., & Sadava, S. (2009).
A longitudinal investigation of alcohol use and subjective
312 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
well-being in a university sample. Journal of Studies on Alcohol
and Drugs, 70, 704–713.
Muthén, B. O., & Muthén, L. K. (2000). Integrating person-
centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture mod-
eling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism: Clinical and
Experimental Research, 24, 882–891.
Napier, J. L., & Jost, J. T. (2008). Why are conservatives happier
than liberals? Psychological Science, 19, 565–572.
Nes, R. B., Roysamb, E., Tambs, K., Harris, J. R., & Reichborn-
Kjennerud, T. (2006). Subjective well-being: Genetic and envi-
ronmental contributions to stability and change. Psychological
Medicine, 36, 1033–1042.
Norlander, T., Bood, S.-A., & Archer, T. (2002). Performance dur-
ing stress: Affective personality, age, and regularity of physical
exercise. Social Behavior and Personality, 30, 495–508.
Oishi, S., & Diener, E. (2001). Re-examining the general positiv-
ity model of subjective well-being: The discrepancy between
specific and global domain satisfaction. Journal of Personality,
69, 641–666.
Oishi, S., Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2007). The optimum level of
well-being: Can people be too happy? Perspectives on Psycho-
logical Science, 2, 346–360.
Oishi, S., & Koo, M. (2008). Two new questions about happiness:
“Is happiness good?” and “Is happiness better?” In M. Eid &
R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-being (pp.
290–306). New York, NY: Guilford.
Okun, M. A., Olding, R. W., & Cohn, C. M. (1990). A meta-analysis
of subjective well-being interventions among elders. Psycholog-
ical Bulletin, 108, 257–166.
Pavot, W. (2008). The assessment of subjective well-being: Suc-
cesses and shortfalls. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The sci-
ence of subjective well-being (pp. 124–140). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). The affective and cognitive context
of self-reported measures of subjective well-being. Social Indi-
cators Research, 28, 1–20.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2004). Findings on subjective well-being:
Applications to public policy, clinical interventions, and educa-
tion. In A. P. Linely & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in
practice (pp. 679–692). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2008). The Satisfaction With Life Scale
and the emerging construct of life satisfaction. Journal of Posi-
tive Psychology, 3, 137–152.
Pavot, W., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991). Further
validation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale: Evidence of the
cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 57, 149–161.
Pavot, W., Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1990). Extraversion and hap-
piness. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1299–1306.
Pavot, W., Fujita, F., & Diener, E. (1997). The relation between
self-aspect congruence, personality, and subjective well-being.
Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 183–191.
Perunovic, W. Q. E., Heller, D., & Rafaeli, E. (2007). Within-
person changes in the structure of emotion: The role of
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
cultural identification and language. Psychological Science,
18, 607–613.
Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence
health? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 925–971.
Reich, J. W., Zautra, A. J., & Davis, M. (2003). Dimensions of
affect relationships: Models and their integrative implications.
Review of General Psychology, 7, 66–83.
Robinson, M. D., Crawford Solberg, E., Vargas, P. T., & Tamir, M.
(2003). Trait as default: Extraversion, subjective well-being,
and the distinction between neutral and positive faces. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 517–527.
Romero, E., Villar, P., Luengo, M. A., & Gomez-Fraguela, J. A.
(2009). Traits, personal strivings, and well-being. Journal of
Research in Personality, 43, 535–546.
Ruscio, J., & Ruscio, A. M. (2008). Categories and dimensions:
Advancing psychological science through the study of latent
structure. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17,
203–207.
Russell, J. A., & Barrett, L. F. (1999). Core affect, prototypical emo-
tional episodes, and other things called emotion: Dissecting the ele-
phant. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 805–819.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human poten-
tials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-
being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations
on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.
Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. (1998). The contours of positive human
health. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 1–28.
Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (2000). Value priorities and subjective
well-being: Direct relations and congruity of effects. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 1177–198.
Sandvik, E., Diener, E., & Seidlitz, L. (1993). Subjective well-
being: The convergence and stability of self-report and non-self-
report measures. Journal of Personality, 61, 317–342.
Schimmack, U. (2008). The structure of subjective well-being. In
M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The science of subjective well-
being (pp. 97–123). New York, NY: Guilford.
Schimmack, U., & Crites, S. L. (2005). The structure of affect. In
D. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The hand-
book of attitudes (pp. 397–435). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schimmack, U., Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Life-satisfaction is
a momentary judgment and a stable personality characteristic:
The use of chronically accessible and stable sources. Journal of
Personality, 70, 345–384.
Schimmack, U., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2008). The influ-
ence of environment and personality on the affective and cog-
nitive components of subjective well-being. Social Indicators
Research, 89, 41–60.
Schyns, P. (1998). Crossnational differences in happiness: Eco-
nomic and cultural factors explained. Social Indicators Research,
43, 3–26.
Scollon, C. N., Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2005).
An experience sampling and cross-cultural investigation of the
Busseri and Sadava 313
relation between pleasant and unpleasant affect. Cognitive and
Emotion, 19, 27–52.
Seidlitz, L., & Diener, E. (1993). Memory for positive versus nega-
tive life events: Theories fsor the differences between happy and
unhappy persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 64, 654–664.
Seidlitz, L., Wyer, R. S., & Diener, E. (1997). Cognitive correlates
of subjective well-being: The processing of valenced life events
by happy and unhappy persons. Journal of Research in Person-
ality, 31, 240–256.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction.
American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Posi-
tive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions.
American Psychologist, 60, 410–421.
Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Ryan, R. M., Chirkov, V., Yougmee, K.,
Ku, C.,  .  .  .  Sun, Z. (2004). Self-concordance and subjective
well-being in four cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychol-
ogy, 35, 209–223.
Sheldon, K. M., & Hoon, T. H. (2007). The multiple determina-
tion of well-being: Independent effects of positive traits, needs,
goals, selves, social supports, and cultural contexts. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 8, 565–592.
Sheldon, K. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). Achieving sustain-
able gains in happiness: Change your actions, not your circum-
stances. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 55–86.
Shmotkin, D. (1998). Declarative and differential aspects of subjec-
tive well-being and its implications for mental health in later
life. In J. Lomranz (Ed.), Handbook of aging and mental health:
An integrative approach (pp. 15–43). New York, NY: Plenum.
Shmotkin, D. (2005). Happiness in the face of adversity: Reformu-
lating the dynamic and modular bases of subjective well-being.
Review of General Psychology, 9, 291–325.
Shmotkin, D., Berkovich, M., & Cohen, K. (2006). Combining hap-
piness and suffering in a retrospective view of anchor periods
in life: A differential approach to subjective well-being. Social
Indicators Research, 77, 139–169.
Shmotkin, D., & Hadari, G. (1996). An outlook on subjective well-
being in older Israeli adults: A unified formulation. Interna-
tional Journal of Human Development, 42, 271–289.
Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and
alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology inter-
ventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 65, 467–487.
Singh, K., & Jha, S. D. (2008). Positive and negative affect, and grit
as predictors of happiness and life satisfaction. Journal of the
Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 34, 40–45.
Sirgy, M. J., Michalos, A. C., Ferriss, A. L., Easterlin, R. A.,
Patrick, D., & Pavot, W. (2006). The quality-of-life (QOL)
research movement: Past, present, and future. Social Indicators
Research, 76, 343–466.
Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship
between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological
Bulletin, 134, 138–161.
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Some additional thoughts on components,
factors, and factor indeterminacy. Multivariate Behavioral
Research, 25, 41–45.
Stones, M. J., & Kozma, A. (1980). Issues relation to the usage and
conceptualization of mental health constructs employed by ger-
ontologist. International Journal of Aging and Human Develop-
ment, 11, 269–281.
Stones, M. J., & Kozma, A. (1985). Structural relationships among
happiness scales: A second order factorial study. Social Indica-
tors Research, 17, 19–28.
Stones, M. J., & Kozma, A. (1986). “Happy are they who are
happy . . .” A test between two causal models of relationships
between happiness and its correlates. Experimental Aging
Research, 12, 23–39.
Stones, M. J., & Kozma, A. (1989). Happiness and activities in later
life: A propensity formulation. Canadian Psychology, 30, 526–537.
Storbeck, J., & Clore, G. L. (2008). The affective regulation of cog-
nitive priming. Emotion, 8, 208–215.
Suh, E. M. (2002). Culture, identity consistency, and subjective
well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83,
1378–1391.
Suh, E., Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Triandis, H. C. (1998). The shifting
basis of life satisfaction judgments across cultures: Emotions
versus norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
74, 482–493.
Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their
relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self-report.
In T. A. Hussain & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Anxiety and the anxiety
disorders (pp. 681–706). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tov, W., & Diener, E. (2007). Culture and subjective well-being. In
S. Kitayama & D. Cohen (Eds.), Handbook of cultural psychol-
ogy (pp. 691–713). New York, NY: Guilford.
Urry, H. L., Nitschke, J. B., Dolski, I., Jackson, D. C., Dalton, K. M.,
Mueller, C. J., . . . Davidson, R. J. (2004). Making a life worth
living: Neural correlates of well-being. Psychological Science,
15, 367–372.
van Dierendonck, D. (2005). The construct validity of Ryff’s Scales
of Psychological Well-being and its extension with spiritual
well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 629–
643.
van Praag, B. M. S., Frijters, P., & Ferrier-i-Carbonell, A. (2003).
The anatomy of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic
Behavior and Organization, 51, 29–49.
Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2003). Latent class models for
classification. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 41,
541–537.
Vitterso, J. (2001). Personality traits and subjective well-being:
Emotional stability, not extraversion, is probably the impor-
tant predictor. Personality and Individual Differences, 31,
903–914.
Vitterso, J. (2003). Flow versus life satisfaction: A projective use
of cartoons to illustrate the difference between the evaluation
approach and the intrinsic motivation approach to subjective
well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4, 141–167.
314 Personality and Social Psychology Review 15(3)
Vitterso, J. (2004). Subjective well-being versus self-actualization:
Using the flow-simplex to promote a conceptual clarification
of subjective quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 65,
299–331.
Vitterso, J., & Nilsen, F. (2002). The conceptual and relational
structure of subjective well-being, neuroticism, and extraver-
sion. Social Indicators Research, 57, 89–118.
Wallace, K. A., & Bergeman, C. S. (2007). Hardiness as a dispo-
sitional resource: Methods of conceptualizing the construct. In
A. D. Ong & M. H. van Dulmen (Eds.), Oxford handbook of
methods in positive psychology (pp. 323–336). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts
of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 678–691.
Watkins, P. C., Woodward, K., Stone, T., & Kolts, R. L. (2003).
Gratitude and happiness: Development of a measure of gratitude
and relationships with subjective well-being. Social Behavior
and Personality, 31, 431–452.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and
validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The
PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54, 1063–1070.
Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at University of Birmingham on November 20, 2014
Watson, D., Weise, D., Vaidya, J., & Tellegen, A. (1999). The two
general activation systems of affect: Structural findings, evolu-
tionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 820–838.
Westerhof, G. J., Dittman-Kohli, F., & Thissen, T. (2001). Beyond
life satisfaction: Lay conceptions of well-being among mid-
dle-aged and elderly adults. Social Indicators Research, 56,
179–203.
Westerhof, G. J., & Keyes, C. L. M. (2006). After the fall of the
Berlin Wall: Perceptions and consequences of stability and change
among middle-aged and older East and West Germans. Journal
of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 61B, S240–S247.
Westerhof, G. J., Thissen, T., Dittman-Kohli, F., & Stevens, N. L.
(2006). What is the problem? A taxonomy of life problems and
their relation to subjective well-being in middle and late adult-
hood. Social Indicators Research, 79, 91–115.
Wiese, B. S. (2007). Successful pursuit of personal goals and sub-
jective well-being. In B. R. Little, K. Salmela-Aro, & S. D.
Phillips (Eds.), Personal project pursuit: Goals, action and
human flourishing (pp. 301–328). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zelenski, J. M., Murphy, S. A., & Jenkins, D. A. (2008). The
happy-productive worker thesis revisited. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 9, 521–537.