• Home
• Library
• DRO home

Integrating the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives to more comprehensively understand wellbeing and pathways to wellbeing Henderson, Luke Wayne and Knight, Tess 2012, Integrating the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives to more comprehensively understand wellbeing and pathways to wellbeing, International journal of wellbeing, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 196-221. Attached Files Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads henderson-integratingthehedonic-2012.pdf Published version application/pdf 536.97KB 50 Title Integrating the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives to more comprehensively understand wellbeing and pathways to wellbeing Author(s) Henderson, Luke Wayne Knight, Tess Journal name International journal of wellbeing Volume number 2 Issue number 3 Start page 196 End page 221 Total pages 26 Publisher International Journal of Wellbeing Place of publication Waterloo, N. Z. Publication date 2012 ISSN 1179-8602 Keyword(s) pleasure meaning hedonia eudaimonia wellbeing well-being happiness flourishing pathways positive psychology integration Summary Recently, the disagreement that separates hedonic from eudaimonic philosophers has spread to the science of wellbeing. This has resulted in two opposing perspectives regarding both wellbeing concepts and proposed pathways to wellbeing. Whilst contention continues, most contemporary psychologists now agree that hedonic and eudaimonic approaches each denote important aspects of wellbeing. This has led to integrated wellbeing conceptualisations, in which the combined presence of hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing components is referred to as ‘flourishing’. In regard to the attainment of wellbeing, research simultaneously investigating hedonic and eudaimonic pathways suggests that a life rich in both types of pursuits is associated with the highest degree of wellbeing. Despite this assertion, previously underemphasised methodological limitations question the validity of such claims. To further progress this important area of investigation, future research directions to ameliorate said limitations are explored. It is recommended that the past tendency to contrast and compare hedonia and eudaimonia be abandoned, and instead that the inherent value of both be recognised. Time-use research methods are needed to cross-validate past findings obtained from cross-sectional research, which will make it possible to transition from purely descriptive conclusions to applied conclusions. Notes Reproduced with the kind permission of the copyright owner. Language eng Field of Research 170106 Health, Clinical and Counselling Psychology Socio Economic Objective 920410 Mental Health HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal ERA Research output type C Journal article Copyright notice ©2012, The Authors Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30052305 Document type: Journal Article Collections: School of Psychology Higher Education Research Group Open Access Collection Related Links Link Description Connect to published version Go to link with your DU access privileges     Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved. Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au. Versions Version Filter Type Tue, 07 May 2013, 13:41:28 EST Wed, 08 May 2013, 08:44:08 EST Wed, 08 May 2013, 15:13:57 EST Wed, 08 May 2013, 15:20:51 EST Filtered Full Access Statistics: 48 Abstract Views, 50 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics Created: Tue, 07 May 2013, 13:41:15 EST by Jane Moschetti

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.