Openly accessible

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 71

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

Connect to link resolver
 
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
Access Statistics: 60 Abstract Views, 71 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.