MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183727261 · doi:10.1037/cap0000033

Foundational frameworks of positive psychology: Mapping well-being orientations.

2015· article· en· W2183727261 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Lambert, Holli‐Anne Passmore, Mark D. Holder

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyEpistemologyCognitive psychologyApplied psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The scientific study of well-being has been strongly influenced by ideas from a number of related fields, including different areas of psychology. Two major philosophical traditions- hedonia and eudaimonia- underscore much of our current understanding of well-being, and are reflected across early and contemporary psychological theories of well-being. These traditions help delineate the various conceptualisations of well-being and its components; moreover, these traditions influence which research questions are asked, and where and how answers are sought. This has resulted in a plethora of categories and terms referring to similar, yet distinct, concepts such as: well-being, happiness, optimal or positive experiences, life satisfaction, and flourishing. Given the difficulties of distinguishing these concepts, this article aims to provide clarity by delineating the major orientations in positive psychology. We provide a road-map to theories and models of well-being found within positive psychology, thereby providing a starting a point from which an integrative framework of theories and models of well-being can be developed. To that end, also included in this review is a selection of well-being models that lie beyond the traditional frameworks. We conclude with a consideration of several criticisms that have been directed at positive psychology, and provide recommendations for future directions.Keywords: positive psychology, eudaimonia, hedonia, well-being, character strengthsResumeL'etude scientifique du bien-etre a ete fortement influencee par des idees empruntees a divers champs connexes, notamment a des domaines de la psychologie. Deux importantes traditions philosophiques, hedonia et eudaimonia, sous-tendent nombre des connaissances actuelles sur le bien-etre et trouvent echo dans les theories en psychologie sur cette notion, tant les toutes premieres que les contemporaines. Ces traditions aident a delimiter les diverses conceptualisations du bien-etre et de ses composants; en outre, elles influencent les questions de recherche qui sont posees ainsi que les methodes utilisees pour y repondre et les endroits ou chercher les reponses. Cette situation a donne lieu a une multitude de categories et de termes qui definissent des concepts semblables, mais neanmoins distincts : bien-etre, bonheur, experience optimale ou positive, satisfaction de vivre, epanouissement. Etant donne la difficulte de delimiter ces concepts, cet article vise a eclaircir les distinctions en determinant les principales orientations au sein de la psychologie positive. Il fournit un « plan » des theories et des modeles sur le bien-etre en psychologie positive, en vue d'etablir un point de depart pour l'etablissement d'un cadre integrateur. A cette fin, sont inclus dans la presente recherche des modeles sur le bien-etre qui ne correspondent pas aux cadres traditionnels. L'article se termine par une reflexion sur des critiques a l'egard de la psychologie positive ainsi que par des recommandations pour les recherches futures.Mots-cles : psychologie positive, eudaimonia, hedonia, bien-etre, force de caractere.Although positive psychology is considered a new field of inquiry, its origins can be traced to several philosophical traditions. These philosophical traditions provide a foundational framework within which positive psychology theories can be understood. Utilizing a philosophical framework, this review maps out numerous theories and models of well-being (see Figure 1). To provide as complete a guide as possible, a selection of well-being perspectives and models that stand tangential to the traditional philosophical frameworks are also considered.Utilitarian Philosophical TraditionUtilitarianism, promoted by the likes of Jeremy Bentham (1748- 1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), focuses on the greatest happiness for the greatest number (Brulde & Bykvist, 2010). Within positive psychology, utilitarianism is most often manifested as maximizing happiness within specific groups of people. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.027
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations143
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207