Relation between Materialistic Value, Spiritual Oneness Belief and Physical Oneness Belief with Happiness: A Study on Young Professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over last 15 years, psychologists have importantly contributed to this discussion by empirically investigating measures, behavioral correlates, and determinants of happiness. Websters (1913) simply defines it as -a: state of well-being characterized by emotions ranging from contentment to intense joy; b: a pleasurable or satisfying experience. Happiness, also called in positive psychology subjective well-being, is commonly considered by positive psychologists main way we can evaluate how well our life is going. Martin Seligman (2002), describes happiness as being based on three lives - pleasurable life, engaged life and meaningful life. The better each of these lives is lived, happier person will be. Ruut Veenhoven describes happiness as the degree in which an individual judges overall quality of his life-as-a-whole favorably. Happiness is increasingly considered a proper measure of social progress and a goal of public policy (World Happiness Report, 2015).The core values of current consumer culture are materialistic and internalization of materialistic values as one's personal goals lead individuals to a greater commitment to buying and having material goods. A person with highly materialistic values believes that acquisition of material good is a central life goal, prime indicator of success and key to happiness and self definition (Richins, 2004).Hellevik (2003) correlated yearly measures of well being in Norway with extent to which citizens exerted strong materialistic values each year, finding that two were negatively associated. Australian researches from 1990s found materialist values and a possessions-based definition of success share common characteristics with type-A behaviors, including competitiveness and aggression. Another study reported that priority US adolescents placed on materialistic aims on a particular year was positively associated with yearly levels of adolescent psychopathology (Twenge et al., 2010). A meta-analysis over 200 independent samples revealed that negative association between materialism and well-being robust across different operationalizations of constructs and across different personal and cultural characteristics (Dittmar et al., 2013).Spiritual oneness is belief in spiritual interconnectedness and essential oneness of all phenomena, both living and nonliving; and a belief that happiness depends on living in accord with this understanding. This is more strongly related to mystic experiences and spirituality than to traditional religiousness. Spiritual oneness is positively associated with pro- environmental attitudes, but not with depression , anxiety or negative affect (Garfield, Drweck, Moore, Kortenkamp, & Gracz, 2014).Psychologist Mark Holder and colleagues (2008) at University of British Columbia in Canada discovered in their research with children (9-12 years old) that 6.5 to 16.5 per cent of children's happiness is attributable to spirituality. A research project by Dr. Michael Yi and Sian Cotton (2009) at University of Cincinnati revealed links between spirituality and happiness among teenagers. The researchers compared teenagers with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) with their healthy peers. Their analysis showed that while spirituality helped all of young cope with life's challenges, but it was especially helpful for ones with IBD. A 2012 review by Koenig, of more than 326 peer-reviewed studies of mainly adult populations found that out of those 326 studies, 256 (79%) found only significant positive associations between spirituality and well-being. Ellison's (1991) study was identified as a key study because it was one of first studies to report on relationship between spiritual beliefs, life satisfaction, and personal happiness. This study revealed that positive influence of spiritualism certainty on well-being is direct and substantial: individuals with strong spiritual belief report higher levels of life satisfaction, greater personal happiness, and fewer negative psychosocial consequences of traumatic life events. …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".