MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391485310 · doi:10.1007/s10902-024-00729-8

Contentment and Self-acceptance: Wellbeing Beyond Happiness

2024· article· en· W4391485310 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel T. Cordaro, Yang Bai, Christina Bradley, Franklyn Zhu, Rachel Han, Dacher Keltner, Arasteh Gatchpazian, Yitong Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Happiness Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContentmentHappinessPositive psychologyQuality of Life ResearchPsychologySelf-acceptanceSocial psychologyPublic healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Contentment is an emotion felt when the present situation is perceived to be complete as it is. Six studies are presented showing the difference between contentment and other positive emotions, documenting contentment’s unique relationship with self-acceptance, and exploring the positive associations between contentment and wellbeing. First, we demonstrated that contentment is perceived as different from happiness and other positive emotions using an emotion concept mapping methodology (Study 1), a dimensional analysis (Study 2), and a free-response narrative analysis (Study 3). We then demonstrated that both trait (Study 4 and 5) and state levels (Study 6) of contentment are associated with a sense of self-acceptance, and further related to increased wellbeing. We conclude that contentment is a unique positive emotion that is central to wellbeing and life satisfaction, and we discuss important implications for future research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.327 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations29
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Happiness StudiesSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207