The Complementary Roles of Eudaimonia and Hedonia and How They Can Be Pursued in Practice

Abstract

Many of us have asked ourselves: What is a good life? What makes a life worth living? This is one of the great existential questions. The answers we develop shape our priorities, choices, and goals, and the very way we decide what is desirable. In conceptions of a good life, the two perspectives that have figured most prominently are the hedonic view and the eudaimonic view (Ryan & Deci 2001). Briefly, a hedonic orientation involves seeking happiness, positive affect, life satisfaction, and reduced negative affect; a eudaimonic orientation includes seeking authenticity, meaning, excellence, and personal growth (Huta & Waterman, 2013). These two perspectives have been discussed for over 2,000 years by philosophers, including Aristotle and Aristippus in ancient Greece, and more recently by early psychologists and psychiatrists, such as Maslow, Jung, and Freud. Much of the current psychology research on well-being similarly addresses hedonia and/or eudaimonia, making the hedonic–eudaimonic distinction a central concept in positive psychology, as evidenced by its frequent appearance in the first edition of this volume. It is time for us to consider more systematically how these concepts might be applied in practice. First, I discuss existing definitions and research. I then venture into more uncharted territory. I will pull together a characterization of the complementary natures of hedonia and eudaimonia, to clarify why the two concepts are so central to discussions of well-being, and then propose specific strategies for pursuing hedonia and eudaimonia in practice.

Full text

216
Chapter 10
The Complementary Roles of
Eudaimonia and Hedonia and
How They Can Be Pursued in
Practice
Veronika Huta
Many of us have asked ourselves: What is a good life? What makes a life
worth living? This is one of the great existential questions. The answers we
develop shape our priorities, choices, and goals, and the very way we decide what
is desirable. In conceptions of a good life, the two perspectives that have figured
most prominently are the hedonic view and the eudaimonic view (Ryan & Deci
2001). Briefly, a hedonic orientation involves seeking happiness, positive affect,
life satisfaction, and reduced negative affect; a eudaimonic orientation includes
seeking authenticity, meaning, excellence, and personal growth (Huta &
Waterman, 2013). These two perspectives have been discussed for over 2,000
years by philosophers, including Aristotle and Aristippus in ancient Greece, and
more recently by early psychologists and psychiatrists, such as Maslow, Jung, and
Freud. Much of the current psychology research on well-being similarly addresses
hedonia and/or eudaimonia, making the hedonic–eudaimonic distinction a central
concept in positive psychology, as evidenced by its frequent appearance in the first
edition of this volume. It is time for us to consider more systematically how these
concepts might be applied in practice. First, I discuss existing definitions and
research. I then venture into more uncharted territory. I will pull together a
characterization of the complementary natures of hedonia and eudaimonia, to
clarify why the two concepts are so central to discussions of well-being, and then
propose specific strategies for pursuing hedonia and eudaimonia in practice.

217
Different Categories of Definitions,
and Common Elements Across
Definitions
Following this section, I use one specific approach to defining hedonia and
eudaimonia, but before I do, I would like to outline the full range of approaches.
In a systematic review of psychology definitions of eudaimonia and
hedonia (Huta & Waterman, 2013), we found that the definitions fall into four
different categories of analysis. The categories are orientations, behaviors,
experiences, and functioning, as detailed below.
Definitions of eudaimonia have been as follows:
 Orientations: Orientations, values, motives, and goals, that is, the
“why” of behavior—for example, valuing growth; seeking
challenge; seeking personal excellence; wanting to serve a higher
and meaningful purpose; having autonomous motivation and
intrinsic goals; having goals that are valuable in themselves and
part of one’s identity (Bauer, McAdams, & Sakaeda, 2005; Delle
Fave, Massimini, & Bassi, 2011; Fowers, Mollica, & Procacci,
2010; Huta & Ryan, 2010; Peterson, Park, & Seligman, 2005;
Ryan, Huta, & Deci, 2008; Vittersø, Oelmann, & Wang, 2009).
 Behaviors: Behavioral content and activity characteristics, that is,
the “what” of behavior—for example, volunteering; giving
money to those in need; expressing gratitude; mindfulness;
engaging in challenging activities to which one brings
commensurate skill (Delle Fave & Massimini, 1988; Ryan et al.,
2008; Steger, Kashdan, & Oishi, 2007).
 Experiences: Subjective experiences, emotions, and cognitive
appraisals—for example, feelings of meaning and value; personal
expressiveness; interest and engagement (Delle Fave, Brdar,
Freire, Vella-Brodrick, & Wissing, 2011; Vittersø, Dyrdal,
Røysamb, 2005; Waterman, 1993).
 Functioning: Indices of a person’s overall positive psychological
functioning, mental health, and flourishing, that is, how well a
person is doing—for example, autonomy; competence;
relatedness; purpose in life; personal growth; self-acceptance;
social well-being; self-discovery; self-actualization; development

218
of one’s best potentials; habitual intense involvement and effort
(Keyes, 2002; Ryan et al., 2008; Ryff, 1989; Waterman, 1993).

219
Definitions of hedonia have fallen into three of the categories of analysis:
 Orientations: For example, seeking pleasure, enjoyment, comfort,
or relaxation, whether or not these aims are achieved; seeking
homeostasis; having a mindset in which one evaluates things as
good and bad (Huta & Ryan, 2010; Peterson et al., 2005;
Vittersø, Søholt, Hetland, Thoresen, & Røysamb, 2010).
 Behaviors: For example, going to a big party; attending a sporting
event or concert; going on a long walk; listening to music (Steger
et al., 2007).
 Experiences: For example, positive affect; life satisfaction;
happiness; low negative affect; low depression (Bauer,
McAdams, & Pals, 2008; Delle Fave, Brdar, et al., 2011; Fowers
et al., 2010; Keyes, 2002; Ryan et al., 2008; Ryff, 1989; Vittersø
et al., 2005; Waterman, 1993).
Although there are certainly differences between the definitions that various
psychologists have used, I will not dwell on the differences here. Instead, I will
distill the concepts that emerge most consistently across definitions, regardless of
the category of analysis, to anchor the reader’s understanding of hedonia and
eudaimonia. (See also Huta, 2013b, for an earlier summary of common elements
across eudaimonia definitions.)
As shown in Huta and Waterman (2013), there is clear agreement that
hedonia involves pleasure, enjoyment, and satisfaction, whether it is construed as
the experience of these variables or as an orientation or behavior aimed at seeking
these experiences. The majority of researchers have also associated hedonia with
an absence of distress (which can be rephrased as a presence of comfort), or with
an affective balance such that positive experiences outweigh negative experiences.
In this chapter, I will assume that hedonia does include the concept of reduced
distress. (See Vittersø, 2013, for an additional discussion of hedonia.)
Conceptions of eudaimonia have varied more widely than those of hedonia.
Nevertheless, Huta and Waterman (2013) found that four core definitional
elements appeared across most or all definitions: (1) authenticity: clarifying one’s
true self and deep values, staying connected with them, and acting in accord with
them; (2) meaning: understanding a bigger picture, relating to it, and contributing
to it(the bigger picture may include broader aspects of your own life or identity, a
purpose, the long term, your community, society, the ecosystem; or even a
conception of how the entire world works or is meant to work); (3) excellence:
striving for higher quality and higher standards in one’s behavior, performance,
accomplishments, and ethics; and (4) growth: actualizing what one feels is right
for oneself, fulfilling one’s potential, and pursuing personal goals; personal
growth, learning, improving, and seeking challenges; and maturing as a human
being.

220
Although hedonia and eudaimonia are distinct concepts, both theoretically
and empirically (e.g., Huta & Ryan, 2010; Peterson et al., 2005), I should add that
they are by no means mutually exclusive, and that they often co-occur. Indeed,
some of the most fulfilling pursuits are the ones where eudaimonia and hedonia
are so seamlessly blended that they become one.
Hedonic and Eudaimonic
Orientations—The Category of
Analysis Focused on Here
The study of all four categories of analysis—orientations, behaviors,
experiences, and functioning—can give us a well-rounded understanding of the
whole process of eudaimonia or hedonia. However, I would argue that one
category is most directly at the heart of what is meant by eudaimonia and hedonia:
orientations. I believe that Aristotle was mainly talking about orientations, and that
it is primarily about orientations—the attitudes, values, motives, and goals a
person can choose. All we have control over in life is our choices and aims—we
cannot ensure the success of our aims (i.e., functioning, experiences), or the
feelings of well-being that may result (i.e., experiences). Thus, choices are more
fruitful targets for intervention than are outcomes. It also seems most fair to
describe the nature of a person’s life in terms of their efforts rather than their
successes. And a conceptualization in terms of choices brings the focus of
eudaimonia and hedonia inward rather than outward to external criteria and on the
process of life rather than the outcomes—a focus that seems more intrinsic, more
engaged, and richer. Even when choosing among orientations and behaviors, I
would treat orientations as more fundamental, since two people can engage in the
same surface behavior for very different reasons (Huta, 2013a; Huta & Ryan,
2010).
Thus, I would conclude that eudaimonia and hedonia are most
fundamentally orientations. For the remainder of this chapter, this is the category
of analysis that I will focus on, and the review of research findings in the next
section will focus on the measures that clearly assess both eudaimonia and hedonia
as orientations—the Hedonic and Eudaimonic Motives for Activities (HEMA)
scale that I developed (Huta & Ryan, 2010), and the Orientations To Happiness
Questionnaire (OTHQ) based on Seligman’s conceptualization (Peterson et al.,
2005).
The HEMA scale inquires, “To what degree [do you typically approach
your activities]/[did you approach your activities today/this week/etc.] with each

221
of the following intentions, whether or not you actually [achieve]/[achieved] your
aim?” The eudaimonic motives are “Seeking to pursue excellence or a personal
ideal,” “Seeking to use the best in yourself,” “Seeking to develop a skill, learn, or
gain insight into something,” and “Seeking to do what you believe in.” The
hedonic motives are “Seeking enjoyment,” “Seeking pleasure,” “Seeking fun,”
“Seeking relaxation,” and “Seeking to take it easy.” Participants give ratings of 1
(not at all) to 7 (very much). The OTHQ states, “Please indicate the degree to
which each of the following statements applies to you from 1 (very much unlike
me) to 5 (very much like me).” Sample items assessing eudaimonia (which
Seligman, 2002, calls the life of meaning) are “My life serves a higher purpose,”
and “I have a responsibility to make the world a better place.” Sample hedonic
items (the life of pleasure) are “Life is too short to postpone the pleasures it can
provide,” and “In choosing what to do, I always take into account whether it will
be pleasurable.” Overall, the HEMA focuses on the excellence, authenticity, and
growth elements of eudaimonia, and the pleasure and comfort elements of
hedonia; the OTHQ focuses on the meaning element of eudaimonia, and the
pleasure element of hedonia. Nevertheless, I have found (in unpublished data) that
the subscales of the HEMA and OTHQ show convergent and discriminant
validity. Furthermore, the research reviewed in the next section has often produced
similar patterns of results for the two scales.
Empirical Findings
Below, I summarize research on hedonic and eudaimonic orientations, to
give the reader a sense of how hedonia and eudaimonia differ, and how they
behave in combination. Where I say “hedonia relates more,” I imply a comparison
with eudaimonia, and vice versa. Results refer to the trait level unless otherwise
specified—the trait level focuses on a person’s life as a whole, linking their typical
or average degree of eudaimonia or hedonia with their typical or average score on
another variable; the state level, by contrast, focuses on a given moment or time
period, linking a person’s hedonia or eudaimonia at that time with another variable
at that time.
Hedonia and eudaimonia relate to somewhat different experiences, so that
people who pursue both hedonia and eudaimonia have a more well-rounded
picture of well-being than people who pursue only one or the other: hedonia
relates more to carefreeness (at trait and state levels), positive affect (only at the
state level), and low negative affect (only at the state level); eudaimonia relates
more to meaning (at trait and state levels), elevation (at the trait level), self-
connectedness (at trait and state levels), work satisfaction, and low depression
(Huta, 2013a; Huta & Ryan, 2010; Proyer, Annen, Eggimann, Schneider, & Ruch,
2012; Schueller & Seligman, 2010).

222
Hedonia and eudaimonia relate equally to vitality (at both trait and state
levels) (Huta, 2013a; Huta & Ryan, 2010).
Hedonia and eudaimonia relate equally to life satisfaction in studies with
the HEMA scale (Huta, 2013a; Huta & Ryan, 2010) and some studies with the
OTHQ (Chan, 2009; Chen, 2010; Proyer et al., 2012; Peterson, Ruch, Beerman,
Park, & Seligman, 2007; Ruch, Harzer, Proyer, Park, & Peterson, 2010), but
eudaimonia relates more to life satisfaction (and to happiness) in other studies with
the OTHQ (Anić & Tončić, 2013; Kumano, 2011; Park, Peterson, & Ruch, 2009;
Peterson et al., 2005; Peterson et al., 2007; Schueller & Seligman, 2010; Vella-
Brodrick, Park, & Peterson, 2009).
With the HEMA scale, hedonia and eudaimonia relate equally to positive
affect (Huta, 2013a; Huta & Ryan, 2010), but with the OTHQ, eudaimonia relates
more to positive affect (Anić & Tončić, 2013; Chan, 2009; Park et al., 2009;
Peterson et al., 2005; Schueller & Seligman, 2010; Vella-Brodrick et al., 2009).
People who pursue both hedonia and eudaimonia have higher degrees of
various well-being outcomes than people who pursue only one or the other (Anić
& Tončić, 2013; Huta & Ryan, 2010; Peterson et al., 2005).
Hedonic activity may be associated with greater immediate well-being,
whereas eudaimonic activity may be associated with greater long-term well-being
(Huta, 2013a; Huta & Ryan, 2010).
Eudaimonic pursuits are associated with a more positive impact on the
surrounding world, including close friends and relatives (Huta, 2012; Huta,
Pelletier, Baxter, & Thompson, 2012), the broader community (Huta, 2013a; Huta,
Pearce, & Voloaca, 2013), and the environment (Huta et al., 2013); generally,
eudaimonia is more related to indices of long-term perspective, caring about the
bigger picture, and abstract rather than concrete thinking (Huta et al., 2013).
Hedonically oriented and eudaimonically oriented individuals have
somewhat different profiles on other individual differences, giving us a sense of
how their natures differ: Of the Values in Action character strengths and virtues
(Peterson & Seligman, 2004), hedonia relates more to playfulness, whereas
eudaimonia relates more to judgment, wisdom, and religiousness ; hedonia relates
negatively to humility (Buschor, Proyer, & Ruch, 2013; Huta, 2013a; Peterson et
al., 2007; Ruch, Proyer, & Weber, 2010b). Hedonia relates more to the
excitement-seeking and gregariousness components of extraversion, whereas
eudaimonia relates more to characteristics reflecting introversion, including
introspectiveness, subjectivity/nonconformism, enjoyment of solitude, enjoyment
of peace and quiet, and a focus on thoughts and ideas (Huta, 2013a). Eudaimonia
relates more to integrated motivation and to a composite of intrinsic goals,
whereas hedonia relates more to a composite of extrinsic goals (Anić & Tončić,
2013; Huta, 2013a). In terms of demographics, hedonia decreases with age,

223
education, skill required in one’s profession, religiousness, and being married, and
eudaimonia increases with skill required in one’s profession and religiousness
(Peterson et al., 2005; Ruch et al., 2010; Schueller & Seligman, 2010). Additional
findings show that eudaimonia relates more to self-control (Anić & Tončić, 2013),
vocational identity achievement (Hirschi, 2011), and career success (Proyer et al.,
2012), whereas hedonia relates more to materialism (Huta, 2013a).
Research on predictors of eudaimonia and hedonia shows the role of
several parenting variables: Parental demandingness (expecting maturity, setting
limits, giving challenges and enrichment) and parental responsiveness (being
nurturing, taking the time to explain, listening, encouraging self-expression) both
relate to the adult child’s eudaimonia but not his or her hedonia, suggesting that
rearing a child to be eudaimonic requires greater investment (Huta, 2012). Adult
children pursue eudaimonia (or hedonia) whether their parents merely verbally
endorsed eudaimonia (or hedonia) or actually role-modeled it; adult children also
derive increased well-being from eudaimonia (or hedonia) if their parents role
modeled it, but derive little or no well-being if their parents only verbally endorsed
eudaimonia (or hedonia) (Huta, 2012).
The Complementary Natures of
Hedonia and Eudaimonia
The above review of definitions and findings gives us an outline of what is
meant by hedonia and eudaimonia. I would like, now, to go even deeper, toward
the very heart of the hedonic–eudaimonic distinction. I do not think the distinction
is some artefact of a tradition hailing from ancient Greece. I think it speaks to two
very real psychological functions.
There are certainly concepts other than hedonia and eudaimonia (as I define
them) that have been associated with a good life, including relationships,
engagement, accomplishment, harmony, physical health, and attitudes like
optimism; extrinsic values such as material wealth, image, status, power, and
popularity; and basic circumstances such as safety, health, freedom, and essential
material resources (Delle Fave, Brdar, et al., 2011; Grouzet et al., 2005; Kasser &
Ryan, 1993; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987; Seligman, 2011; Tafarodi et al., 2012).
Eudaimonia and hedonia are not sufficient for an optimal existence, and some of
the above variables are needed as well (including relationships, which play a
major role in well-being; Diener & Seligman, 2002).
Yet there is something fundamental about the distinction between
eudaimonia and hedonia, they play major complementary roles in life. Clarifying
these roles can help us to explain why the hedonic–eudaimonic distinction so often

224
appears center stage, and to appreciate the importance of having a balance of both
pursuits.
Below, I outline several complementary functions. They are not clear-cut,
because hedonia includes eudaimonic functions to some degree, and vice versa.
And they are rough generalizations that sometimes oversimplify the picture.
Nevertheless, they are useful for developing a deeper feel for hedonia and
eudaimonia, especially when pursuing them in practice.
Hedonia is about taking, for me, now; eudaimonia is about building,
something broader, for the long-term. This is perhaps the most fundamental
distinction. Hedonia is a self-nourishing and self-care function—taking care of
one’s own needs and desires, typically in the present or near future; reaching
personal release and peace, to replenish, heal, and find a fresh perspective; and
“drinking in” nutriments of energy and joy. Eudaimonia is a cultivating function—
giving of oneself, and investing in a larger aspect of the self, a long-term project,
or the surrounding world. Thus, it is roughly about taking versus giving, narrow
versus broad perspective, and short-term versus long-term perspective. The
mindsets associated with these orientations might be summarized as desire versus
care. Hedonic desire need not be seen as vulgar—I am referring to that healthy
ability to feel and flow with what one needs and wants and relishes. The
prerequisite for eudaimonia is caring in a very general sense, such as
thoughtfulness, and caring about quality, rightness, context, or the welfare of
others. Deeper still, hedonia and eudaimonia are based on distinct assumptions
about oneself: that one has rights versus responsibilities. If one does not feel
entitled to happiness, self-nourishment, and taking up space, it is difficult to
pursue hedonia in the first place. Eudaimonia, on the other hand, begins when a
person takes some responsibility for his or her life and for the implications of his
or her actions (Frankl, 1946/1997).
Hedonia is the pursuit of what feels good; eudaimonia is the pursuit of
what one believes to be right. Implied in the previous sentence are several
distinctions (see also Steger & Shin, 2012, for similar distinctions). First, there is
the affective and biological versus cognitive distinction—the desirability of
pursuits is gauged in terms of more emotional and physical experiences in
hedonia, but in terms of more abstract values and ideals in eudaimonia. We might
approximate this by speaking of pleasure versus value. There is an automatic
versus effortful distinction. Hedonia proceeds more directly and automatically
from our hard wiring. Eudaimonia is a natural inclination as well (Maslow,
1968)—it is fulfilling to use what we have and become all that we can be.
However, eudaimonic ideals must first be developed, and then actively kept in
mind to some degree, if they are to be pursued; as such, eudaimonia is more
effortful and more easily disrupted (Huta, 2013b). To some degree, there is also a
subjective versus objective distinction (Diener, Sapyta, & Suh, 1998). Hedonia
aims at activities that are pleasant for the individual in question. Eudaimonia is

225
also largely guided by subjective inner processes and gut feelings, but some
eudaimonic aims, such as ethical behavior and maturity, are informed by
conceptions of what is universally of high quality in all human beings.
Overall, hedonia is more fundamental, whereas eudaimonia is more
elevated. We cannot consider one pursuit “better” than the other, each is important
in its own way. Hedonia is more fundamental in the sense that it often takes care
of immediate needs and desires, and is based on older brain systems that we share
with other species. Eudaimonia is a “higher pleasure” (Seligman, 2002) in the
sense that it allows people to develop their potential, and it exercises the higher
cognitive capacities which are particularly well-developed in humans, such as
values, morality, and vision (Huta 2013b; Steger & Shin, 2012). The actual
proportions of hedonia and eudaimonia that best suit a person probably vary
widely from individual to individual. But if a person does not have at least some
hedonia and some eudaimonia, they may feel flat and unfulfilled, be more
vulnerable to unhappiness, or develop psychopathology. To achieve optimal well-
being, we need to have some degree of both complementary functions, and they
probably keep each other in check.
Steps Toward Eudaimonia and
Hedonia
The definitions, findings, and complementary functions discussed above
clearly indicate the importance of pursuing both hedonia and eudaimonia. This, of
course, raises the question of how exactly a person goes about pursuing these. I
dedicate the remainder of this chapter to a description of what eudaimonia and
hedonia might look like in practice.
I will first note, however, that hedonia and eudaimonia are present in
various interventions already. For example, prescribing psychotropic medication is
a hedonic intervention to the degree that it is treated as a means to alleviate
suffering. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (Beck, 2011) includes the hedonic aim of
relieving distress and the eudaimonic aim of reducing dysfunction. More strongly
in the eudaimonic direction, we find therapies which also aim to reduce distress,
but which place more emphasis on taking suffering as a flag, even an opportunity,
indicating the need to move toward greater authenticity, meaning, excellence, or
growth. Examples of such interventions are humanistic therapies (e.g., Frankl,
1946/1997; Maslow, 1968; Rogers, 1961), acceptance commitment therapy
(Hayes, Luoma, Bond, Masuda, & Lillis, 2006), and well-being therapy (Fava &
Tomba, 2009). Some interventions explicitly target the enhancement of both
hedonia and eudaimonia, such as quality of life therapy and coaching (Frisch, in

226
press). And a variety of positive psychology interventions are aimed less at
alleviating suffering and more at enhancing hedonic and/or eudaimonic aspects of
life (Sin & Lyubomirsky, 2009).
My aim here is to bring together some key concepts in the pursuit of
hedonia and eudaimonia (which will be italicized) that could form the basis of
interventions and of research on those interventions. (The Appendix also lists
some measures that could be used by researchers and practitioners.) Applied
settings might include coaching, education, organizations, clinical practice, and
self-help. In writing this chapter, I sacrificed much depth, illustration, and nuance
for the sake of at least touching on many concepts and authors that are relevant—
the topic could easily fill a book of its own. I will also say that I consider the
proposal below to be a draft, which will undoubtedly be revised and expanded as
our field gains insight into well-being.
From here on in, I will be using more colloquial language, and speaking to
the reader as “you.” This is in the spirit of more direct and intimate
communication, as I will be addressing the reader as someone who may be
personally interested in the pursuit of hedonia or eudaimonia.
Steps Toward Eudaimonia
The four common elements across most definitions of eudaimonia—
authenticity, meaning, excellence, and growth (Huta & Waterman, 2013)—form
an excellent framework for the pursuit of eudaimonia. These terms therefore make
up the headings of the outline below. The elements are intertwined to some
degree, and what I say about one may also apply to others.
Do you have to do all of the things below? Certainly not. Only one or two
ideas may connect with a need or interest that you currently have.
Authenticity
As noted earlier, authenticity involves clarifying your true self and deep
values, staying connected with them, and acting in accord with them. Authenticity
can be very personally fulfilling and is experienced as meaningful (Schlegel,
Hicks, King, & Ardnt, 2011). At the same time, like the other elements of
eudaimonia, it is largely pursued for a subtler reason—as an end in itself,
something that simply feels right. The concept of authenticity is directly embedded
in the term “eudaimonia” from ancient Greece—the term is made up of two words,
“eu,” meaning good or healthy, and “daimon,” meaning the spirit or true self
(Norton, 1976).

227
Facing yourself, warts and all, takes a good dose of humility. Soul-
searching to establish, re-evaluate, and evolve your identity brings uncertainty,
and may be a time of crisis (Marcia, 1967). And it is not always easy to make your
persona, profession, and relationships congruent with your true self—it may take
courage, there may be limitations, and you may have to compromise. Yet finding
paths toward authenticity is liberating, brings clarity, makes life feel more real,
and sets a firmer foundation to build upon.
Moving toward a clearer identity involves a dialogue between life
experiences and the inner self (Waterman & Schwartz, 2013). You can cultivate a
habit of noticing moments when something captures your interest, imagination, or
curiosity (Kashdan & Silvia, 2009). Trust that there is a voice inside you, however
vague at first, that can sort out what is “you.” Humanistic psychologists called this
voice the organismic valuing process (Rogers, 1964), and much of positive
psychology implicitly assumes that we all have this ability (Joseph & Linley,
2004). You can learn to hear this inner voice, and to gauge when your mind is
speaking authentically and when it is biased. One trick to bypass your biases is to
ask yourself, “What would someone who knows me well have to say?”
An important part of who you are is your character strengths. To identify
these, you can take the Values in Action (VIA) Inventory of Strengths (Peterson &
Seligman, 2004). The VIA includes strengths of the head (love of learning,
curiosity, good judgment, creativity, appreciation of beauty) and strengths of the
heart (fairness, forgiveness, gratitude, honesty, hope, humor, kindness, leadership,
love, modesty, persistence, prudence, spirituality, teamwork, zest, bravery,
perspective, self-regulation, social intelligence) (Park & Peterson, 2010).
More generally, you might write an essay or have a discussion (Staudinger,
2001) on questions such as: How do I act when I’m allowed to be vulnerable?
Who inspires me? What did I love as a child? If money or time were not an issue,
what would I do? What do I believe in? To move toward generalizations, you can
start with something specific (e.g., I love cooking, I love sitting by rivers), and
apply a downward arrow technique (Szymanska, 2008), which is a chain of “why”
questions for reaching deeper into yourself, for example, “What is my reason for
liking it? Why does that reason fit with me? What does my last answer say about
me in general?”
Perhaps most importantly, take the time to mull things over. Instead of
escaping into a TV show or videogame or Facebook, try shifting some time toward
being with yourself or having a meaningful conversation. The human mind
naturally reviews the past, highlights what was meaningful, brings up what was
discrepant, and connects the dots, if we just give it the time.
To stay connected with that inner “pilot light” at any given time, it helps to
practice mindfulness—focusing on your experiences in the present, and clearing

228
away judgments and reactions in an effort to see the experiences for what they are
(Baer, Smith, Hopkins, Krietemeyer, & Tonry, 2006).
Regular meditation is also very helpful. It need not take long, follow
someone else’s prescribed technique, or be in a physically uncomfortable position.
It is a regular time for encountering yourself, possibly celebrating what you are
grateful for, reciting a self-made summary of what you stand for, setting the tone
for the upcoming day, or anything else that helps keep you grounded.
And when you surround yourself with things that resonate with you—such
as pictures, plants, music, or memorabilia—they provide daily reminders of your
spirit. You could make some of them yourself, or personalize them by building
stories around them. It’s about breathing your own spirit into your world.
Finally, aligning your lived life with your true self partly involves shaping
your activities, and partly involves shaping your psychological approach. Despite
the constraints of life, there is usually something you can do to feel that life is
more on your terms. You might live your passion through a hobby, show more of
your character in your persona, steer conversations to meaningful topics, or
incorporate signature strengths into your work (Seligman, 2002). Sometimes, you
may do major housecleaning, such as ending a meaningless relationship or
switching your work toward more of a calling (Wrzesniewski, McCaulay, Rozin,
& Schwartz, 1997). It isn’t easy, but it helps to think of how much the change will
energize you, and how much less energy will be leeched out of you in the form of
frustration.
To shift psychologically toward taking the helm, much can be learned from
research on self-determination theory, which points to the following autonomy-
supportive principles (Deci & Ryan, 1987). Listen to your own perspective, and
seek out others who respect your perspective. Use non-coercive language with
yourself—consider replacing “should,” “ought to,” and “have to,” with phrases
like “it makes sense to,” “now is a good time to,” or “let’s go for it.” It is
liberating to give yourself the freedom to choose how you will act (the core aim of
existential interventions; Warnock, 1970). And think through the rationale for an
activity, to see whether and how it aligns with your interests, values, and meaning
framework, even if it means lumping it in with “daily unexciting chores I
graciously accept as a normal part of life.” Perhaps find someone who embraces
the activity and ask them how they see it—their perspective can often be boiled
down to a single effective phrase (consider Nike’s brilliant “Just do it!”).
Meaning
Meaning involves understanding a bigger picture, relating to it, and
contributing to it—the bigger picture may include broader aspects of your life or
identity, a purpose, the long term, your community, society, the ecosystem, or

229
even a conception of how the entire world works or is meant to work. There is
more to the concept of meaning (Wong & Fry, 2012), but the self-transcendent
aspect is especially relevant to eudaimonia.
Developing an understanding of the bigger picture may involve perplexing
existential questions, and contributing to the surrounding world may involve
personal sacrifice. Yet relating to a broader context gives a role to your actions,
and an opportunity to make a difference (Huta & Zuroff, 2007).
Seeking to understand a bigger framework means being guided by big
questions: How does this bigger picture operate? What is its purpose? What
matters in this bigger context? Such questions raise the likelihood of doubting our
existing worldview, sometimes threatening our sense of stability. I therefore
believe in “nibbling” at them, tackling only as much as we are ready for. I also
believe in being comfortable with half-baked hypotheses—it’s a life-long process
and nobody has the final answers. You can be somewhat systematic in building
your understanding by labeling your hypotheses; for example, “half-baked
hypothesis,” “quarter-baked hypothesis,” or “no hypothesis but interesting
question!” And just assigning such labels directs your unconscious toward seeking
answers.
We often develop our life philosophies through exposure to others’
theories—through our parents and local culture, religion, travel, philosophical
texts, discussions with friends, immersion in biography or fiction. But it is not
enough to gather material from others. You need to attend to your own
experiences, and then process it all—through partly unconscious mulling, or
through intentional use of metaphor or narrative (McAdams, 1993), or through an
intuitive process in which you align yourself with a bigger picture “simply by
doing.” Meaning is based on connections, contrasts, and hierarchies—you need to
connect the dots somehow, otherwise you simply have a pile of ideas. Perhaps that
is why Aristotle placed contemplation as the highest of the virtues (Aristotle, 350
B.C.E., Oxford translation 1912-1954, republished 2001).
Contributions to a bigger picture have value in some broader, deeper, or
longer-term sense. People can contribute in many different ways, such as random
acts of kindness (Otake, Shimai, Tanaka-Matsumi, Otsui, & Fredrickson, 2006),
service, building, creating, activism, teaching, childrearing, guiding the next
generation, or investing in a worthwhile personal goal. Much of what is meant by
a broader contribution is captured by the concept of generativity, identified by
Erikson (1950) as the central task of adulthood (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1998).
Contributing also includes refraining from harm, which is a large part of activities
like proenvironmental behavior (Kasser, 2011; Pelletier, Baxter, & Huta, 2011).

230
Excellence
Excellence involves striving for higher quality and higher standards in your
behavior, performance, accomplishments, and ethics. I would add that the
standards need to fit with your true self, your means, and your stage in life. And
it’s about the effort and process, whether or not the goal is achieved.
Excellence takes work, long-term commitment, and sometimes risk. Yet it
can be deeply gratifying to know that you have done your best, done the right
thing, or done a good job. It fills you and simultaneously brings a feeling of
release, like something has culminated because you’ve given it your all. It builds
feelings of quality and healthy pride. You appreciate things more profoundly,
knowing how much work it takes to earn them. And it elevates you, inspires you,
and brings you to a higher level of functioning.
To differentiate up from down in the pursuit of excellence, you need some
conception of when a choice is good, right, of higher quality, true, noble, sacred,
or beautiful. We absorb such conceptions from our parents and culture, and
sometimes from character education in school (Berkowitz & Bier, 2004). You can
build a vision of your standard or ideal by imagining how you would behave and
feel, and what you would be capable of, perhaps by writing an essay on your “best
possible self” (King, 2001). You can look to role models, people who inspire you.
It’s worth learning about them in detail, to immerse yourself in their way of
thinking and behaving, and get a realistic sense of the time invested in their
excellence, the costs, and how much of their life is quite ordinary. All that being
said, the development of judgment and ideals needs to be balanced by tolerance,
lest it turn into being judgmental toward others or yourself.
Various concepts in psychology fall under the umbrella of excellence. For
example, Seligman (2002) speaks of regularly exercising your five greatest
signature strengths, and serving a higher purpose. He also describes how you can
turn many jobs into callings, going beyond what is asked of you to create
something special (see also Duffy & Sedlacek, 2007; Wrzesniewsky et al., 1997).
Wong (2010) speaks of responsible action—finding the right solution and doing
what is morally right. Kohlberg (1984) developed a theory of moral development,
identifying reasoning that ranged from entirely selfish and short-sighted to
prosocial, universally valid, and based on a personal ability to judge what is
appropriate. Orlick (1990) speaks of achieving a high level of excellence in the
performance of your specific profession or sport. In pursuing excellence, try not to
compare yourself with others unless it inspires you or teaches you something you
need. That is, adopt a mastery orientation (focusing on the learning and
improvement itself, and using your past self as a reference point) rather than a
performance orientation (wanting to appear competent compared to others)

231
(Dweck & Leggett, 1988). Eudaimonia is first and foremost a private dialogue—
it’s about your relationship with yourself.
Growth
Growth involves actualizing what you feel is right for you, fulfilling your
potential, and pursuing personal goals; personal growth, learning, improving, and
seeking challenges; and maturing as a human being.
Like excellence, growth requires commitment and effort, and brings the
uncertainty and instability of change. Yet people naturally seek out activities
slightly beyond their current ability (e.g., Abuhamdeh & Csikszentmihalyi, 2012;
Deci, 1971). Advertisers do us a disservice by implying that we want everything to
be easy. Growth builds feelings of progress, accomplishment, and competence,
and the fulfillment of bringing a personal project to fruition.
Some theories of growth have proposed universal milestones, whereas
others have focused on person-specific aims (Waterman & Schwartz, 2013).
Maturity is more aimed at universal goals, actualization is more person-specific,
and personal growth is somewhere in between.
Several theories are relevant to the concept of maturity. Erikson (1950)
stated that we pass through stages of psychosocial development, the sequence in
adulthood being: identity—determining your true character; intimacy—connecting
deeply with others; generativity—making a difference; and ego integrity—coming
to terms with life. Loevinger (1966) proposed stages of ego development, such that
people are initially conformist, then a blend of conscientious and conformist, then
conscientious (rules are internalized), individualistic (autonomy of self and others
is respected), and autonomous (multiple facets are integrated and limitations are
tolerated), and finally integrated (inner conflicts are reconciled). Maslow (1964)
described highly self-actualized people as having realism, tolerance, a non-hostile
sense of humor, autonomy, spontaneity, comfort with solitude, strong ethics and
responsibility, a sense of fellowship with the human condition, purpose, profound
relationships, continual fresh appreciation, and peak experiences.
Personal growth includes processes such as learning information and skills,
gaining experience, improving, deepening insight, overcoming obstacles,
transcending suffering, and setting challenges for yourself. The mind, like any
muscle, wants to be used and developed.
To be open to growth, it is important to believe that it is possible and that
success is based on learning and hard work (a growth mindset), rather than
believing that people cannot change and that success depends on innate ability (a
fixed mindset) (Dweck, 2006).

232
The somewhat mysterious process of inner transformation will not take
place if you are not engaged, truly interacting with life, as flow theory shows.
Flow is that state of immersion during an activity that you can’t yet do
automatically, but that you find challenging and are able to face with just enough
skill to meet the challenge (too little skill leads to anxiety, too much skill leads to
boredom) (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). People seem wired to seek flow
(Csikszentmihalyi & Nakamura, 2010), and since flow activities extend our
abilities, they lead to personal growth (Csikszentmihalyi & Massimini, 1985).
Personal growth is further facilitated by openness to experience and by curiosity
(Vittersø, 2004; Vittersø et al., 2009).
Actualization involves developing what you feel you are meant to do, what
fits with you, perhaps even what feels like a personal destiny (Norton, 1976). It
need not look prestigious, it need not be understood by others. It’s about coming
into your own. People I have met who lived their passion range from a visionary
department head, to a memorable grocery store employee who just shone with a
zest for helping people, to a retiree who created a giant spreadsheet of historical
milestones simply for personal interest.
Follow your passion first, without worrying about where it will take you,
whether it will succeed, whether it will make money. The logistics come later.
Yes, you may need to adjust your vision in the face of limiting circumstances, but
you’ll be further along than if you never started, and you will keep the flame alive.
It’s like art—the primary mindset needs to be experiential, to feel your way
through an idea, while practical and analytical considerations play an essential but
supporting role. Interestingly, things then start to fall into place, as Joseph
Campbell describes:
Follow your bliss. If you do follow your bliss, you put yourself on a kind of
track that has been there all the while waiting for you, and the life you
ought to be living is the one you are living. …. If you follow your bliss,
doors will open for you that wouldn’t have opened for anyone else.
(Campbell & Moyers, 1988, p. 120).
Finally, growth requires some self-management. It helps to be aware of
your stage of change with respect to a project, and to only move forward when
you are ready. When you rush into a project and have to back out later, it’s
discouraging and makes it harder to try again. Prochaska and Velicer (1997)
identified the following stages of change:
 Precontemplation: You are not ready and may not be aware of the
importance of the goal.
 Contemplation: You are considering the advantages and disadvantages.
 Preparation: You are ready and planning your goals.
 Action: You begin.
 Maintenance: You continue.

233
 Termination: The pursuit has become a part of you and there is little
temptation to drop it.
The preparation stage is aided by implementation intentions, very specific
plans for intermediate steps (Gollwitzer, 1999). Maintenance is aided by grit,
including sustained interest, resistance to distraction, perseverance through
setbacks, and simply sticking with it. Grit is partly based on the understanding that
frustration, confusion, and some failure are normal parts of learning, and do not
mean that you should quit (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007).
Maintenance is also based on self-regulation—controlling your feelings, thoughts,
and behaviors, through clear standards, self-monitoring, and willpower. Self-
regulation is a better predictor of reaching your potential than is your intelligence
(Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Maddux, 2009). When you encounter fatigue or
amotivation, it helps to remind yourself of the value of your goal—thinking of
values is a more cognitive process and achievable even when your feelings are
down. And I have observed that accomplished individuals often have a means of
periodically organizing their thoughts and gaining perspective on their goals, be it
a diary, pensive walks, or discussions with a confidant. Overall, the stages from
contemplation and onward are fueled by that remarkable class of human abilities
that might be called faith—believing in something even before it has happened!—
such as self-efficacy or believing you can do it, hope, optimism, trust in the
process, and positive vision (Carver & Scheier, 2002; Prochaska & DiClemente,
1984; Snyder, 1995). With such tools in hand, you can see the possibilities, run
with the gifts.
Steps Toward Hedonia
Through hedonic pursuits, we seek to experience pleasure and enjoyment,
relieve distress and strain, and reach satisfaction. Hedonic pursuits cover the full
range from physical to emotional, from crude to sublime, from transient to
profound. Each part of these ranges can be beneficial, if done in the right context
and in the right way.
Hedonia can have undesirable consequences when taken to excess or when
not balanced by eudaimonia—for example, destructive impulsivity, chronic
escapism, addiction, selfishness, antisocial behavior, greed, and unbridled
consumerism. (Eudaimonia can certainly be excessive as well.) But when pursued
in a healthy way, hedonia not only leads to joy and comfort, but also “fills your
tanks” and fuels motivation, inspiration, broadened attention, and a desire to build
(Fredrickson, 2004). It also gives you a break so you can find a fresh perspective.
Below, I focus only on healthful approaches to hedonia. In its optimal form,
hedonia brings out those beautiful primal, sensual, and creature-comfort parts of

234
ourselves that emerge spontaneously when we are fulfilled to our heart’s content,
well-rested, and free of preoccupations.
It is worth looking at Fordyce’s (1983) 14 fundamentals of happiness,
which he tested in several interventions. They provide some good advice for
pursuing hedonia (focusing on the present, not expecting too much, making
happiness a high priority, not worrying needlessly, taking care of yourself), as
well as more eudaimonic recommendations (meaningful work, authenticity,
planning and organizing, solving rather than ignoring problems), and principles
relevant to both eudaimonia and hedonia (engagement, relatedness, positive and
optimistic thinking). More recently, Lyubomirsky (2008) identified a partly
overlapping list of validated positive psychology interventions: savouring, caring
for your body, gratitude, optimism, engagement, avoiding overthinking and
comparing yourself with others, relationships, kindness, forgiveness, good coping
strategies, goal commitment, and religion and spirituality.
Let me add some comments to these recommendations. So much of well-
being is in your perspective, and adopting a positive perspective is something you
can learn (Seligman, 1998). It truly is about seeing the cup as half full rather than
half empty. You can practice selective attention, focusing on what you have rather
than what you don’t—there is usually enough bad material in life to justify misery,
and enough good material to justify happiness, so you can make choices about
your focus (Mather & Carstensen, 2003). Be wary of setting expectations too high
(or having expectations at all), as it undermines enjoyment (Mauss, Tamir,
Anderson, & Savino, 2011; Schooler, Ariely, & Loewenstein, 2003). If you have
the attitude that nothing is ever good enough, nothing ever will be. Appreciate
how much luckier you are than some people, an attitude called downward social
comparison (Wills, 1981). And when things are difficult, balance entitlement with
grace, acceptance, and equanimity (processes aided by eudaimonia, to be sure).
Engagement is critical (Seligman, 2011). Get immersed in what you do,
rather than having an evaluative mindset. Evaluation is useful when change is
desired, but otherwise, when you’re judging from “outside” yourself, it blocks
personal enjoyment (Vittersø et al., 2009)—imagine someone constantly asking
“Am I happy yet?” Also, intentional activities (e.g., exercise, hobbies, quality time
with family and friends) account for much more of happiness than circumstances
(e.g., getting a raise, getting married, moving to California); intentional activities
are sustained and provide variety, and thus counteract hedonic adaptation, the
process of getting used to your situation and reverting to previous levels of
happiness (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, & Schkade, 2005). Easiness is not always a
gauge of whether a hedonic activity is worthwhile—sometimes activities are more
hedonically satisfying when they require effort, be it physical activity or emotional
or cognitive investment (. . . sometimes). Furthermore, seeing an activity as just a
vehicle to happiness, rather than truly engaging in the activity itself, is an extrinsic
mindset (Schooler et al., 2003). Extrinsic motives reduce the genuine connection

235
with an activity that is needed for enjoyment (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Though I’ve
been speaking of hedonia as the “pursuit” of happiness, it’s important to interpret
this phrase correctly. Happiness cannot be directly commanded or bought.
Hedonia is about engaging in joyful and relaxing activities and attitudes, and then
somehow happiness comes in its own due time (Martin, 2008). To quote Eleanor
Roosevelt, “Happiness is not a goal . . . it’s a by-product of a life well-lived.”
Although happiness cannot be guaranteed, there is nevertheless a way to
very much enhance the likelihood of hedonic experience: savoring. It’s the process
of actively opening your senses, emotions, and cognitive appreciation to indulge in
something longer and more fully. Even the little things, especially the little things,
can be relished—a great tune, a friend’s laughter, or the smell of the flowers.
People can savor the present moment, or the past, by reminiscing and reliving, or
the future, by anticipating and imagining (Bryant & Veroff, 2007). Savoring
processes include physically luxuriating, marveling, basking and self-
congratulation, and gratitude (Bryant & Veroff, 2007). Gratitude is a particularly
powerful predictor of well-being (Emmons & McCullough, 2003), and it is worth
making a habit of celebrating your blessings, perhaps as part of a daily meditation
(Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005; Seligman, Rashid, & Parks, 2006).
There is also an interpersonal form of savoring—sharing a positive event with
others who then engage in active-constructive responding, that is, showing
genuine excitement, and capitalizing on the event by discussing it further,
celebrating, telling others, and so on (Gable, Reis, Impett, & Asher, 2004).
In order to take care of yourself, you need to take the time. Don’t hold back
on vacations (they are crucial for eudaimonic development, too), and take breaks
the rest of the year as well. Wells (2012) proposes a 1-3-2 principle, arguing that
people need to rest, take personal time, and completely unplug from work at least
1 hour a day, 3 days a month, and 2 weeks a year. That’s probably a bare
minimum. Furthermore, different people find different activities fulfilling
(Lyubomirsky et al., 2005), and thus it’s important to listen to yourself. Pay
attention to your (positive) fantasies, wishes, and impulses, and follow through
when you can, at least in some small way. You may have gotten into the habit of
ignoring these, but they do resurface here and there, and you can build on them.
Also, take note of how different activities actually make you feel—we are not
always good at predicting what will make us happy (Gilbert & Wilson, 2007).
Finally, I will say that hedonia need not always be a “pursuit.” Sometimes
it’s good to just be. On a cool day in the height of summer, with the cicadas going
and the sound of wind in the trees, who needs anything more than to simply sit? I
truly believe, on an existential level, that we are “meant to” enjoy and just be as
much as we are “meant to” pursue eudaimonia.

236
Conclusion
The long-standing theoretical literature on eudaimonia and hedonia, the
empirical findings, and the clarification of complementarities all point to the
importance of having both pursuits in life. Much research is still needed regarding
the outcomes, correlates, and predictors of these pursuits. Nevertheless, we do
have enough of a grounding to think about applications. For one thing, discussions
of how a person goes about pursuing hedonia and eudaimonia will deepen our
understanding of these concepts, and help with theoretical integration in more
basic research. It will generate hypotheses for research on interventions—there is
adequate empirical support for some of the individual elements in my proposal,
but research has yet to be conducted on other elements or on combinations of
elements. Most importantly, I hope that this chapter will serve as a springboard for
discussions of how the vital concepts of eudaimonia and hedonia can concretely be
applied to improve peoples’ lives. When hedonia and eudaimonia are pursued
wisely, with a feel for their deeper natures and intricacies, they can make life full
and beautiful.
Summary Points
 Psychology definitions of eudaimonia and/or hedonia fall into different
categories of analysis: orientations, behaviors, experiences, or
functioning.
 There is good reason to consider the orientations category—the “why”
of behavior—to be the most fundamental (though the other categories
provide valuable information as well).
 The concepts appearing in most definitions of hedonia are
pleasure/enjoyment and low distress; the concepts in most definitions of
eudaimonia are authenticity, meaning, excellence, and growth. These
sets of concepts can be operationalized as orientations, and can be used
to anchor and organize well-being interventions.
 Underlying the difference between the two sets of concepts is a
distinction between major complementary functions in life, roughly
summarized as “taking, for me, now” versus “investing in something
broader for the longer-term.”
 Research on hedonic and eudaimonic orientations shows, among other
things, that they relate to somewhat different aspects of personal well-
being (e.g., carefreeness versus meaning), and that they together relate
to greater well-being than either pursuit alone.
 Finally, the second half of the chapter identifies specific activities and
practices that a person can adopt to bring more hedonia and eudaimonia

237
into their life. I have tried to provide enough examples, caveats, and
principles to give the reader a feel for what these pursuits entail and
when they are truly fulfilling, so that he or she can craft their own path
to fulfillment.
References
Abuhamdeh, S., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2012). The importance of challenge for the enjoyment
of intrinsically motivated, goal-directed activities. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 38, 317–330. doi:10.1177/0146167211427147
Anić, P., & Tončić, M. (2013). Orientations to happiness, subjective well-being and life goals.
Psihologijske teme, 22, 135–153.
Aristotle. (2001). Nichomachean ethics. In R. McKeon (Ed.), The basic works of Aristotle (pp.
928–1112). New York, NY: Modern Library.
Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., & Tonry, L. (2006). Using self-report
assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13, 27–45.
doi:10.1177/1073191105283504
Battista, J., & Almond, R. (1973). The development of meaning in life. Psychiatry, 36, 409–427.
Bauer, J. J., McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2008). Narrative identity and eudaimonic well-being.
Journal of Happiness, 9, 81–104. doi:10.1007/s10902-006-9021-6
Bauer, J. J., McAdams, D. P., & Sakaeda, A. R. (2005). Interpreting the good life: Growth
memories in the lives of mature, happy people. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 88, 203–217. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.203
Beck, J. S. (2011). Cognitive behavior therapy: Basics and beyond (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Berkowitz, M. W., & Bier, M. C. (2004). Research-based character education. Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 72–85.
Bernard, M. E., Ellis, A., & Terjesen, M. (2006). Rational-emotive behavioral approaches to
childhood disorders: History, theory, practice and research. New York, NY: Spring
Science.
Bryant, F. B., & Veroff, J. (2007). Savoring: A new model of positive experience. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Buschor, C., Proyer, R. T., & Ruch, W. (2013). Self- and peer-rated character strengths: How do
they relate to satisfaction with life and orientations to happiness? Journal of Positive
Psychology, 8, 116–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2012.758305
Campbell, J., & Moyers, B. D. (1988). The Power of Myth. New York, NY: Doubleday.

238
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2002). Optimism. In C. R. Snyder, & S. J. Lopez (Eds.),
Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 231–243). New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Chan, D. W. (2009). Orientations to happiness and subjective well-being among Chinese
prospective and in-service teachers in Hong Kong. Educational Psychology, 29, 139–151.
doi:10.1080/01443410802570907
Chen, G. (2010). Validating the orientations to happiness scale in a Chinese sample of university
students. Social Indicators Research, 99, 431–442. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9590-y
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Massimini, F. (1985). On the psychological selection of bio-cultural
information. New Ideas in Psychology, 3, 115–138.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Nakamura, J. (2010). Effortless attention in everyday life: A systematic
phenomenology. In B. Bruya (Ed.)., Effortless attention: A new perspective in the
cognitive science of attention and action (pp. 179–189). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105–115.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of
behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1024–1037.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and
the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Delle-Fave, A., Brdar, I., Freire, T., Vella-Brodrick, D., & Wissing, M. (2011). The eudaimonic
and hedonic components of happiness: Qualitative and quantitative findings. Social
Indicators Research, 100, 185–207. doi:10.1007/s11205-010-9632-5
Delle Fave A., & Massimini F. (1988). Modernization and the Changing Contexts of Flow in
Work and Leisure. In M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal
Experience. Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness (pp. 193–213). New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press.
Delle-Fave, A., Massimini, F., & Bassi, M. (2011). Psychological selection and optimal
experience across cultures: Social empowerment through personal growth. New York,
NY: Springer.
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J. & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life
Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
Diener, E., Sapyta, J. J., & Suh, E. (1998). Subjective well-being is essential to well-being.
Psychological Inquiry, 9, 33–37.
Diener, E. D., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13, 81–
84.
Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and
passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1087–
1101. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087

239
Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting
academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939–944.
Duffy, R. D., & Sedlacek, W. E. (2007). The presence of and search for a calling: Connections to
career development. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 70, 590–601.
doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2007.03.007
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and
personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.
Emmons, R. A., & Diener, E. D. (1985). Personality correlates of subjective well-being.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 89–97.
Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens: An
experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 377–389. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.2.377
Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and Society. New York, NY: Norton.
Fava, G. A., & Tomba, E. (2009). Increasing psychological well-being and resilience by
psychotherapeutic methods. Journal of Personality, 77, 1903–1934. doi.1111/j.1467-
6494.2009.00604.x
Fordyce, M. W. (1983). A program to increase happiness: Further studies. Journal of
Counselling Psychology, 30, 483–498.
Fowers, B. J., Mollica, C. O., & Procacci, E. N. (2010). Constitutive and instrumental goal
orientations and their relations with eudaimonic and hedonic well-being. The Journal of
Positive Psychology, 5, 139–153. doi:10.1080/17439761003630045
Frankl, V. E. (1997). Man's Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy. New York,
NY: Beacon Press.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. The Royal
Society, 359, 1367–1377. doi:10.1098/rstb.2004.1512
Frisch, M. B. (in press). Evidence-based well-being/positive psychology assessment and
intervention with quality of life therapy and coaching and the quality of life inventory
(QOLI). Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-012-0140-7
Gable, S. L., Reis, H. T., Impet, E. A., & Asher, E. R. (2004). What do you do when things go
right? The intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing positive events. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 228–245. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.228
Gilbert, D. T., & Wilson, T. D. (2007). Prospection: Experiencing the future. Science, 317,
1351–1354.
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American
Psychologist, 54, 493–503.
Grouzet, F. M. E., Kasser, T., Ahuvia, A., Dols, J. M. F., Kim, Y., Lau, S., . . . Sheldon, K. M.
(2005). The structure of goal contents across 15 cultures. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 89, 800–816. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.800

240
Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and
Commitment Therapy: Model, processes and outcomes. Behaviour Research and
Therapy, 44, 1–25. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006
Hirschi, A. (2011). Effects of orientations to happiness on vocational identity achievement.
Career Development Quarterly, 59, 367–378.
Huta, V. (2012). Linking peoples’ pursuit of eudaimonia and hedonia with characteristics of their
parents: Parenting styles, verbally endorsed values, and role modeling. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 13, 47–61. doi:10.1007/s10902-011-9249-7
Huta, V. (2013a). Pursuing eudaimonia versus hedonia: Distinctions, similarities, and
relationships. In A. Waterman (Ed.), The best within us: Positive psychology perspectives
on eudaimonic functioning (pp. 139–158). Washington, DC: APA Books.
Huta, V. (2013b). Eudaimonia. In S. David, I. Boniwell, & A. C. Ayers (Eds.), Oxford Handbook
of Happiness (pp. 201–213). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Huta, V., Pearce, K., & Voloaca, M. (May, 2013). How your style of pursuing personal well-
being relates to how you impact the world around you. Symposium presented at the
Psychology Outside The Box Conference, Ottawa, Ontario.
Huta, V., Pelletier, L., Baxter, D., & Thompson, A. (2012). How eudaimonic and hedonic
motives relate to the well-being of close others. Journal of Positive Psychology, 7, 399–
404.
Huta, V., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Pursuing pleasure or virtue: The differential and overlapping
well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. Journal of Happiness Studies,
11, 735–762. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9171-4
Huta, V., & Waterman A. S. (2013). Eudaimonia and its distinction from hedonia: Developing a
classification and terminology for understanding conceptual and operational definitions.
Journal of Happiness Studies.. doi: 10.1007/s10902-013-9485-0
Huta, V., & Zuroff, D. C. (2007). Examining mediators of the link between generativity and
well-being. Journal of Adult Development, 14, 47–52. doi:10.1007/s10804-007-9030-7
Jones, A., & Crandall, R. (1986). Validation of a short index of self-actualization. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 63–73.
Joseph, S., & Linley, A. P. (2004). Positive therapy: A positive psychological theory of
therapeutic practice. In S. Joseph & A. P. Linley (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice
(1st ed., pp. 354–371). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Kashdan, T. B., & Silvia, P. (2009). Curiosity and interest: The benefits of thriving on novelty
and challenge. In S.J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (2nd ed., pp. 367–
375). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Kasser, T. (2011). Ecological challenges, materialistic values, and social change. In R. Biswas-
Diener (Ed.), Positive psychology as social change (pp. 89–108). Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-9938-9_6

241
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). A dark side of the American dream: Correlates of financial
success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65,
410–422.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life.
Journal of Health and Social Research, 43, 207–222.
King, L. (2001). The health benefits of writing about life goals. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 27, 798–807.
Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral
stages (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.
Kumano, M. (2011). Orientations to happiness in Japanese people: Pleasure, meaning, and
engagement. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 81, 619–624.
Loevinger, J. (1966). The meaning and measurement of ego development. American
Psychologist, 21, 195–206.
Loevinger, J. (1979). Construct validity of the sentence completion test of ego development.
Applied Psychological Measurement, 3, 281–311.
Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). The how of happiness: A scientific approach to getting the life you
want. New York, NY: Penguin Press.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary
reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137–155.
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: The architecture
of sustainable change. Review of General Psychology, 9, 111–131. doi:10.1037/1089-
2680.9.2.111
Maddux, J. E. (2009). Self-regulation. In S. Lopez (Ed.), The encyclopedia of positive
psychology (pp. 874–880). Chichester, England: Blackwell.
Marcia, J. E. (1967). Ego identity status: Relationship to change in self-esteem, “general
maladjustment,” and authoritarianism. Journal of Personality, 35, 118–133.
Martin, M. W. (2008). Paradoxes of happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 171–184.
Maslow, A. (1964). Religion, values and peak experiences. New York, NY: Viking
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Towards a psychology of being. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Mather, M., & Carstensen, L. L. (2003). Aging and attentional biases for emotional faces.
Psychological Science, 14, 409–415.
Mauss, I. B., Tamir, M., Anderson, C. L. & Savino, N. (2011). Can seeking happiness make
people unhappy? Paradoxical effects of valuing happiness. Emotion, 11, 807–815.
McAdams, D. P. (1993). The stories we live by: Personal myths and the making of the self. New
York, NY: Morrow.
McAdams, D. P., & de St. Aubin, E. (1998). How and why we care for the next generation.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

242
Norton, D. L. (1976). Personal Destinies: A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Orlick, T. (1990). In pursuit of excellence: How to win in sport and life through mental training.
(2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Leisure Press.
Otake, K., Shimai, S., Tanaka-Matsumi, J., Otsui, K., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Happy people
become happier through kindness: A counting kindnesses intervention. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 7, 361–375.
Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2010). Does it matter where we live?: The urban psychology of
character strengths. American Psychologist, 65, 535–547. doi:10.1037/a0019621
Park, N., Peterson, C., & Ruch, W. (2009). Orientations to happiness and life satisfaction in
twenty-seven nations. The Journal Positive Psychology, 4, 273–279.
doi:10.1080/17439760902933690
Pelletier, L. G., Baxter, D., & Huta, V. (2011). Personal autonomy and environmental
sustainability. In V. I. Chirkov, R. M. Ryan, & K. M. Sheldon (Eds.), Human autonomy
in cross-cultural context (pp. 257–277). Dorcrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-90-481-9938-9_6
Peterson, C., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Orientations to happiness and life
satisfaction: The full life versus the empty life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6, 25–41.
doi:10.1007/s10902-004-1278-z
Peterson, C., Ruch, W., Beermann, U., Park, N., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2007). Strengths of
character, orientations to happiness and life satisfaction. Journal of Positive Psychology,
2, 149–156. doi:10.1080/17439760701228938
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and
classification. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1984). The transtheoretical approach: Towards a
systematic eclectic framework. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones Irwin.
Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1997). The transtheoretical model of health behavior change.
American Journal of Health Promotion, 12, 38-48.
Proyer, R. T., Annen, H., Eggimann, N., Schneider, A., & Ruch, W. (2012). Assessing the “good
life” in a military context: How does life and work satisfaction relate to orientations to
happiness and career-success among Swiss professional officers. Social Indicators
Research, 106, 577–590. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9823-8
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin.
Rogers, C. R. (1964). Toward a modern approach to values: The valuing process in the mature
person. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68, 160–167.
Ruch, W., Harzer, C., Proyer, R. T., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2010). Ways to happiness in
German-speaking countries: The adaptation of the German version of the Orientations to
Happiness Questionnaire in paper-pencil and internet samples. European Journal of
Psychological Assessment, 26, 227–234. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000030

243
Ruch, W., Proyer, R. T., & Weber, M. (2010). Humor as a character strength among the elderly:
Empirical findings on age-related changes and its contribution to satisfaction with life.
Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 1, 13–18. doi:10.1007/s00391-009-0090-0
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on
hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.
Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a
dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529–565.
Ryan, R. M., Huta, V., & Deci, E. L. (2008). Living well: A self-determination theory
perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 139–170.
doi:10.1007/s10902-006-9023-4
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of
psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.
Schlegel, R. J., Hicks, J. A., King, L. A., & Arndt, J. (2011). Feeling like you know who you are:
Perceived true self-knowledge and meaning in life. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 37, 745–756. doi:10.1177/0146167211400424
Schooler, J. W., Ariely, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2003). The pursuit and assessment of happiness
may be self-defeating. In J. Carrillo & I. Brocas (Eds.), Psychology and Economics.
Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Schueller, S. M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2010). Pursuit of pleasure, engagement and meaning:
Relationships to subjective and objective measures of well-being. The Journal of Positive
Psychology, 5, 253–263. doi:10.1080/17439761003794130
Schwartz, S. H., & Bilsky, W. (1987). Toward a universal psychological structure of human
values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 550–562.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Learned optimism. New York, NY: Pocket Books.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize
your potential for lasting fulfillment. New York, NY: Free Press.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-
being. New York, NY: Free Press.
Seligman, M. E. P., Rashid, T., & Parks, A.C. (2006). Positive psychotherapy. American
Psychologist, 61, 774–788.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress:
Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410
Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need-satisfaction, and longitudinal well-
being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76,
482–497.
Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive
symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 467–487. doi:10.1002/jclp.20593

244
Snyder, C. R. (1995). Conceptualizing, measuring and nurturing hope. Journal of Counselling
and Development, 73, 355–360.
Staudinger, U. M. (2001). Life reflection: A social-cognitive analysis of life review. Review of
General Psychology, 5, 148–160.
Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The Meaning in Life Questionnaire:
Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 53, 80-93.
Steger, M. F., Kashdan, T. B., & Oishi, S. (2007). Being good by doing good: Daily eudaimonic
activity and well-being. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 22–42.
doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.03.004
Steger, M. F., & Shin, J. Y. (2012). Happiness and meaning in a technological world. In P. Brey,
A. Briggle, & E. Spence (Eds.), The good life in a technological age (pp. 92–108). New
York, NY: Routledge.
Szymanska, K. (2008). The downward arrow technique. The Coaching Psychologist, 4, 85–86.
Tafarodi, R. W., Bonn, G., Liang, H., Takai, J., Moriizumi, S., Belhekar, V., & Padhye, A.
(2012). What makes for a good life? A four-nation study. Journal of Happiness Studies,
13, 783–800. doi:10.1007/s10902-011-9290-6
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007). The psychological structure of pride: A tale of two facets.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 506–525. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.92.3.506
Vella-Brodrick, D. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2009). Three ways to be happy: Pleasure,
engagement, and meaning-findings from Australian and US samples. Social Indicators
Research, 90, 165–179. doi:10.1007/s11205-008-9251-6
Vittersø, J. (2004). Subjective well-being versus self-actualization: Using the flow-simplex to
promote a conceptual clarification of subjective quality of life. Social Indicators
Research, 65, 299–331.
Vittersø, J. (2013). Feelings, meanings, and optimal functioning: Some distinctions between
hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. In A. S. Waterman (Ed.), The best within us:
Positive psychology perspectives on eudaimonia (pp. 39–55). Washington, DC: APA
Books.
Vittersø, J., Dyrdal, G. M., & Røysamb, E. (2005, June). Utilities and capabilities: A
psychological account of the two concepts and their relations to the idea of a good life.
Paper presented at the 2nd Workshop on Capabilities and Happiness, University of
Milano, Bicocca, Italy.
Vittersø, J., Oelmann, H. I., & Wang, A. L. (2009). Life satisfaction is not a balanced estimator
of the good life: Evidence from reaction time measures and self-reported emotions.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 10, 1–17. doi:10.1007/s10902-007-9058-1
Vittersø, J., Overwien, P., & Martinsen, E. (2009). Pleasure and interest are differentially
affected by replaying versus analyzing a happy life moment. Journal of Positive
Psychology, 4, 14–20. doi:10.1080/17439760802060602

245
Vittersø , J., Søholt , Y., Hetland , A., Thoresen , I. A., & Røysamb , E. ( 2010 ). Was Hercules
happy? Some answers from a functional model of human well-being. Social Indicators
Research, 95, 1–18. doi:10.1007/s11205-009-9447-4
Warnock, M. (1970). Existentialism (Rev. ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of perspective expressiveness
(eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64,
678–691.
Waterman, A. S., & Schwartz, S. J. (2013). Eudaimonic identity theory. In A. Waterman (Ed.),
The best within us: Positive psychology perspectives on eudaimonic functioning (pp. 99–
118). Washington, DC: APA Books.
Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L., Ravert, R. D., Williams, M. K., Agocha,
V.B., . . . Donnellan, M. B. (2010).The Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being:
Psychometric properties, demographic comparisons, and evidence of validity. The
Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 41–61. doi:10.1080/1743976090343520
Wells, G. (2012). Superbodies: How the science behind world-class athletes can transform your
body and health. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward social comparison principles in social psychology. Psychological
Bulletin, 90, 245–271.
Wong, P. T. P. (2010). Meaning therapy: An integrative and positive existential psychotherapy.
Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 40, 85–99.
Wong, P. T. P., & Fry, P. S. (Eds.). (2012). The human quest for meaning (2nd ed.). Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Wood, A. M., Linley, P. A., Maltby, J., Baliousis, M., & Joseph, S. (2008). The authentic
personality: A theoretical and empirical conceptualization and the development of the
authenticity scale. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 55, 385–399. doi:10.1037/0022-
0167.55.3.385
Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C. R., Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and
callings: People’s relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21–33.
Appendix
Measures for assessing the outcomes of practicing eudaimonia or hedonia
Below, I suggest some measures that might be used by researchers or practitioners when
they need to assess the outcomes of practicing eudaimonia or hedonia. The measures can also
sometimes be useful self-assessments in our private lives. We may choose to evaluate ourselves
when we experience a lack of well-being, or feel that a question needs to be answered. But, as
discussed earlier, excessive self-assessment can unnecessarily detract attention from engaging
with life, make us feel that the glass is half empty rather than half full, and create an evaluative
mindset which interferes with the experience of well-being. It’s a balance.

246
Scale
Author(s)
Sample items
AUTHENTICITY, IDENTITY, REFLECTIONS OF FIT BETWEEN TRUE SELF AND ACTIVITY
Dispositional
Authenticity
Wood, Linley, Maltby,
Baliousis & Joseph, 2008
“I am in touch with ‘the real me’,” “I am true to myself in most situations,”
“I always feel I need to do what others expect me to do (R)”
Self-connectedness
Huta, 2012
“Connected with myself,” “Aware of what matters to me,” “Aware of how
I feel”
Questionnaire for
Eudaimonic Well-Being
Waterman et al., 2010
“I believe I know what I was meant to do in life,” “I believe I know what
my best potentials are and I try to develop them whenever possible,” “It is
more important that I really enjoy what I do than that other people are
impressed by it”
Personal Expressiveness
Waterman, 1993
“This activity gives me my strongest feelings that this is who I really am,”
“When I engage in this activity I feel that this is what I was meant to do,”
“I feel a special fit or meshing when engaging in this activity”
Interest
Vittersø, Overwien, &
Martinsen, 2009
“Interested,” “Engaged,” “Immersed”
Autonomous Motivation,
Controlled Motivation
Sheldon & Elliot, 1999
“I pursue this activity because of the fun and enjoyment it provides me,” “I
pursue this activity because I really believe it’s an important goal to have,”
“I pursue this activity because I would feel ashamed, guilty, or anxious if I
did not” “I pursue this activity because somebody else wants me to”
Subjective Vitality
Ryan & Frederick, 1997
“I feel energized,” “I feel alive and vital,” “I have energy and spirit”
MEANING
Framework
Battista & Almond, 1973
“I have really come to terms with what’s important for me in my life,” “I
have a system or framework that allows me to truly understand my being
alive,” “I have a clear idea of what I’d like to do with my life”
Presence of Meaning
Steger, Frazier, Oishi, &
Kaler, 2006
“I understand my life’s meaning,” “I have a good sense of what makes my
life meaningful,” “I have discovered a satisfying life purpose”
Meaning Experience
Huta & Ryan, 2010
“My activities and experiences are meaningful,” “My activities and
experiences are valuable,” “My activities and experiences play an
important role in some broader picture”
Purpose in Life
Ryff, 1989
““I sometimes feel as if I’ve done all there is to do in life (R),” “Some
people wander aimlessly through life, but I am not one of them,” “I live life
one day at a time and don’t really think about the future (R)”
EXCELLENCE
Authentic Pride
Tracy & Robins, 2007
“Honor,” “Confidence,” “Achieving”
Elevation
Huta & Ryan, 2010
“Enriched,” “Morally elevated,” “Part of something greater than myself”
GROWTH, ACTUALIZATION, MATURITY
Personal Growth
Ryff, 1989
“For me, life has been a continuous process of learning, changing, and
growth,” “I think it is important to have new experiences that challenge
how you think about yourself and the world,” “I gave up trying to make big
improvements or changes in my life a long time ago (R)”
Self-Actualization
Jones & Crandall, 1986
“I don’t accept my own weaknesses (R),” “I have no mission in life to
which I feel especially dedicated (R),” “I can express my feelings even
when they may result in undesirable consequences”
Sentence Completion
Test of Ego Development
Loevinger, 1979
“The thing I like about myself is ______,” “My main problem is ______,”
“If I can’t get what I want ______” (RESPONSES NEED TO BE CODED)
HEDONIA
Positive Affect
Emmons & Diener, 1985
“Happy,” “Pleased,” “Enjoyment/fun”
Negative Affect
Emmons & Diener, 1985
“Unhappy,” “Frustrated,” “Worried/anxious”
Life Satisfaction
Diener, Emmons, Larsen,
& Griffin, 1985
“I am satisfied with my life,” “So far I have gotten the important things I
want in life,” “In most ways, my life is close to my ideal”
Happiness
Lyubomirsky & Lepper,
1999
“In general, I consider myself: 1—not a very happy person . . . 7—a very
happy person,” “Compared to most of my peers, I consider myself: 1—less
happy . . . 7—more happy”
Carefreeness
Huta & Ryan, 2010
“Carefree,” “Easygoing,” “Lighthearted”
Subjective Vitality
Ryan & Frederick, 1997
“I feel energized,” “I feel alive and vital,” “I have energy and spirit”
R = reverse coded.