Overview

It is safe to postulate that all people want to have “a good life”. Although the meaning of “a good life” may vary from culture to culture and from individual to individual, this meaning revolves around the same aspects of life across cultures. What actually varies between cultures and individuals is the availability of certain aspects of “a good life”, the subjective significance people assign to these aspects, and the way they evaluate them.

Everything we do or do not do, wish or do not wish, and have or do not have has an explicit or an implicit relevance to how good or not good we perceive our lives to be. Because the preference for “a good life” over “a bad life” underlies all facets of our lives, understanding what constitutes and influences “a good life” on an individual level has a significant value for all people as we all want to have good lives.

During the past several decades researchers investigated the concept of “the good life” based on three theoretical approaches (a) focusing on quality of life (QOL) on a population and on individual levels by considering objective and/or subjective factors present or absent in people’s lives (Power, 2004; WHOQOL Group, 1995), (b) focusing on subjective well-being (SWB) by considering an individual’s level of overall happiness and life satisfaction (Corey et al., 2004; Diener et al., 1999; Watson, 2000), and (c) focusing on an individual’s level of functionality across social, psychological, and health factors (Keyes, 1998; Ryff, 1989; Ware & Sherbourne, 1992).

The goal of the present research is to develop a comprehensive scale of “the good life”, which will overcome limitations of prior approaches (Hagerty et al., 2001; Rapley, 2003), by integrating measurements of SWB, QOL, and functionality on an individual level and utilizing innovative quantification methods. The scale will focus on how individuals evaluate their lives and compare these measurements with the average “good life” of others. The comprehensive scale of “the good life” will be referred to as the Self-Perceived Quality of Life (SPQL) scale.

The SPQL scale includes well-being, emotions, and physical and mental health indices, which may correlate with the measurement of depression, anxiety, and mood. Thus, performance on the scale indices is expected to predict depression, anxiety, and mood. The SPQL scale will provide the above assessments retrospectively for major life stages of human development which comprise the lifespan, this will allow tracing the “history” of SPQL throughout the lifespan. The SPQL scale will have implications for evaluating the effectiveness of a wide range of interventions intended to improve mental heath and well-being.

Conceptual Model

The SPQL construct consists of three axes (click here to view the SPQL diagram): Subjective well-being (SWB), subjective affective experiences (SAE), and fulfillment of needs and preferences. Each axis is compounded from several variables: SWB consist of its baseline which is the average of overall happiness/unhappiness and transient deviations which are measures of frequency and intensity of non-normative transient experiences of happiness/unhappiness; subjective affective experiences (SAE) also consist of its baseline which is the average of overall positive and negative SAE and transient deviations which are measures of frequency and intensity of non-normative transient experiences of SAS; and fulfillment of needs and preferences which is a product of strength and fulfillment of a wide range of needs and preferences.

Because temporal fluctuations within SPQL are likely to occur over time, a single-occasion measurement will not provide a comprehensive assessment (Diener, 2000; Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, & Schkade, 2005). In order to capture a comprehensive picture of SPQL, all three variables will be measured retrospectively throughout three major life stages of adult human development: Early-adulthood, mid-adulthood, and late-adulthood (click here to view the SPQL diagram).

Transitions between life-stages

As people approach the subsequent life stage in their development, they face developmental tasks which they need to master in order for the transition to the next life stage to be successful (Erikson, 1968; Harter, 1999). The cycle of transition from one life stage to another is marked by three phases, (a) mastering or failing a task, (b) consequential reevaluation of life circumstances, values, and self-concept, and (c) adjustment and adaptation to new values and circumstances. To a lesser degree, cycles of transitions occur continually within major life stages on annual and even on daily basis.

A histogram of SPQL throughout the lifespan can reflect the function of an individual’s “good life” (see figure 1 for an example). A correlation analyses between fragments of the function during different life-stages among the members of the representative sample will reveal whether it has any predictable sets of patterns, and in turn, whether “the good life” can be predicted based on lived life-stages with a degree of certainty greater than chance.

      Figure 1. Lifespan

SPQL Axes

Subjects’ responses on the inventories for each of the three SPQL axes will provide the data for the psychometric validation of the scale and for the quantitative analyses which will allow measuring “the good life”. The theoretical framework for the first two axes is based on the existing theories of SWB, positive affect and negative affect, and mood (Diener et al., 1999; Fredrickson, 1998; Watson, 2000; Watson & Clark, 1994). The theoretical framework for the third axis is based on theories which conceptually differentiate between different categories of needs (Maslow, 1970; Panksepp, 2000). Different categories of needs, in turn, are assorted into four general categories of needs comprising the third axis. The measurement of an individual’s level of functionality across social, psychological, and health factors is integrated in the third axis. This is accomplished through evaluating strength and fulfillment of individual’s needs for optimal functioning across these factors.

Axis I: Subjective Well-Being (SWB)

SWB baseline is maintained by the psychological and biological homeostasis (Brickman & Campbell, 1971; Cummins & Lau, 2004). Measurement of overall happiness reflects the SWB baseline. A higher SWB baseline indicates a higher SPQL. People who have experienced more positive and less negative intense experiences during their lives (i.e., transient deviations), have a higher SPQL. In order to asses this facet of SPQL, frequency and intensity of non-normative transient subjective experiences of happiness/unhappiness which deviated from the SWB baseline throughout time will be measured.

Axis II: Subjective Affective Experiences (SAE)

People who have experienced more positive and less negative intense subjective affective experiences (SAE) during their lives (i.e., transient deviations), have a higher SPQL. The SAE baselines are maintained by the psychological and biological homeostasis. A higher SAE baseline indicates a higher SPQL. The integrated measurement of overall positive SAE and overall negative SAE will reflect the average of the SAE baselines. In order to asses transient deviations from the SAE baselines, frequency and intensity of non-normative transient positive and negative subjective affective experiences which deviated from their baselines throughout time will be measured.

Axis III: Fulfillment of Needs

Individuals with the same score on SWB can differ in their evaluations of life standards even if their objective life circumstances are alike. Accordingly, their self-perceived QOL may vary. Hence, in order to capture a more accurate measurement of SPQL, the strength and degree of fulfillment of a wide range of human needs and preferences for life circumstances has to be evaluated. However, the felt needs are not the only kind of needs that a person may have (Maslow, 1970). If a need is satisfied it may not be felt as intensely as an unsatisfied need of lesser importance for overall happiness. Thus, the strength with which a need is felt at a certain point in time does not necessarily indicate that it makes a greater contribution to the overall SPQL, than some other needs that are felt less intensely or unfelt at all at that point in time due to them being is the state of satisfaction. Hence, the strength of individual preferences and needs will be evaluated not only through questions such as ‘how important fulfillment of this need to your overall happiness?’, but also with questions such as ‘if this need would be unfulfilled, how would it affect your overall happiness?’

Conceptual model for axis III fulfillment of needs

In order to measure fulfillment of needs, a broad range of human needs is sorted into four conceptually distinct categories (see table 2) which are (a) contingent on corresponding stages of cognitive and moral development (Kohlberg, Levine, & Hewer, 1983; Piaget, 1952), (b) constitute major components of self-concept (Marcia, 1980), and (c) correspond to the neural activity in different clusters of anatomical brain regions (Berridge, 2004; Lewis, 2000). Because sometimes the same anatomical brain regions are involved in different ways in neural activity associated with four categories of needs, implicated brain regions will be distinguished based on their dominance in related processes and based on the chronological maturation of the dominant regions.

Table 2.

Four categories of needs on axis III

1. Instinctual needs include (a) sensory stimulation needs which became linked with positive or negative affect without involvement of cognitive evaluations, (b) physiological needs such as hunger, thirst, and sex, and (c) other physiological needs related to digestion, fluid balance, body temperature, and blood pressure, which could elicit positive or negative affect depending on whether these needs are met or unmet.

2. Self-centered emotional needs include (a) needs for safety and security (e.g., financial stability, home), love and belonging (e.g., affectionate relationships, sense of community), esteem (e.g., recognition, confidence), (b) ego-centered self-conscious needs (underpinned by self-conscious emotions, that is, emotions which require self-conscious awareness and evaluations), such as pride and honor (e.g., from personal accomplishments vs. nurturing), and guilt and embarrassment (with a focus on how one’s status has been effected vs. focusing on how others have been effected), and (c) spiritual/religious needs motivated by ego inflation or belonging emotional needs.

3. Humanistic and spiritual emotional needs include (a) a higher order of self-conscious altruistic needs which are not self-centered, such as pride and honor (e.g., from nurturing vs. from personal accomplishments), and guilt and embarrassment (with a focus on how others have been effected vs. focusing on how one’s status has been effected), (b) self-actualization needs, characterized by a desire to fulfill one’s potential, which are not ego-centered (e.g., desiring truth over dishonesty), and (c) spiritual/religious needs which are not motivated by ego inflation or belonging emotional needs.

4. Cognitive needs include needs for harmony, organization, and coherence in (a) aesthetics (e.g., art, architecture, poetry, and music), and (b) intellect (sciences, information, and skills).

Measuring axis III fulfillment of needs

Because according to the SPQL theory an individual’s motivations ensue from the idiosyncratic cluster of four categories of needs, these four categories are proposed to compound an individual’s motivational framework (MF). In the following discussion, disparate preferences and needs will be referred to as motivational units (MU). Motivational units are comprised of two dimensions, importance of MU to the SPQL (strength) and the degree of fulfillment (see figure 3). The strength of motivational unit (MU) will be determined by evaluating the capacity of fulfillment or unfulfillment of MU to skew the SWB baseline.

Figure 3. Motivational units

Self-Concept Profiles

Statistical instruments will be used to construct self-concept profiles. The clusters of items comprising four motivational unit (MU) categories (instinctual needs, self-centered emotional needs, humanistic and spiritual emotional needs, and cognitive needs) will be identified through factor analysis and represented by the mean of their strength. Then, they will be sorted accordingly into four components of self-concept: Instinctual self-concept, self-centered emotional self-concept, humanistic and spiritual emotional self-concept, and cognitive self-concept.

The ratio between these components of self-concept, and their strength relative to the population mean, will comprise individuals’ self-concept profile. Statistical instruments will also be used to analyze the data for discrimination in demographic information, and significant interaction effects.

Conclusion

The SPQL theory and scale offer a number of contributions to the field. The comprehensive theory (a) synthesizes several existing theories in the field which address the concept of “a good life”, (b) contributes to our understanding of what constitutes and influences “a good life” on an individual level, and (c) provides a foundation for further investigations of the SPQL construct and “a good life” concept. The SPQL scale (a) allows measuring how individuals perceive their well-being and QOL throughout a lifespan relative to the average “good life” of others who represent the same or different segments of the population, (b) offers an evaluation of effectiveness of a wide range of interventions intended to improve mental heath and well-being, and (c) provides a simultaneous assessment of depression, anxiety, and mood.

Click here to learn about the psychometric validation of the scale.

Click here to view the full list of references.