Reciprocal Relations Between Meaning in Life, Beneficence, and Psychological Needs for Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness: Evidence from a Three-Wave Longitudinal Study

IF 3.1 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2024-02-24 DOI:10.1007/s10902-024-00741-y

{"title":"Reciprocal Relations Between Meaning in Life, Beneficence, and Psychological Needs for Autonomy, Competence, and Relatedness: Evidence from a Three-Wave Longitudinal Study","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s10902-024-00741-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Meaning in life has been established as a key factor of human well-being and flourishing. Beneficence and the three psychological needs of self-determination theory—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—have all been individually studied as antecedents of meaningfulness. Yet, no previous research has examined them neither longitudinally nor simultaneously as predictors of meaning over time. In a three-wave longitudinal study in Chile (n: T1 = 1477, T2 = 820, T3 = 487) we examined the reciprocal relations between autonomy, competence, relatedness, beneficence, and meaning, using cross-lagged panel analysis. Taken individually, each of the four factors predicted meaning, and when entered simultaneously into the same model, competence, relatedness, and beneficence predicted meaning over time. Furthermore, we found that meaning predicted all four factors over time. Our results thus advance research on meaning in life by examining key predictors of it and showing that meaning itself predicts the same factors dynamically over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Happiness Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00741-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Meaning in life has been established as a key factor of human well-being and flourishing. Beneficence and the three psychological needs of self-determination theory—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—have all been individually studied as antecedents of meaningfulness. Yet, no previous research has examined them neither longitudinally nor simultaneously as predictors of meaning over time. In a three-wave longitudinal study in Chile (n: T1 = 1477, T2 = 820, T3 = 487) we examined the reciprocal relations between autonomy, competence, relatedness, beneficence, and meaning, using cross-lagged panel analysis. Taken individually, each of the four factors predicted meaning, and when entered simultaneously into the same model, competence, relatedness, and beneficence predicted meaning over time. Furthermore, we found that meaning predicted all four factors over time. Our results thus advance research on meaning in life by examining key predictors of it and showing that meaning itself predicts the same factors dynamically over time.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

人生意义、利己主义与自主性、能力和相关性心理需求之间的相互关系：来自三波纵向研究的证据

摘要生活的意义已被确定为人类幸福和繁荣的一个关键因素。益处和自我决定理论中的三种心理需求--自主性、能力和相关性--都被单独作为意义的前因进行过研究。然而，以前的研究还没有对它们进行纵向研究，也没有将它们同时作为意义随时间变化的预测因素进行研究。在智利进行的一项三波纵向研究（n：T1 = 1477，T2 = 820，T3 = 487）中，我们使用交叉滞后面板分析法研究了自主性、能力、关联性、恩惠和意义之间的相互关系。单独来看，这四个因素中的每一个都能预测意义，而当同时进入同一个模型时，能力、亲和力和恩惠随着时间的推移都能预测意义。此外，我们还发现，随着时间的推移，意义对所有四个因素都有预测作用。因此，我们的研究结果通过研究人生意义的关键预测因素，并表明意义本身会随着时间的推移动态地预测相同的因素，从而推动了对人生意义的研究。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Happiness Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

8.60

自引率

6.50%

发文量

110

期刊介绍： The international peer-reviewed Journal of Happiness Studies is devoted to theoretical and applied advancements in all areas of well-being research. It covers topics referring to both the hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives characterizing well-being studies. The former includes the investigation of cognitive dimensions such as satisfaction with life, and positive affect and emotions. The latter includes the study of constructs and processes related to optimal psychological functioning, such as meaning and purpose in life, character strengths, personal growth, resilience, optimism, hope, and self-determination. In addition to contributions on appraisal of life-as-a-whole, the journal accepts papers investigating these topics in relation to specific domains, such as family, education, physical and mental health, and work. The journal welcomes high-quality theoretical and empirical submissions in the fields of economics, psychology and sociology, as well as contributions from researchers in the domains of education, medicine, philosophy and other related fields. The Journal of Happiness Studies provides a forum for three main areas in happiness research: 1) theoretical conceptualizations of well-being, happiness and the good life; 2) empirical investigation of well-being and happiness in different populations, contexts and cultures; 3) methodological advancements and development of new assessment instruments. The journal addresses the conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of happiness and well-being dimensions, as well as the individual, socio-economic and cultural factors that may interact with them as determinants or outcomes. Central Questions include, but are not limited to: Conceptualization: What meanings are denoted by terms like happiness and well-being? How do these fit in with broader conceptions of the good life? Operationalization and Measurement: Which methods can be used to assess how people feel about life? How to operationalize a new construct or an understudied dimension in the well-being domain? What are the best measures for investigating specific well-being related constructs and dimensions? Prevalence and causality Do individuals belonging to different populations and cultures vary in their well-being ratings? How does individual well-being relate to social and economic phenomena (characteristics, circumstances, behavior, events, and policies)? What are the personal, social and economic determinants and causes of individual well-being dimensions? Evaluation: What are the consequences of well-being for individual development and socio-economic progress? Are individual happiness and well-being worthwhile goals for governments and policy makers? Does well-being represent a useful parameter to orient planning in physical and mental healthcare, and in public health? Interdisciplinary studies: How has the study of happiness developed within and across disciplines? Can we link philosophical thought and empirical research? What are the biological correlates of well-being dimensions?