Childhood Socioeconomic Status Shapes Beliefs About Hedonic Versus Eudaimonic Happiness: A Life History Approach

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Happiness Studies Pub Date : 2024-05-06 DOI:10.1007/s10902-024-00760-9
Jinseok P. Kim, Eunkook M. Suh
{"title":"Childhood Socioeconomic Status Shapes Beliefs About Hedonic Versus Eudaimonic Happiness: A Life History Approach","authors":"Jinseok P. Kim, Eunkook M. Suh","doi":"10.1007/s10902-024-00760-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Many have pondered whether happiness is chiefly made of positive feelings and joy (hedonism) or by acquiring meaning via self-actualization (eudaimonism). Drawing on life history theory, we examined if individuals’ early-life experience (i.e., childhood socioeconomic status; SES) colors their notions of well-being. A consistent pattern was found in two studies (Study 1, <i>N</i> = 183; Study 2, <i>N</i> = 168) using MTurk samples; wealthier childhood upbringing predicted stronger endorsement of eudaimonic happiness. This pattern, supporting claims of life history theory, emerged only when perceptions of (economic) instability was salient (chronic, Study 1; experimentally primed, Study 2). Also, only childhood SES, but not current SES, mattered. This research finds novel evidence that childhood experience and current threat perception may interact to shape people’s ideals of happiness.</p>","PeriodicalId":15837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Happiness Studies","volume":"33 5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","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/s10902-024-00760-9","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

Many have pondered whether happiness is chiefly made of positive feelings and joy (hedonism) or by acquiring meaning via self-actualization (eudaimonism). Drawing on life history theory, we examined if individuals’ early-life experience (i.e., childhood socioeconomic status; SES) colors their notions of well-being. A consistent pattern was found in two studies (Study 1, N = 183; Study 2, N = 168) using MTurk samples; wealthier childhood upbringing predicted stronger endorsement of eudaimonic happiness. This pattern, supporting claims of life history theory, emerged only when perceptions of (economic) instability was salient (chronic, Study 1; experimentally primed, Study 2). Also, only childhood SES, but not current SES, mattered. This research finds novel evidence that childhood experience and current threat perception may interact to shape people’s ideals of happiness.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
童年时期的社会经济地位决定了人们对享乐型幸福和幸福型幸福的看法:生活史方法
许多人都在思考,幸福是主要由积极的感受和快乐(享乐主义)构成,还是通过自我实现获得意义(幸福主义)。根据生活史理论,我们研究了个人的早期生活经历(即童年社会经济地位)是否会影响他们的幸福观。在使用 MTurk 样本进行的两项研究(研究 1,样本数 = 183;研究 2,样本数 = 168)中,我们发现了一种一致的模式:较富裕的童年成长经历预示着较强的优裕幸福感。只有当(经济)不稳定性感知突出时(研究 1 为慢性;研究 2 为实验引物),才会出现这种支持生活史理论主张的模式。此外,只有童年时期的社会经济地位(SES),而不是当前的社会经济地位(SES)与幸福感有关。这项研究发现了新的证据,表明童年经历和当前的威胁感可能会相互作用,塑造人们的幸福理想。
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
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?
期刊最新文献
Thriving and Striving Around the World: A Cross-Cultural Examination of the Relationship Between Achievement Goals and Flourishing The Effect of Online Multi-Component Positive Psychology Intervention on Adolescents’ Risky Behaviors and Psychological Flexibility: A Mixed Method Study Trajectories of Personal Growth among First-Time Parents: The Predicting Role of Coping Flexibility and Parental Distress How Locus of Control Predicts Subjective Well-Being and its Inequality: The Moderating Role of Social Values Disability and Life Satisfaction: The Role of Accessibility
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1