Tweed, Roger G.

Positive psychologists can study the relation between some of the discipline's core dimensions and aversive outcomes, including youth violence. Dimensions such as gratitude, forgiveness, sense of meaning, altruism (or at least apparent altruism), prudence, and humility have received attention within positive psychology, and evidence is reviewed suggesting that these may also deserve empirical attention in terms of their relation to youth violence and even their potential to reduce youth violence.

This study examined self-perceived strengths among 116 people who were homeless. Those who had experienced a longer period of current homelessness tended to report fewer personal strengths (r = −0.23). Nonetheless, in spite of their marginalized position in society, the vast majority of participants (114 out of 116) perceived personal strengths. A prior diagnosis with mental illness was not associated with the number of strengths reported, but self-perception of strengths was associated with altruistic orientation. The Values in Action (VIA) taxonomy of character strengths captured many of the responses generated by this population. The most frequently mentioned character categories included social intelligence, kindness, persistence, authenticity and humour. The most frequently mentioned other strengths included personal skills (e.g. music, sports), job skills, intelligence and education. The results have relevance for efforts to build self-perceptions that facilitate escape from homelessness.

This study explored common measures of well-being to assess whether the naturally emerging relationships are best explained by a “Big Two” (hedonic vs. eudaimonic) or another, yet to be discovered framework. A sample of young adult participants (n = 355) completed measures of life satisfaction, flourishing, positive and negative experience, meaning in life, basic psychological needs, and subjective happiness. Goldberg’s (2006) Bass-Ackward procedure of component analysis was used to determine the relationship between the variables. Results indicated that life satisfaction and flourishing loaded on both hedonic and eudaimonic variables at several levels of the analysis, suggesting that these constructs may be outcomes of both hedonia and eudaimonia. Results further indicated that searching for meaning was distinct from hedonia, but was not an effective indicator of eudaimonic well-being. Overall, the results justify the distinction between hedonia and eudaimonia; however, they also suggest that further distinctions between different measures of well-being are required. Moreover, life satisfaction may be a superordinate category that reflects outcomes of both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Thus, the “Big Three” of positive psychology (i.e., positive affect, negative affect, and life satisfaction) is neither purely hedonic, nor purely eudaimonic, nor a balanced combination of the two, and thus is deficient as an indicator of either type of well-being. Furthermore, the results suggests that further understanding the place of life satisfaction within hedonic and eudaimonic conceptualizations of happiness is important in enhancing our overall understanding of well-being.

The chapter, "Measuring eudaimonic well-being" was written by Roger Tweed (Douglas College Faculty). Part of the "International Handbooks of Quality-of-Life" book series. This chapter presents Aristotle’s conceptualization of eudaimonia and reviews measures that can be used to assess this type of eudaimonic well-being. The authors consider the question of the extent to which eudaimonia is measureable given the conceptual confusion and lack of normative clarification surrounding the use of the term. It is proposed that a defining factor in the measurement of eudaimonia, that makes it different from the assessment of other related constructs, is the inclusion of the assessment of virtue. The lack of virtue measurement in assessments of eudaimonic well-being given Aristotle’s definition is presented. The authors offer suggestions for researchers currently choosing measures of eudaimonia. --From publisher description.

The chapter "How can positive psychology influence public policy and practice" was written by the listed authors including Roger Tweed (Douglas College Faculty). Positive psychologists who decline to involve themselves in government policy issues may be similar to medical doctors who refuse to work in hospitals or clinics. Both the positive psychologist and the doctor may greatly reduce their positive effect if they avoid involvement in these institutions that widely impact the population. This chapter explains what positive psychologists bring to policy discussions: An emphasis on measurable well-being, a desire to do more than just ameliorate pathology, and a broad knowledge of psychological findings. The chapter provides examples of policy relevant findings related to: (a) measurement of well-being, (b) identification of groups with particular needs, and (c) exploration of paths to the good life. The chapter also gives warnings about ways to fail in policy engagement, such as limiting efforts to legislative lobbying, ignoring lessons from policy-engaged academics, failing to consider costs, seeking to change fundamental belief systems of opponents, ignoring unintended consequences, expressing hubris, providing imbalanced emphasis on particular types of well-being, and failing to test policies incrementally. The chapter closes by proposing a strategy for policy engagement that not only promotes, but also embodies positive psychology. --From publisher description.