General Well-Being Schedule

Leading on from this looking at the case study of Renee (Open University, 2014a) by using the Dynamic Model of Wellbeing I was able to understand Renee’s situation with a lot more clarity of her situation. Renee is a single mother with four children and also lives with her eighty-year-old mother who has ill health. Renee works but with poor pay and barely enough income to support her family. By using the guidelines of the model I was able to establish that she had poor external conditions with her work and income also her living standards were poor within her home. Her personal resources such as her health suffered due to her external conditions, her optimism was low and so was her self-esteem, being behind with bills and ill affording the

Mental health is considered a critical concern in our society; the number of people affected every year is 1 in 10 adults and children who report experiencing problems in functioning properly at work, school , or with family and friends. Numerous studies have showed the existence of a positive correlation between positive social support and optimal mental health. An observational study conducted by tried to find the effect of an optimist spouse on the well-being of his significant partner and demonstrated the relationship between ideal support and emotional well-being. The longitudinal study lasted for four years and participants were tracked to report results related to their “physical functioning, self-rated health, and number of chronic illnesses”. The case research study included 42 subjects a number of 21 couples from the Health and Retirement Study group, participants were among age 53-97, the Mean was 68.51 and standard deviation 8.68. The study included different ethnicities and

Kroenke, K., Spitzer, R. L., & Williams, J. B. (2001). The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16, 606–613. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x

To improve mental health inequities and cater to disparaged groups, researchers must utilize measurements to determine the mental health of a population. Van Lente et al. (2011) analyzed results from the third National Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition 2007, an interview based study

The premise of the article: Universal Happiness? Cross-Cultural Measurement Invariance of Scales Assessing Positive Mental Health, is that positive mental health compliments the emotional security and the psychosocial aspects of a person’s life into a single paradigm. The paradigm shows that people who have a good mental health status see themselves as having a distinct direction in their life and that their life has more purpose than those who allow their mental health to deteriorate. Along with direction and purpose people with a good mental health status also have lasting relationships, are more accepting of whom they are, and exhibit a more positive affect. Bieda et al (2016) illustrates this by utilizing the Positive Mental Health Scale,

Scientific journals follow critical reading guidelines that establish your credibility. Elizabeth N. Burris and Shevaun D Neupert from North Carolina State University explore this topic in relation to Mood Repair and Daily stressors. In their article Mood Management: Mood Repair and Daily Stressors Correlate with Daily Affect they are looking for whether individual differences in mood repair would predict emotional reactivity to daily stressors. In this study Elizabeth N. Burris and Shevaun D. Neupert focus on a sample of 43 community dwelling older adults who were part of a larger study called Anticipatory coping Every Day and completed a 8 day daily diary. When picking potential participants if they got a score greater than or equal to 8 on the Short Blessed Test, cognitive impairment screening, were admitted into the study. This study used different tasks to measure the Daily Positive and Negative Affect and Daily Stressors. In conclusion this study found that there was a increase in the amount of negative

Larsen and Prizmic argued that the balance of positive and negative affect (the Losada ratio) is a key factor in subjective well-being and in defining whether a person flourishes. Larsen and Prizmic discussed work by several authors (e.g. Fredrickson and Losada, 2005; Gottman, 1994) which suggested that to maintain an optimal level of emotional well-being and positive health, individuals need to experience approximately three times more positive than negative affect. Given thus background the conducted a study to address three questions: First, is there evidence that a specific positivity ratio distinguishes individuals with different mental health status and especially flourishing from non-flourishing individuals? Second, are there are differences in the positivity ratio when daily affect data are used? Third, does the proposed critical positivity ratio of 2.9 discriminate individuals with different mental health status equally well across the adult lifespan? (“The Ratio between Positive and Negative Affect and Flourishing Mental Health across

The Depression anxiety and stress scale (DASS-21) is a 21-item quantitative measure of distress that has 3 scales- anxiety, stress and depression, each of which has 7-items (Henry & Crawford, 2005). The DASS-21 is a shorter version of the full 42-item questionnaire (DASS) both of which are typically used to discriminate between the three related states of depression, anxiety and stress (Antony, Bieling, Cox, Enns, & Swinson, 1998). Distinguishing between these states has proven difficult, particularly between anxiety and depression (Clark & Watson, 1991a) . Many of the major scales predominantly measure the common factor of negative affectivity (Watson & Clark, 1984). While the full version DASS is used in both clinical and research settings, the DASS-21 is typically used for research purposes (Lovibond, 2013). As such this paper will evaluate the empirical evidence for the validity and reliability of the DASS-21 for research purposes.

The 5-item WHO well-being index (WHO-5) [4] which measures psychological well-being and 63 was developed from the 10-item WHO well-being index (WHO-10), which was originally a 28-64 item scale [5].

The remainder of this report will include a background on general human well being, a description of each indicator used, the results of the HWI, and finally, an evaluation of its overall effectiveness.

Taking part in the varying Happiness Assessment surveys was insightful in many ways. My results showed that I am typically in alignment with the rest of the population on the happiness scale. Upon examining the overall graphed data, I found that the spread of the distributions were close to being symmetrical and contained no outliers. Most of my scores gave the interpretation that I was just slightly above average compared to others on the well-being scale. However, my general satisfaction with life interpretation was slightly below average. I found that the results of each test were relatively consistent with each other and provided fairly accurate feedback, however, the use of one test alone would not allow someone to make an accurate assessment.

Due to the increase in research on subjective wellbeing throughout the 1980’s, and its relation to personality, the Satisfaction with Life Scales (1993) were developed (Diener, Emmons, Larson & Griffin, 1985). Life satisfaction refers to a

Rubrics of psychological well-being and health, particularly within the United States, begins by theorizing a normative subject who is, so far, always possessive of the Euro-American, middle-class, male, cisgendered, heterosexual point of view. These rubrics, often in the form of personality assessment instruments, are not only characteristic of the West’s position as hegemon over social life, but also display an inability to see from any reference point besides the dominant culture’s standard of living (Lacey, 2004). Beginning with an idealized and, ultimately, fantastic image of the norm (of which no person truly obtains), these assessments then associate deviations from the normative social position as not simply natural deviations in

According to the wellbeing assessment results, the assessment indicated that I am struggling (moderate or inconsistent) with my wellbeing as the five elements showed all my scores under 6. I received a score of 5 on career wellbeing, a score of 6 on social wellbeing, a score of 3 on financial wellbeing, a score of 4 on physical wellbeing, and score of 3 on community wellbeing. I was honestly shocked and surprised when I read through the descriptions of the elements because it all described areas that I am struggling at this point in my life. As I reflected on the results of this assessment, it helped me to think about the overarching problem that hinders me from having a thriving life which is the financial struggles. I honestly think that financial struggles have negatively affected the overall wellbeing as it impacted and shaped the rest of the four elements.

These days, the wellbeing checking in provincial division is a remarkable exploration region. All through the world heaps of scientists and wellbeing organizations manage wellbeing observing. The gathered data sets around a patient helps the specialists in the examination of wellbeing state changes. As of now, there are numerous wellbeing