| Title |
Eudaimonic well-being, inequality, and health: Recent findings and future directions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Review of Economics, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12232-017-0277-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carol D. Ryff |
| Abstract |
The theoretical and philosophical underpinnings of a eudaimonic model of well-being are examined and its empirical translation into distinct dimensions of well-being is described. Empirical findings have documented aging declines in eudaimonic well-being, but there is considerable variability within age groups. Among older adults who remain purposefully engaged, health benefits (reduced morbidity, extended longevity) have been documented. Eudaimonic well-being also appears to offer a protective buffer against increased health risk among the educationally disadvantaged. Neural and genetic mechanisms that may underlie eudaimonic influences on health are briefly noted, and interventions designed to promote eudaimonic well-being are sketched. Needed future research directions include addressing problems of unjust societies wherein greed among privileged elites may be a force compromising the eudaimonic well-being of those less privileged. Alternatively, and more positive in focus, is the need to better understand the role of the arts, broadly defined, in promoting eudaimonic well-being across all segments of society. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 2 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 316 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 316 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 55 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 47 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 9% |
| Researcher | 22 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 20 | 6% |
| Other | 40 | 13% |
| Unknown | 104 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 85 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 40 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 21 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 9 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 37 | 12% |
| Unknown | 116 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,433,226
of 24,092,222 outputs
Outputs from International Review of Economics
#9
of 94 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,074
of 312,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Review of Economics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,092,222 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 94 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,395 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them