According to the World Health Organization, health is more than the absence of disease; it represents a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, tied closely to the enjoyment of fundamental human rights. Well-being can be understood through two traditions: the hedonic (which emphasizes happiness and the pursuit of pleasure), and the eudaemonic (which focuses on personal development and human potential). Another relevant dimension, the social well-being, evaluates societal functioning and support systems. Recent studies emphasize the importance of understanding well-being comprehensively rather than in fragmented perspectives. This study explored the different dimensions of well-being- subjective, eudaemonic, and social- among Argentine citizens. Results revealed generally high levels of subjective and eudaemonic well-being, with autonomy and personal growth standing out as key indicators, reflecting participants' sense of independence and dedication to self-development. Life satisfaction and vitality were also high, though social well-being scored below the theoretical average, indicating negative assessments of societal functioning. Experienced well-being revealed a balance of positive and negative experiences, with a tendency toward enjoyment and satisfaction. Differences in well-being were observed across gender, age, marital status, and perceived social class. Notably, religious practice was associated with higher social well-being, though it also linked to increased negative affect. Despite limitations in sample size and scope, findings highlight the complexity of well-being and the need for comprehensive approaches to address social needs and promove effective interventions.

Keywords: health, well-being, hedonic tradition, eudaemonic tradition, life satisfaction, affect

According to the World Health Organization (WHO),^1,2 health is more than just the absence of disease; it is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being, closely linked to the full enjoyment of the fundamental rights of human being.

Well-being has been approached primarily from two perspectives: one related to happiness (the hedonic tradition) and the other linked to the development of the human person (the eudaemonic tradition). Later, Keyes, Shmotkin, and Ryff³ expanded on these classifications, referring to them as subjective well-being and psychological well-being. While both constructs are related, they represent different facets of positive psychological functioning, and thus, of an individual’s well-being.⁴

Initially, empirical studies considered happiness to be the only indicator of positive psychological functioning.⁵ However, subjective well-being now also includes people's beliefs and feelings about whether they lead desirable and rewarding lives.⁶ This perspective examines how and why people experience their lives positively, including cognitive judgments and affective reactions.⁷

While the hedonic approach emphasizes happiness by defining well-being in terms of the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of displeasure, the eudaemonic perspective focuses on the actualization of human potential. It considers well-being as the fulfillment or realization of this potential.⁸ Accordingly, studies on psychological well-being focus on personal development, the approach to life challenges, and the effort to achieve goals.⁵ Within this framework, social well-being is understood as individuals’ assessment of the circumstances and functioning of society.¹ Hervás and Vázquez² argue that well-being comprises general, hedonic, eudaemonic, and social dimensions, considering it essential to approach the construct comprehensively rather tan in fragmented ways.

At the local level, in a line of work initiated years ago, we began investigating well-being in relation to other relevant collective aspects. These included the perception of social problems, the collective affectivity predominant in the environment, which arises from the quality of the relationships established within it, and trust in institutions as mechanisms through which society responds to the people´s needs.

Bases on the above, it is clear that studying well-being levels as diagnostic criteria for mental health is necessary.³ For this reason, the aim of this empirical study was to explore the different dimensions of well-being- subjective, eudaemonic, and social- among Argentine citizens. Additionally, it aimed to verify whether statistically significant differences exist based on sociodemographic and psychosocial variables such as gender, age, social class, importance attributed to religion, and ideological positioning.

Type of study and design: This is a correlational study (group difference study) and follows a cross-sectional, non-experimental design, with the general population serving as the unit of analysis.

Sample: The sample was selected through intentional non-probabilistic sampling and composed of 243 Argentines from various cities across the country (Table 1).

Instrument The study utilized a self-administered questionnaire consisting of socio-demographic ítems and the following scales:

- Pemberton Happiness Index (Hervás & Vázquez, 2013). The Index consists of 21 items divided into two subscales. The Remembered Well-Being subscale, evaluates components form different well-being traditions (hedonic, eudaimonic, and social) through 11 items on a Likert scale, with responses ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). This subscale demonstrated satisfactory reliability (α =.90). The Experienced Well-Being subscale assesses affective states and current feelings via 10 items, measuring the presence or absence of positive (α= .58) and negative (α= .63) experiences.

Procedure: This study was approved as part of the UBACyT (P20020220200034BA) project, titled 'Well-being: Socio-cognitive Bases and Psychosocial Correlates,' directed by Dr. Elena Zubieta, with Dr. Marcela Muratori as a member of the responsible team. The project (Resolution No. RESCS-2022-881-E-UBA-REC) has been approved and is supported by the Secretariat of Science and Technology at the University of Buenos Aires of Argentina. The study adhered to ethical standards, including informed consent and the management of confidentiality and privacy. Participants were thoroughly informed about the purpose, methods, and benefits of the research prior to providing their consent. All participants voluntarily agreed to take part in the study. Furthermore, the questionnaire was administered anonymously, and participants were assured that the information collected would be utilized only for academic and scientific purposes. The questionnaire was administered individually via the Survey Monkey platform in December 2023.

Data analysis was conducted using the SPSS21 statistical package.

As shown in Table 2, the averages related to well-being are generally high. The highest scores were recorded in eudaimonic well-being, encompassing the six dimensions of psychological well-being proposed by Ryff⁵ Notably, autonomy stood out, referring to the sense of self-determination, Independence, and personal authority. Personal growth also emerged as significant, reflecting participants´ interest in developing their potential, as well as their belief in their ability to grow as individuals and enhace their capacities. Although slightly lower, participants still demonstrated high levels of life satisfaction and vitality. Conversely, social well-being scored below the theoretical average, indicating a relatively negative assessment of the circumstances and functioning of the society in which participants are embedded.

Regarding the well-being experienced (Table 3), participants reported a balance between positive and negative experiences, with a tendency towards satisfaction, enjoyment and fun. The percentage presented reflect the proportion of participants who declared having experienced the conditions described by each items.

Next, we sought to analyze differential profiles based on socio-demographic and psychosocial variables. Regarding gender, only statistically significant differences were observed in subjective cognitive well-being, with male people (M = 7.09) reporting feeling more satisfied with their lives than female people (M = 6.41) (t(207) = -2.322, p = .02).

In relation to well-being and age, different interesting associations were observed. As this increases, greater subjective well-being was observed both at the cognitive (r = .201, p = .004) and hedonic (r = .212, p = .022) levels, higher levels of vitality (r = .160, p = .021) and higher levels of eudaemonic well-being with respect to the meaning of life (r = .144, p = .038), self-acceptance (r = .145, p = .036), social relationships (r = .187, p = .007), perception of control (r = .207, p = .003), and autonomy (r = .202, p = .004). The only dimensions for which no statistically significant relationship were found were personal growth and social well-being.

Statistically significant differences were found concerning marital status (Table 4). Married individuals reported higher levels of life satisfaction compared to single individuals, as well as experiencing less negative affect. In the same line, in terms of eudaemonic well-being, married people felt a stronger sense of connection to those around them and perceived greater control over their daily lives compared to single people. Regarding autonomy, divorced people demonstrated the highest sense of being able to remain true to themselves in important matters, followed by married persons, and finally single ones.

Withe respect to perceived social class, people who identify as belonging to the low and middle-low class (M = 6.88) report feeling less connected to those around them compared to persons who consider themselves middle class (M = 8.01) (Social Relations: F(2,205) = 5,688, p = .004). Those in the high class category score slightly lower (M = 7.69).

Finally, people who place greater importance on religion exhibit higher levels of social well-being (r = .229, p = .001), but also higher levels of negative affect (r = .167, p = .016). No statistically significant differences were observed in well-being according to ideological positioning. 

The results presented in this article generally corroborate the trends observed in previous studies.^9–15 On the one hand, high levels of subjective and eudaemonic well-being were identified, even these values are higher than those reported in previous studies conducted in Argentina (Velázquez, Mikkelsen, Linares, & Celemín, 2010).¹⁶ However, social well-being levels were found to be low, confirming the notion that when the focus of assessment shifts to the social environment, well-being levels tend to decrease. In this sense, the most deficient dimension is the one that refers to the ability to perceive an environment that adequately supports the fulfillment of social needs.

When considering the gender variable, male participants reported greater satisfaction with their lives, whereas women displayed higher levels of pessimism in terms of negative affectivity within their enviroment. Analyzing age, results show that, as individuals grow older, they tend to achieve greater autonomy, have greater control over life events and experience more enjoyment from opportunities to develop their personal abilities.

Regarding differences according to the psychosocial variables, the findings suggest coherence in terms of fulfilling certain basic securities or a materialistic level overcome. This, even at a perceptual level, allows individuals to feel a sense of belonging to a bigger community, fostering self-efficacy and a stronger internal locus of control. Data reinforce, to some extent, finding from quality of life studies that emphasizes the benefits of religious practice for well-being, through the support and containment networks it provides to individuals (Barrientos, 2004).

Despite the limitations of this study in terms of number of participants and sample intentionality, these results highlight the importance of studies of well-being in various areas of life. The need to replicate studies, and carry out new ones adding different sociodemographic and psychosocial variables, lies in the complexity and plurality of the subject, which requires a comprehensive approach. Exploring well-being not only allows to recognize its complex nature, considering social and cultural factors, but also to detect social needs in order to promote effective interventions.^17–24

None.

The author declares there is no conflicto of interest.

1. Keyes C. Social well-being. Social Psychology Quarterly. 1998;61:121–140.
2. Hervás G, Vázquez C. Construction and validation of a measure of integrative well-being in seven languages: The Pemberton Happiness Index. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2013;11(1):66.
3. Keyes C, Shmotkin D, Ryff CD. Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of two traditions. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002;82(6):1007–1022.
4. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well being: an introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2008;9:1–11.
5. Ryff C. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1989;57(6):1069–1081.
6. Diener E. New findings and future directions for subjective well-being research. American Psychologist. 2012;67(8):590–597.
7. Diener E. El bienestar subjetivo. Intervención Psicosocial. 1994;3:67–
8. Ryan RM, Deci EL. To be happy or to be self-fulfilled: A review of research on hedonic and eudaemonic well-being. Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:141–166.
9. Muratori M, Delfino G, Mele S, et al. Bienestar psicosocial en estudiantes universitarios civiles y militares. Investigaciones en Psicología. 2014;19:73–86.
10. Muratori M, Zubieta EM. La inseguridad subjetiva como mediadora del bienestar social y clima emocional. Psicología, Cultura y Sociedad. 2016;16:95–120.
11. Muratori M, Zubieta E, Ubillos S, et al. Felicidad y bienestar psicológico: Estudio comparativo entre Argentina y España. 2015;24(2):1–18.
12. Páez D, Asún D. Emotional climate, mood and collective behaviour: Chile 1973-1990. In: H Riguelme editor. Era in twilight. Friburg. Bilbao: Foundation for children/Instituto Horizonte. 1994. p. 56–80.
13. Páez D. Violencia colectiva, clima emocional y procesos socioculturales (Documento técnico). San Sebastián: Universidad del País Vasco. 2004.
14. Zubieta EM, Delfino GI. Satisfacción con la vida, bienestar psicológico y bienestar social en estudiantes universitarios de Buenos Aires. Anuario de Investigaciones. 2010;17:277–283.
15. Zubieta EM, Muratori M, Mele S. Bienestar, clima emocional, percepción de problemas sociales y confianza institucional. Anuario de Investigaciones. 2012;19:97–106.
16. Delfino G, Botero C, Gónzalez Insua F. Una escala corta de bienestar: el índice de felicidad de Pemberton aplicado a población adulta de Buenos Aires. Anuario de Investigaciones. 2019;26:115–122.
17. Bilbao Ramírez M. Creencias sociales y bienestar: valores, creencias básicas, impacto de los hechos vitales y crecimiento psicológico (Tesis doctoral inédita). Universidad del País Vasco, San Sebastián. 2008.
18. Chen FF, Jing Y, Hayes A, et al. Two concepts or two approaches? A bifactor analysis of psychological and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies. 2013;14:1033–1068.
19. Cicognani E, Pirini C, Keyes C, et al. Social participation, sense of community and social well-being: A study on American, Italian and Iranian university students. Social Indicators Research. 2008;89:97–112.
20. Lachman ME, Firth KM. The adaptive value of feeling in control during midlife. In: OG Brim, et al., editors. How healthy are we? A national study on well-being at midlife. The University of Chicago Press,Chicago. 2004. p. 320–349.
21. Muratori M, Delfino GI, Zubieta EM. Sucesos vitales y bienestar. Anuario de Investigaciones. 2012;19:49–57.
22. Páez D, Fernández, Ubillos S, et al. Psicología Social, Cultura y Educación. Madrid: Pearson Educación. 2004.
23. Rotter JB. Social learning and clinical psychology. Enlewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall. 1954.
24. Velázquez GA, Mikkelsen C, Linares S, et al. Calidad de Vida en Argentina. Ranking del bienestar por departamentos (2010). Tandil: Centro de Investigaciones Geográficas (CIG) - CONICET/UNCPBA. 2014.