Measuring well-being in sport performance

Giles S, Fletcher D, Arnold R, Ashfield A, Harrison J. Measuring Well-Being in Sport Performers: Where are We Now and How do we Progress? Sports Med. 2020 Jul;50(7):1255-1270.

Despite the lack of a universally agreed definition of wellbeing, it is principally understood to encompass a combination of both hedonic and eudaimonic components, which are crucial to thriving across multiple life domains.

The hedonic perspective is typically defined in terms of happiness which is achieved through the striving for rewarding and pleasurable experiences that reinforce positive feelings and satisfaction. The eudaimonic perspective, as proposed by Aristotle (350 BC), focuses more broadly on the personal qualities and ways of life that promote living well. A central tenet to this perspective is the enactment of personal qualities that enable a person to live up to one’s personal potential in a manner that is consistent with their daimon (or ‘true self’).

Grounded in eudaimonic principles, scholars have defined a variety of components (e.g. autonomy, personal growth, and purpose in life) that are used to study psychological well-being and states of flourishing.

Debate remains, however, regarding the extent to which particular components correspond to eudaimonia as articulated in the original philosophical works, as well as the extent to which these are empirically distinguishable from hedonic conceptions of wellbeing. While a comprehensive review of the conceptual and theoretical discussion on this topic is beyond the scope of this paper, it is worth noting that this issue has provided a continual source of debate in the works of contemporary philosophers, and eminent humanistic, clinical, and developmental psychologists. The study of hedonic well-being is often broadly equated with Diener’s model of subjective well-being (SWB). With regards to measurement, there is general agreement that SWB comprises an affective component (i.e. the presence of positive emotions and the absence of negative emotions) and a cognitive component (i.e. evaluations of life satisfaction).

Turning to eudaimonic well-being, numerous conceptual models of measurement have been proposed that combine various components of psychological and social functioning and extend the notion of well-being beyond ‘feeling good’ as emphasised in the hedonic perspective.

To illustrate the conceptual variance that existsdepicts how various domains and components of well-being have been combined in prominent approaches to measurement. While there remains a lack of consensus regarding the conceptual structure of eudaimonic well-being, most scholars accept that measures of eudaimonic well-being are important because they provide an insight into the subjective experiences of individuals beyond that captured through assessments of life satisfaction and affect.