The Quality of Life Institute, East Sandwich, MA 02537, USA.
Qual Life Res. 2012 May;21(4):625-31. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9961-0. Epub 2011 Jul 3.
The aim of this paper is to examine the oft-heard concern that quality or quality-of-life cannot be defined. This concern persists today, even in the presence of countless studies that claim to be assessing quality or quality-of-life. There is obviously a disconnect here that warrants some attention, if not explanation. In this study, I summarize the extent of this disconnect and offer a number of potential explanations of why this situation exists. I review the role that operational definitions, statistical and empirical models, and content-specific definitions play in defining quality and/or quality-of-life. I conclude that none of these approaches provide a comprehensive definition of quality or quality-of-life. In its stead, I will argue that quality or quality-of-life represents a distinctive pattern of thinking. I establish this pattern by examining the cognitive-linguistic basis of these definitions and argue that when this is done it will be possible to identify an universal cognitive (hybrid) construct that describes how a person thinks about all types of qualitative assessments. The implication of this is that for a study to claim that it is defining or assessing quality or quality-of-life, it will first have to demonstrate the presence of the elements of this hybrid construct.
本文旨在探讨一个常见的观点，即质量或生活质量无法被定义。尽管有无数研究声称在评估质量或生活质量，但时至今日，人们仍对这一观点持怀疑态度。这种明显的脱节值得关注，即使不能解释，也需要关注。在这项研究中，我总结了这种脱节的程度，并提出了一些可能的解释，说明为什么会出现这种情况。我回顾了操作定义、统计和经验模型以及特定于内容的定义在定义质量和/或生活质量方面所起的作用。我得出的结论是，这些方法都没有提供对质量或生活质量的全面定义。相反，我将认为质量或生活质量代表了一种独特的思维模式。我通过检查这些定义的认知语言学基础来建立这种模式，并认为当这样做时，就有可能确定一个描述一个人如何思考所有类型的定性评估的通用认知（混合）结构。这意味着，一项研究要声称它正在定义或评估质量或生活质量，就必须首先证明这种混合结构的要素的存在。
