VanderWeele Tyler J, Johnson Byron R
Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Nat Hum Behav. 2025 Apr 30. doi: 10.1038/s41562-025-02187-5.
Interest in the scientific study of well-being has grown substantially, spanning various disciplines and sectors of society, while also gaining greater relevance in policymaking. In this Perspective, we compare and contrast unidimensional versus multidimensional understandings of well-being, and corresponding measures of life satisfaction or life evaluation versus flourishing. We consider conceptual, empirical, pragmatic and policy arguments that have been put forward for each of these understandings and measurement approaches. While we argue that well-being needs to be conceptually and scientifically understood, and empirically studied, as a multidimensional construct, we acknowledge the pragmatic and policy challenges of doing so and how in some circumstances relying on a unidimensional assessment may sometimes be practically necessary. We put forward some proposals as to how researchers and policymakers might navigate these various challenges.
对幸福的科学研究兴趣大幅增长，涵盖社会的各个学科和领域，同时在政策制定中也变得更加重要。在这篇观点文章中，我们比较并对比了对幸福的单维度与多维度理解，以及生活满意度或生活评价与蓬勃发展的相应衡量标准。我们考虑了针对这些理解和测量方法中的每一种所提出的概念、实证、务实和政策方面的论据。虽然我们认为幸福需要在概念上和科学上被理解为一个多维度的结构并进行实证研究，但我们也认识到这样做在务实和政策方面的挑战，以及在某些情况下依赖单维度评估有时在实际中可能是必要的。我们就研究人员和政策制定者如何应对这些各种挑战提出了一些建议。
