Chapter-1

Introduction
 INTRODUCTION

Subjective well-being - is a psychological construct in a relatively new

field of positive psychology and for about half a century now there‘s been an

increasing scientific interest of researchers, especially psychologists and

psychiatrists. The author Edward Diener who first began to explore the

concept of subjective well-being, in one of his cited articles of a highly

influential scientific journal Psychological Bulletin from 1984, proposed

three components of subjective wellbeing: life satisfaction, pleasant emotions

and unpleasant emotions (Diener, 1984.). In 1999 the same author and his co-

workers added the fourth component to the explanation of subjective well-

being: the pleasure gained from certain aspects of life such as job satisfaction,

marriage, leisure activities and satisfaction with one‘s health (Schimmack,

2008). Although in literature and everyday life, the term subjective well-

being is often used as a synonym for happiness, this psychological construct

is defined as a cognitive evaluation of life that is filled with pleasant emotions

without the unpleasant ones, and which apart from the cognitive component

includes the emotional component. Although these two components are

separate, it turned out that they are usually poorly to moderately correlated

(Rijavec et al., 2008, Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). This model of subjective

well-being as described by Diener, is actually an extension of the construct of

hedonistic well-being originating from the philosophy of hedonism, which

described human yearning for happiness and satisfaction while avoiding pain

and suffering. However, subjective well-being is not only described by the

hedonistic component, but also all the positive and negative aspects of human

life. The cognitive component of subjective well-being -one of the most

researched components of subjective well-being is the life satisfaction

assessment. Although the concept of life satisfaction has been researched

since the 1960‘s, no comprehensive theory has been discovered that would

operationalise this construct.

Subjective wellbeing (SWB) encapsulates issues relating to young

people more comprehensively by including young people's perspectives,

levels of satisfaction along with social behaviors, mental health and focus on

an individual's perspective. Further, given that young people have been

constructed as lazy, apathetic, rebellious and other negative judgments (Wyn

& White, 1997; Bourke, 2003) and are not well understood (Mathews et al.,

2000; Glendinning et al., 2003), analyzing SWB can provide insight into

young people's perspectives of their own lifestyles, ways of thinking and

outlooks within their cultural context: "...accepting children as active

members of society and not only as subjects for research leads unavoidably to

the inclusion of children in any effort to study their well-being" (Ben-Arieh,

2005, p. 576). Focus on SWB allows examination of various problems and

experiences as integrated issues occurring in the daily lives of young

residents. Studying wellbeing does not stigmatize young people, nor does it

present them as products of their environments or create them as social actors

able to negotiate the social world in any way they desire; rather it allows

young people to situate their own experiences and lifestyles.

Happiness is being evaluated with subjective well-being concept in

psychology (Hybron, 2000). Subjective well-being means evaluating own

positive and negative affections and life satisfaction of individuals (Diener,

2001). If people experience positive feelings frequently and negative feelings

rarely and highly satisfied from their lives, then they have a high level of

subjective well-being. In the context of positive features, subjective well-

being of children and adolescents can be thought. In psychology, happiness is

expressed the terms of ―subjective well being‖. This term is a

multidimensional construct. As adults‘ subjective well-being, subjective well-

being of children and adolescents has also three important factors which are

life satisfaction, positive emotions and negative emotions (Hybron, 2000).

Definitions of Subjective Well Being

Subjective well-being (SWB) is defined as a subjective evaluation of

overall life satisfaction and the frequency with which one experiences

positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) (Diener et al., 1999; Robbins &
Kliewer, 2000). Subjective well-being is the subjective measurement of the

overall satisfaction with life (Camfield, 2003). In general it is assumed that

individual satisfaction with life is a multidimensional concept. This

multidimensional concept is believed to encompass not only material

achievements but also other aspects of life, such as health, love, employment,

and having children. Subjective well-being – when it is measured– refers to a

person‘s declared well-being and is based on a person‘s answer to either a

single question or a group of questions about his/her well-being (Rojas,

2003). Therefore subjective well-being can be regarded as an outcome

measure by which to judge successful living (Diener & Suh, 2000).

SWB refers to the self-evaluation of life satisfaction (Robbins &

Kliewer, 2000). Diener‘s (e.g., Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999) model of

SWB consists of both cognitive and affective components. Cognitive

evaluations of SWB are assessed through global judgments of life

satisfaction. Affective components (i.e., predominant moods and emotions)

are assessed by evaluating the frequency of pleasant and unpleasant emotions.

Thus, the model operationalizes SWB as consisting of three interrelated

factors: global life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect (Lightsey,

1996; Robbins & Kliewer, 2000). While research has demonstrated that life

satisfaction tends to be related empirically to positive and negative affect,

they are conceptually distinct constructs that should be examined

independently, not in the aggregate (Lent, 2004).

SWB has been defined as the ways people "evaluate their lives in

positive terms" (Diener & Eunkook, 2000a, p. 3). Most commonly, SWB has

comprised of two key dimensions: cognitive assessments or satisfaction and

positive affect or feelings of happiness (Ryff, 1989; Headey, 1998; Cummins,

2000; Sagiv & Schwartz, 2000; Triandis, 2000). Some add the concept of

negative affect or what detracts from feeling happy (Diener et al., 1985a;

Arthaud-Day et al., 2005). Ryff (1989) identified six components of SWB:

self acceptance, positive relationships with others, autonomy, environmental

mastery, purpose in life and personal growth (see also Triandis, 2000). Some

have talked about well-being being related to opportunities resulting from

one's social environment, such as inability to find employment, social

marginalization and structures detracting from personal growth, self-esteem

or achievement of goals (Munoz-Sastre, 1999; Cummins, 2000). Wellbeing

has also been related to individual characteristics, such as age, gender,

religion, marital status, friendships, residential mobility, income, education,

work and leisure activities (Munoz-Sastre, 1999), and biological

characteristics, including physical health, beauty, strengths, personality

(extroversion or neuroticism), intelligence, sexual preference and

assertiveness (Munoz-Sastre, 1999; Cummins, 2000). Many of these authors

have argued that happiness, values and acceptance are more important than

social environments (Ryff, 1989; Meyers & Diener, 1995; Cummins, 2000;

Sagiv & Schwartz, 2000). While clearly defined and extensively measured,

the concept has not been well theorized (Diener, 1984; Ryff, 1989).

SWB is unique in that it captures an individual‘s self-perceived life

satisfaction by examining their cognitive appraisal of their own life.

Additionally, SWB captures a more complete picture of an individual‘s

emotional experiences than traditionally used measures of internalizing

problems such as depression or anxiety. Few other outcome variables are able

to capture not only negative emotional experiences but also positive ones as

well. Additionally, SWB has been shown to be quite stable over time, making

it more useful for research that seeks to examine the effects of various factors

on long-term functioning as opposed to relatively brief mood or cognitive

changes (Diener et al., 1999).

Subjective well-being (SWB) is defined as ‗a person‘s cognitive and

affective evaluations of his or her life‘ (Diener, Lucas, & Oshi, 2002). The

cognitive element refers to what one thinks about his or her life satisfaction in

global terms (life as a whole) and in domain terms (in specific areas of life

such as work, relationships, etc.) The affective element refers to emotions,

moods and feelings. Affect is considered positive when the emotions, moods
and feelings experienced are pleasant (e.g. joy, elation, affection etc.) Affect

is deemed negative, though, when the emotions, moods and feelings

experienced are unpleasant (e.g. guilt, anger, shame etc.)

In defining the concept of subjective well-being, it‘s unavoidable to

mention the American author Warner Wilson who made a statement in 1967

that happy people are the ones who are young, healthy, well educated, well-

paid, intelligent, and moderately religious, of modest aspirations, married and

have built highly professional ethics (Wilson, 1967). Over the years, many of

Wilson's conclusions were inverted, and today they represent an essential

prerequisite for the existence of subjective well-being.

Today, subjective well-being is observed as a broader phenomenon

that includes emotional responses (affects, emotions), satisfaction with

different aspects of life (family relations, leisure, hobbies, job, relationships

with partners, etc.) and global satisfaction. Thus, Andrews and Robinson

(1991) concluded that in order to measure the subjective well-being, it‘s

ultimately important to calculate what the person wants out of life in

comparison to what they‘ve achieved (Andrews & Robinson 1991). Carr

(2004) presented a framework for conceptualizing the various components of

SWB at two levels. First, the cognitive component, that is, the satisfaction

with self, family, peer group, health, finances, work, and leisure. Second, the
affective component, that is, the positive affect: happiness, elation, ecstasy,

pride, affection, joy, and contentment, and the negative affect: depression,

sadness, envy, anger, stress, guilt or shame, and anxiety.

Background

Several terms recur in the literature and are used in various ways. We

follow the basic distinction drawn by several researchers (Waterman, 1993;

Ryan & Deci, 2000) between eudaimonic and hedonic measures, with the

former comprising a multifaceted measure of ―flourishing‖, and the latter

happiness and satisfaction—which we suggest are distinct concepts. The

umbrella term used to denote both the eudaimonic and hedonic measures is

psychological and subjective well-being.

Eudaimonic Measures

The first category of measures we consider focuses on eudaimonia, or

―human flourishing‖. Based on Aristotelian philosophy, eudaimonic measures

incorporate a morediverse set of principles than their hedonic counterparts,

which focus more on pleasure. Sen (1996) wrote that ―Aristotle saw

―eudaimonia‖ as being constitutively diverse, leading to a heterogeneous

view of fulfillment . . . proceeding . . . in the direction of a structured

diversity of joys‖. Ryff and Singer (1998) defined eudaimonia as ‗the idea of

striving toward excellence based on one‘s own unique potential‘. The

measure has the advantage of incorporating process and outcome, giving it

both instrumental and intrinsic importance. It also gives due recognition to

the role of individual internal cognition in conditioning outcomes.

Lyubomirsky et al. (2005) found that external circumstances may account for

just about 10% of variation between individuals in measures of life

satisfaction, with most accounted for by ―intentional activities‖, i.e. aspects of

functioning over which individuals have some control (cited in Huppert et al.,

2006). In addition, this focus on process ties in with Frey & Stutzer‘s (2007)

arguments that individuals benefit from what they label ―procedural utility‖

as well as outcomes; and that they should become ―better able of advancing

what constitutes their idea of the good life‖ (Frey & Stutzer, 2007).We argue

for a two-pronged approach to measuring eudaimonia based on: (1)perception

of meaning in life—defined by the individual based on his/her own unique

potential; and (2) the ability to strive towards excellence in fulfilling this idea.

To develop these concepts, we draw upon Steger‘s Meaning in Life

questionnaire (Steger et al., 2006) and on Deci and Ryan‘s measures of the

psychological needs associated with goal identification and pursuit, which in

turn predict ―optimal functioning‖ (Ryan &Deci,2000, 2001). This focus also

ties in with Ryf and Singer‘s (in press) assertion that purpose in life and

personal growth are the two most eudaimonic aspects of well-being.

Hedonic Measures: Happiness and Life Satisfaction

Subjective perceptions of well-being have three components: a

cognitive component (often described as life satisfaction), and positive and

negative affect (Diener, 1984).The preponderance of positive over negative

affect can be described as happiness (Bradburn, 1969). The extent to which

happiness and unhappiness constitute a single dimension has been challenged,

but most recent research has found that they are not independent: ―most

moments of experience can be adequately characterized by a single summary

value on the Good/Bad dimension‖ (Kahneman, 1999). We argue for the

separate measurement of life satisfaction and happiness, and that satisfaction

consider both life overall and several distinct domains that are argued to be

important.

The Importance of Subjective Well-Being

SWB is one measure of the quality of life of an individual and of

societies. Philosophers have debated the nature of the good life for millennia,

and one conclusion that has emerged from this debate is that the good life is

happy (although philosophers often differ on the definition of happiness). We

consider positive SWB to be necessary for the good life and good society, but

not sufficient for it. It is hard to imagine that a dissatisfied and depressed

culture would be an ideal society, no matter how desirable it is in other

respects. A person or society that has high SWB, however, might still be
missing an ingredient such as fairness, which people might consider to be

essential to a high quality of life. Diener and Suh (1998), working from the

philosophical notion of utility, suggested that SWB is one of three major

ways to assess the quality of life of societies, along with economic and social

indicators. How people feel and think about their own lives is essential to

understanding well-being in any society that grants importance not just to the

opinions of experts or leaders, but to all people in the society. We therefore

maintain that abundant SWB is a necessary, but not sufficient, characteristic

of the good society and the good life. As such, the area of SWB is of

fundamental importance to the behavioral sciences.

High SWB leads to benefits (Lyubomirsky et al., 2002), not the least

of which include better health and perhaps even increased longevity (Danner

et al., 2001). In a survey of college students from 17 countries, Diener (2000)

found that happiness and life satisfaction were both rated well above neutral

on importance (and more important than money) in every country, although

there was also variation among cultures. Furthermore, respondents from all

samples indicated that they thought about happiness from time to time. Thus,

even those from relatively unhappy societies value happiness to some extent.

Third, SWB represents a major way to assess quality of life in addition to

economic and social indicators such as GNP and levels of health or crime

(Diener & Suh, 1997).

Subjective well-being as a psychological construct

At the beginning of the 20th century, an empirical approach to the

study of subjective well-being slowly started to expand, especially from the

late 1940‘s when the World Health Organization concluded that mental health

is not merely the absence of mental illness (Gallagher, 2009). At that time,

after World War II psychology was greatly influenced by the medical model

focused on the alleviation of human problems and suffering, research and

treatment of various mental illnesses. It was in some way understandable,

especially because of the enormous psychological consequences of war.

The humanistic psychology movement started in the 1950‘s and 60‘s

with the most famous representatives being Carl Rogers and Abraham

Maslow. Emphasizing the human tendency towards personal growth, after

World War II they were the first to write about, not as the previous authors,

human weakness and disease, but about person's development through self

actualization, the goals toward which one strives, and generally about the

fundamental questions of human existence and the meaning of life. The

impact of their teachings on the wider culture was very strong, but on

psychology itself it had little impact because of the lack of empirical research

(Rijavec et al., 2008). The reason for this relative failure within the profession

also lies in the fact that this model of thinking promoted a philosophical

outlook and it wasn‘t considered scientific. In some postulates, it even got

close to religious interpretations, reaffirming existential concepts such as

freedom, faith, hope, love, will, etc. (Milivojević, 1989). This interest

emerged in large part as a reaction to long-term focus of psychological

research on negative emotions and psychopathology, which has been

prevalent in literature almost 17 times more than the studies examining

positive states (Diener et al., 1999).

Adolescents Subjective Well-Being

The present research focuses on subjective well- being among

adolescents. The period of adolescence, which spans ages 11–21, is divided

roughly into early (ages 11–14), middle (ages 15–18), and late adolescence

(ages 19–21) (Holmbeck et al., 1995). Adolescents undergo through multiple

transitions during this period: the transition to puberty, and transitions

involving parent–child relationships, school, peers, and cognitive and

emotional abilities. These transitions shape maturity of cognition, emotion,

and behavior.

The psychological effects of stressful life events during adolescence

have been frequently studied within the psychological literature (Rudolph et

al., 2000; Kim et al., 2003; Cole et al., 2006). One group that is particularly

vulnerable to stress is urban youth, as urban adolescents not only experience

more stressors than suburban or rural adolescents, but the types of stressors
they experience are also qualitatively different and generally more chronic

(Guerra et al., 1995; Landis et al., 2007). Urban adolescents are often exposed

to higher levels of uncontrollable stress (Self-Brown et al., 2004; Landis et

al., 2007) including community violence, financial strain, housing evictions,

pressure to join gangs, academic disparities, physical abuse, and separation

from caregivers (Landis et al., 2007). While many researchers have examined

the negative outcomes of this type of stress, fewer have examined what leads

to positive outcomes. Policy makers, teachers, parents, researchers and many

others in society are concerned about young people's wellbeing (Glover et al.,

1998). Concerns for those in their late teens and early twenties commonly

include mental health, emotional wellbeing, social support, participation and

inclusion, financial wellbeing and health (such as suicide, obesity and social

isolation) (White & Wyn, 2004).

Nowadays, studies of adolescents and children's subjective well-being

are found to relate with demographic factors (age, gender and socio-economic

level) and other internal-features (self-concept, extraversion, etc.). For

example, it was found that an adolescent who has much internal locus of

control and self-esteem has high levels of subjective well-being (Buccheri,

Gesu and Samgo, 2000) In addition, in parallel with the adults‘ subjective

well-being, it was found that demographic factors have little effect on the

adolescents‘ subjective well-being (McGrath and Tschal, 2004).

 Overall subjective well-being can be understood in terms of life

satisfaction, contentment and hedonic level, while different aspects of

subjective well-being including self-appraisals like job satisfaction, self-

esteem and control belief (Veenhoven, 1991). By life satisfaction, Veenhoven

means `the degree to which an individual judges the overall quality of his

life-as-a-whole favorable' (Veenhoven, 1991). She uses the word happiness

synonymously with life satisfaction. Well-being has been measured by a

number of researchers using various instruments (Bowling, 1991; McDowell

& Newell, 1996). These scale mostly concern personality disorders, distress

and psychological well-being, and deal with areas such as happiness, life-

satisfaction and morale.

Huebner and his colleagues (Huebner, 1991; Terry & Huebner, 1995;

Huebner et al., 1999; McCullough et al., 2000) have concentrated on the

construct of subjective well-being among children and adolescents. Drawing

on the Students' Life Satisfaction Scale (SLSS) and ratings of the measures of

frequencies of positive and negative affect, they argue that subjective well-

being among children and adolescents can be seen as a three-component

construct: global life satisfaction, and positive and negative affect (Huebner,

1991; McCullough et al., 2000).

 The School Well-being Model (Konu & Rimpelä, 2001). This model

(Figure 1) divides well-being in the school context into four categories:

school conditions, social relationships, means for self-fulfillment and health

status. Important contexts with an influence on children's well-being outside

school include home and the surrounding community. This study explored the

associations of children's general subjective well-being with factors related to

the school context (Figure 1). General subjective well-being was measured

using an indicator (GSWI) (Konu et al., in preparation a) that is based on the

Raitasalo modification of the Beck Depression Inventory (Raitasalo, 1995;

Kaltiala-Heino et al., 1999). The GSWI focuses on perceived satisfaction in

specific life domains.

Theoretical Models of Subjective Well-Being

There are several existing theoretical models that explain how SWB is

derived. One is a temperament model (Costa & McCrae, 1980) that prioritizes

the role of personality and its effect on dispositions (e.g., friendliness) and

perceptions about life events. The model would suggest that people with

positive temperaments are more likely to have positive dispositions and

interpretations of life events, which lead to greater SWB. A second model,

the process-participation model (Cantor & Sanderson, 1999) emphasizes the

independent contributions of both social resources and personality in

predicting SWB. In this model, high social resources and positive personality

characteristics lead to more ―active participation‖ in one‘s life, which results

in higher SWB. Both models have received empirical support suggesting that

there are multiple mechanisms through which SWB may be attained.

When psychologists measure SWB, they are measuring how people

think and feel about their lives. The three components of SWB, life

satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect, are independent factors that

should be measured and studied separately (Andrews & Withey, 1976, Lucas

et al., 1996). Thus, the presence of positive affect does not mean the absence

of negative affect and vice versa. Before evaluating the correlates and

predictors of SWB, it is worth noting the instruments used in measuring the

components of SWB. Life satisfaction can be measured using a questionnaire

such as the 5 item satisfaction with life questionnaire (Diener, Emmons,

Larsen & Griffin, 1985; Pavot & Diener, 1993). Affectivity can be measured

by for example, the PANAS [Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule]

(Watson, Clark & Tellegan, 1988). Both of the previous measures are

examples of self-report measures. Other methods of assessment include the

Experience Sampling Method (ESM) (Stone et al., 1999), informant reports

from family and friends (Sandvik et al., 1993) and memory recall of positive

versus negative life events (Seidlitz, Wyer & Diener, 1997). The ESM works

like a pager which, at random intervals, signals the respondent to record their

mood at the point when they are paged. These measurements are taken over a

period of time such as a month or 6 weeks and are then averaged out to

provide an indication of a person‘s level of positive and negative affect. The

self-report measures have raised some concerns to many positive

psychologists, (e.g. Schwartz & Strack, 1991). They showed that SWB scores

can be influenced by a number of factors such as situational factors, the type

of scales that are used, the order in which the items are presented, and the

mood of the respondent at the time when the measurement was taken. Most

researchers recommend the use of a ‗multi-method battery to assess SWB

wherever possible‘ since a more accurate assessment of SWB can be

achieved and the amount of response artifices can be minimized. In general,

however, self-reported well being measures have shown convergence with

non-self report methods including some physiological measures (Lucas et al.,

1996).

Personality appears to be one of the strongest and most consistent

predictors of SWB. Explanations and support for the relationship between

personality and SWB comes from a number of research studies and theories.

The dynamic equilibrium model (Headey & Waring, 1992): Although

an event in one‘s life can influence an individual‘s SWB, the individual will

eventually adapt to the change experienced and return to his or her

biologically determined ‗set point‘ or level of adaptation.

The ‗hedonic treadmill‘ theory (Brickman & Campbell, 1971):

Individuals adapt quickly to changes in their lifestyles and return to their

baseline levels of happiness, a theory which is consistent to the dynamic

equilibrium model. Exceptions to the adaptation rule include death of a loved

one such as a spouse or child, where individuals adapt very little to their

baseline level of happiness or not at all, and noise, where individuals almost

never adapt (Frederick & Loewenstein, 1999).

Although research evidence seems to support the theory of happiness

having a genetic component, as well as the concept of adaptation, Diener et al

(1999) have suggested that these theories, whilst useful, provide an

incomplete explanation of why and how individuals adapt. Also, whilst genes

may predispose a person to behave in a certain way within certain contexts, a

person‘s level of SWB is not uncontrollable. After all, at best 50% of the

variance in SWB can be explained by heritability and at worst (Lykken &

Tellegan‘s, 1996) 80% can be explained by heritability. This still leaves

between 50% and 20% to a combination of volition (what the individual can

do to improve their SWB) and circumstances (demographic and situational

factors). Hence, whilst the power of the personality in influencing SWB is

important in terms of predisposing an individual to behave in a certain way,

one‘s own efforts are also of importance. For example, what about the

individual‘s capacity to change the way they think about their life? For

example, a neurotic individual could learn to be more optimistic by changing

their explanatory thinking style. He or she could start doing various positive

psychology exercises, such as attending to and recalling more of the pleasant

aspects of life, practicing the savoring technique, and doing the three good

things exercise. One could also spend more time doing the things that bring

happiness.

The personality traits of extroversion and neuroticism have been

granted the most theoretical and empirical attention, given that extroversion is

strongly correlated with SWB and neuroticism is strongly correlated with

negative affect (Costa & McCrae, 1980; Watson & Clark, 1984; Diener &

Lucas, 1999). According to Watson and Clark (1984), extroverts have a

temperamental predisposition to experience positive affect, whereas neurotics

are predisposed to experience negative affect. Their claim is consistent with

Gray‘s theory of the personality having one of two brain systems (Diener et

al., 1992). People who are ‗approach‘ orientated in their behaviour are

sensitive to signs of reward and non-punishment and operate on the

Behavioural Activation System (BAS). People who are more sensitive to

signs of punishment and non-reward operate on the Behavioural Inhibition

System (BIS). Extroverts can be seen as BAS controlled whilst neurotics can

be seen as BIS controlled.

How one thinks about his or her life also plays a part in determining

one‘s SWB. In addition to extraversion, Diener et al (1999) also found that

optimism (the expectation that more good things will happen in the future

than bad), internal locus of control (the belief that one has control over his or

her life) and self-esteem (defined by Baumeister et al (2003) as ‗how much

value one places on themselves, their self-worth and their capabilities‘) were

personality traits that correlated significantly with SWB. The theory of

dispositional optimism (Scheier & Carver, 1985) states that one‘s thoughts

about one‘s future affect one‘s circumstances because by expecting to do

well, one will work more effectively and persist more for the goals set,
therefore being more likely to achieve those goals and consequently achieve a

greater sense of SWB. However, could it be that if one feels good about his or

her life one is more likely to be more optimistic?

Many studies cite a rich and fulfilling social life and a network of close

social support with family and friends as being strongly correlated with SWB.

A study of the happiest 10% of college students showed that those found to

engage in large amounts of social activity were the happiest (Diener &

Seligman, 2002).Consistent with the conclusions from this study was the

experiment conducted by Fleeson et al (2002) where both extroverted and

introverted college students were asked to record their activities and moods

over a period of 3 weeks in a diary. The results showed that both groups were

happiest when engaged in ‗extroverted‘ activities. Both these studies support

the theory that social participation is a strong predictor of life satisfaction.

Indeed it is easy to see why extroverts have a predisposition to greater levels

of SWB given their propensity to socialize more. However, this does not

explain the findings of Diener et al (1992) which showed that whether

extroverts lived alone or with others, whether they had jobs which involved

working with other people or not and whether they lived in rural or urban

areas, extroverts were happier than introverts. This raises the question as to

whether the social aspects of extraverts that lead to greater experiences of

positive affect have been over emphasized. Having said this, there is more
empirical research that shows close social connections correlate with SWB

than research that shows otherwise.

Need for the study

In the field of psychology, there has been a growing movement toward

examining subjective well-being. A dearth of literature still exists within this

area of research for adolescent population. Thus, this study is intended

primarily exploratory in nature. Further, this study attempts to add knowledge

on adolescents subjective well being. Because adolescents are in a transitional

period hence, life events, personality and coping interact differently, which

may lead to outcomes with regard to adolescent well being dimensions.

Therefore, it is important to find what factors are related with adolescents‘

subjective well-being. As a result, in this research, the effect of some

demographic factors on adolescents‘ subjective wellbeing is investigated so

that appropriate strategies to improve well being can be recommended in

developing a comprehensive intervention program for enhancing adolescents

well being.