Background: Huta and Waterman (2014) proposed that definitions of eudaimonia and hedonia fall into four categories: orientations (motives/goals/priorities), behaviors (actions/activities), experiences (affects/feelings/cognitive-affective appraisals), and functioning (achievements/strengths/abilities/habits). Theories and measures exist to represent both eudaimonia and hedonia in three categories – orientations, behaviors, experiences. However, when it comes to functioning – which is essentially a person’s collection of strengths, often developed gradually over time – researchers have focused mostly on eudaimonia, e.g., Ryff’s Psychological Wellbeing, Waterman’s Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Wellbeing, Jones and Crandall’s Self-actualization index. Researchers have neglected the possibility of healthy hedonic functioning. I set out to fill this gap by developing a theoretical model and measure of hedonic strengths, each of which complements a eudaimonic strength, e.g., the ability to let go complements the ability to persist, the ability to be spontaneous complements the ability to self-regulate, the ability to live in the present complements long-term purpose.
Hypotheses: Hedonic strengths will be distinct from eudaimonic strengths. Also, hedonic strengths will relate more to hedonic motivation (seeking pleasure/enjoyment/fun, comfort/painlessness/ease), while eudaimonic strengths will relate more to eudaimonic motivation (seeking authenticity/autonomy, excellence/virtue, growth/self-actualization, and meaning/contribution).
Sample: 296 North American undergraduates; only 11% psychology majors, 73% female.
Design: Online questionnaire with measures of seven hedonic strengths and seven complementary eudaimonic strengths, with some measures of hedonic strengths developed specifically for this study.
Results: Hedonic strengths and eudaimonic strengths formed two clearly distinct factors in exploratory factor analysis. The hedonic strengths factor correlated significantly more with hedonic motivation (when using only the pleasure motivation items, not the painlessness motivation items), while the eudaimonic strengths factor correlated significantly more with eudaimonic motivation.
Contribution: Following further studies, this will lead to publication of a measure of hedonic strengths that can be used in positive psychology research and practice.