Background
Recent works (Han 2018, Miller 2018) discuss the lack of practical wisdom (phronesis) in VIA-IS. An intervention concerning the creative use of one character strength in everyday life was carried out with university students over a period of two weeks. Following Russell (2009), practical wisdom was operationalized as deliberation about means, content and adoption of virtuous ends. There were three different groups: a) use of a signature strength, b) use of a barely pronounced strength, c) use of an intrinsically selected strength.
Hypotheses/Research Questions
It is assumed that the participants find it easier to apply phronesis in conditions a) and c) than in condition b).
The study aims to find out to which parts of practical wisdom this applies and how participants experience practical wisdom in the different conditions.
Sample Characteristics and Sample Size
N = 211, 72.6% female, mean age of 20.6 (SD=0.77 years), undergraduate students
Design
In a qualitative investigation (after Mayring 2015) with a Three-Group Posttest Only Design, the participants report on their experiences with this type of deliberation in using their character strengths in everyday life over a period of two weeks.
Results
First results show that participants who applied weakly developed strengths found it more difficult to find suitable means to apply a strength. They also showed less persistence in adopting the strength.
Scientific Contribution
The aim of this study is to fathom the Aristotelian virtue of phronesis and its significance for the work with the VIA-IS. The intervention aims to find out how the participants use practical wisdom in the application of character strengths. This could contribute to the research of the questions whether phronesis should be made more explicit in the practical work with VIA-IS and if it should be added to VIA-IS as an independent virtue.