Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Multidimensional versus unidimensional approaches to well-being

Nature Human Behaviour volume 9, pages 857–863 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adler, M. D. & Fleurbaey, M. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy (Oxford Univ. Press, 2016).

  2. Plough, A. L. (ed.) Well-Being: Expanding the Definition of Progress: Insights from Practitioners, Researchers and Innovators from Around the Globe (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).

  3. Trudel-Fitzgerald, C. et al. Psychological well-being as part of the public health debate? Insight into dimensions, interventions and policy. BMC Public Health 19, 1712 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Social Prescribing and Community-Based Support: Summary Guide. NHS England https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/social-prescribing-summary-guide-updated-june-20.pdf (NHS England, 2019)

  5. Murthy, V. Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The US Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community (US Department of Health and Human Services, 2023).

  6. Layard, R. & De Neve, J. E. Wellbeing (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2023).

  7. National Research Council Subjective Well-Being (National Academies Press, 2013).

  8. Kahneman, D. in Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology (eds Kahneman, D. et al.) 3–25 (Russel Sage, 1999).

  9. Stone, A. A., Shiffman, S. S. & DeVries, M. W. in Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology (eds Kahneman, D. et al.) 26–39 (Russel Sage, 1999).

  10. Watson, D., Clark, L. A. & Tellegen, A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54, 1063–1070 (1988).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J. & Griffin, S. The Satisfaction with Life Scale. J. Pers. Assess. 49, 71–75 (1985).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., Sachs, J. D. & Neve, J. E. D. World Happiness Report 2021 (University of Oxford: Wellbeing Research Centre, 2021).

  13. Allin, P. & Hand, D. J. New statistics for old? Measuring the wellbeing of the UK. J. R. Stat. Soc. A 180, 3–24 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ryff, C. D. & Keyes, C. L. M. The structure of psychological well-being revisited. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69, 719–727 (1995).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S. & Kaler, M. The Meaning in Life Questionnaire: assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. J. Couns. Psychol. 53, 80–93 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Peterson, C. & Seligman, M. E. Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification Vol. 1 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2004).

  17. Fletcher, G. The Philosophy of Well-Being: An Introduction (Routledge, 2016).

  18. Crisp, R. in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Winter edn (ed. Zalta, E. N.) https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/well-being/ (Stanford Univ., 2021).

  19. Woodard, C. in International Encyclopedia of Ethics (ed. LaFollette, H.) 1–7 (Wiley, 2019).

  20. Su, R., Tay, L. & Diener, E. The development and validation of the Comprehensive Inventory of Thriving (CIT) and the Brief Inventory of Thriving (BIT). Appl. Psychol. Health Well Being 6, 251–279 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Butler, J. & Kern, M. L. The PERMA-Profiler: a brief multidimensional measure of flourishing. Int. J. Wellbeing https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v6i3.526 (2016).

  22. VanderWeele, T. J. On the promotion of human flourishing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 31, 8148–8156 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Marsh, H. W., Huppert, F. A., Donald, J. N., Horwood, M. S. & Sahdra, B. K. The Well-Being Profile (WB-Pro): creating a theoretically based multidimensional measure of well-being to advance theory, research, policy and practice. Psychol. Assess. 32, 294–313 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cantril, H. The Pattern of Human Concerns (Rutgers Univ. Press, 1965).

  25. Proctor, C. & Tweed, R. in Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being (ed. Vittersø, J.) 277–294 (Springer Cham, 2016).

  26. Helliwell, J. F. in Measuring Well-Being: Interdisciplinary Perspectives from the Social Sciences and the Humanities (ed. Lee, M. T.) 29–49 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2021).

  27. Frijters, P., Krekel, C., Sanchis, R. & Santini, Z. I. The WELLBY: a new measure of social value and progress. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 11, 736 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Layard, R. et al. When to Release the Lockdown? A Wellbeing Framework for Analysing Costs and Benefits Occasional Paper No. 49 (Centre for Economic Performance, 2020).

  29. VanderWeele, T. J. & Lomas, T. Terminology and the well-being literature. Affect. Sci. 4, 36–40 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Fredrickson, B. L. & Losada, M. F. Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. Am. Psychol. 60, 678–686 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Norriss, H. Flourishing, positive mental health and well‐being: how can they be increased? Int. J. Leadership Public Serv. 6, 46–50 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kristjánsson, K. Flourishing as the Aim of Education: A Neo-Aristotelian View (Routledge, 2020).

  33. White, S. C. But What Is Wellbeing? A Framework for Analysis in Social and Development Policy and Practice (Centre for Developmental Studies, ESRC Research Group on Wellbeing in Developing Countries, 2008).

  34. Dodge, R., Daly, A. P., Huyton, J. & Sanders, L. D. The challenge of defining wellbeing. Int. J. Wellbeing 2, 222–235 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E. & Smith, H. L. Subjective well-being: three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 125, 276–302 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lomas, T. & VanderWeele, T. J. Towards an expanded taxonomy of happiness: a conceptual analysis of 16 distinct forms of mental wellbeing. J. Humanist Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678231155512 (2023).

  37. Tatarkiewicz, W. Analysis of Happiness (Martinis Nijhoff, 1976).

  38. Feldman, F. What Is This Thing Called Happiness? (Oxford Univ. Press, 2010).

  39. Lyubomirsky, S. The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want (Penguin, 2008).

  40. George, L. Subjective well-being: conceptual and methodological issues. Annu. Rev. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2, 345–382 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Veenhoven, R. in A Comparative Study of Satisfaction with Life in Europe (eds Saris, W. E. et al.) 11–48 (Eötvös Univ. Press, 1996).

  42. Diener, E., Lucas, R. E. & Oishi, S. Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and life satisfaction. Handbook Positive Psychol. 2, 63–73 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lomas, T., Pawelski, J. O. & VanderWeele, T. J. A flexible map of flourishing: the dynamics and drivers of flourishing, well-being, health and happiness. Int. J. Wellbeing https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v13i4.3665 (2023).

  44. VanderWeele, T. J. Measures of community well-being: a template. Int. J. Community Wellbeing 2, 253–275 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Lomas, T., Pawelski, J. O. & VanderWeele, T. J. Flourishing as ‘sustainable well-being’: balance and harmony within and across people, ecosystems and time. J. Posit. Psychol. 20, 203–218 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. WHOQoL Group. The development of the World Health Organization quality of life assessment instrument (the WHOQOL). In Quality of Life Assessment: International Perspectives: Proc. Joint-Meeting Organized by the World Health Organization and the Fondation IPSEN in Paris 1993 (eds Orley, J. & Kuyken, W.) 41–57 (Springer, 1994).

  47. Moons, P., Budts, W. & De Geest, S. Critique on the conceptualisation of quality of life: a review and evaluation of different conceptual approaches. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 43, 891–901 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Felce, D. & Perry, J. Quality of life: its definition and measurement. Res. Dev. Disabil. 16, 51–74 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Seligman, M. PERMA and the building blocks of well-being. J. Posit. Psychol. 13, 333–335 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. VanderWeele, T. J. et al. The Global Flourishing Study and initial results. Nat. Hum. Behav. (in the press).

  51. Keyes, C. L. The mental health continuum: from languishing to flourishing in life. J. Health Soc. Behav. 43, 207–222 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Seligman, M. E. Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being (Simon and Schuster, 2011).

  53. Huppert, F. A. & So, T. T. Flourishing across Europe: application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being. Soc. Indic. Res. 110, 837–861 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kern, M. L. et al. Systems informed positive psychology. J. Posit. Psychol. 15, 705–715 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Węziak-Białowolska, D., McNeely, E. & VanderWeele, T. J. Human flourishing in cross cultural settings: evidence from the US, China, Sri Lanka, Cambodia and Mexico. Front. Psychol. 10, 1269 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Węziak-Białowolska, D., McNeely, E. & VanderWeele, T. J. Flourish Index and Secure Flourish Index—validation in workplace settings. Cogent Psychol. 6, 1598926 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Höltge, J. et al. A systems perspective on human flourishing: exploring cross-country similarities and differences of a multisystemic flourishing network. J. Posit. Psychol. 18, 695–710 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Goodman, F. R., Disabato, D. J., Kashdan, T. B. & Kauffman, S. B. Measuring well-being: a comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA. J. Posit. Psychol. 13, 321–332 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Helliwell, J. F. & Wang, S. in World Happiness Report 2012 (eds Helliwell, J. F. et al.) 10–57 (Sustainable Development Solutions Network, 2012).

  60. Lomas, T. et al. Childhood and demographic predictors of life evaluation, life satisfaction and happiness: a cross-national analysis of the Global Flourishing Study. Preprint at OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/THN5V (2025).

  61. Nilsson, A. H., Eichstaedt, J. C., Lomas, T., Schwartz, A. & Kjell, O. The Cantril Ladder elicits thoughts about power and wealth. Sci. Rep. 14, 2642 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. VanderWeele, T. J. Constructed measures and causal inference: towards a new model of measurement for psychosocial constructs. Epidemiology 33, 141–151 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. VanderWeele, T. J. & Vansteelandt, S. A statistical test to reject the structural interpretation of a latent factor model. J. R. Stat. Soc. B Stat. Methodol. 84, 2032–2054 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Oishi, S. & Diener, E. Residents of poor nations have a greater sense of meaning in life than residents of wealthy nations. Psychol. Sci. 25, 422–430 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Kim, E. S. et al. Mapping demographic variations in purpose and meaning across the world: a cross-national analysis of 22 countries in the Global Flourishing Study. Preprint at OSF https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/kme7y_v1 (2025).

  66. Dahlsgaard, K., Peterson, C. & Seligman, M. E. Shared virtue: the convergence of valued human strengths across culture and history. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 9, 203–213 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Alan, S., Boneva, T. & Ertac, S. Ever failed, try again, succeed better: results from a randomized educational intervention on grit. Q. J. Econ. 134, 1121–1162 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Kirby, J. N., Tellegen, C. L. & Steindl, S. R. A meta-analysis of compassion-based interventions: current state of knowledge and future directions. Behav. Ther. 48, 778–792 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Ho, M. Y. et al. International REACH Forgiveness Intervention: a multi-site randomised controlled trial. BMJ Public Health 2, e000072 (2024).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Gander, F., Hofmann, J., Proyer, R. T. & Ruch, W. Character strengths—stability, change and relationships with well-being changes. Appl. Res. Qual. Life 15, 349–367 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Węziak-Białowolska, D., Białowolski, P., VanderWeele, T. J. & McNeely, E. Character strengths involving an orientation to promote good can help your health and well-being: evidence from two longitudinal studies. Am. J. Health Behav. 35, 388–398 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Weziak-Bialowolska, D. et al. Prospective associations between strengths of moral character and health: longitudinal evidence from survey and insurance claims data. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 58, 163–176 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Weziak-Bialowolska, D. et al. Associations of orientation to promote good in challenging situations with distress and well-being: multi-study evidence from three non-Western longitudinal samples. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 54, 449–464 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Chen, Y. et al. Gratitude and mortality among older US female nurses. JAMA Psychiatry 81, 1030–1038 (2024).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. VanderWeele, T. J. et al. Current recommendations on the selection of measures for well-being. Prev. Med. 133, 106004 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Sidgwick, H. The Methods of Ethics 7th edn (Hackett, 1981).

  77. Hurka, T. Perfectionism (Clarendon, 1993).

  78. Aristotle. The Nicomachean Ethics: Translated with an Introduction (Oxford Univ. Press, 1980).

  79. Aquinas, T. Summa Theologica: Complete English Translation in Five Volumes (Ave Maria Press, 1948).

  80. VanderWeele, T. J. A Theology of Health: Wholeness and Human Flourishing (Univ. Notre Dame Press, 2024).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Global Flourishing Study was supported by funding from the John Templeton Foundation (grant no. 61665), the Templeton Religion Trust (grant no. 1308), the Templeton World Charity Foundation (grant no. 0605), the Well-Being for Planet Earth Foundation, the Fetzer Institute (grant no. 4354), the Well Being Trust, the Paul L. Foster Family Foundation, and the David and Carol Myers Foundation. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these organizations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA

    Tyler J. VanderWeele

  2. Human Flourishing Program, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Tyler J. VanderWeele

  3. Institute for Studies of Religion, Baylor University, Waco, TX, USA

    Byron R. Johnson

Authors
  1. Tyler J. VanderWeele
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Byron R. Johnson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Both authors conceived this Perspective. T.J.V. drafted the manuscript, and B.R.J. provided critical review and edits.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tyler J. VanderWeele.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

T.J.V. reports consulting fees from Gloo Inc., along with shared revenue received by Harvard University in its licence agreement with Gloo according to the University IP policy. The remaining author declares no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Human Behaviour thanks Paul Allin, Margaret Kern and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

VanderWeele, T.J., Johnson, B.R. Multidimensional versus unidimensional approaches to well-being. Nat Hum Behav 9, 857–863 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02187-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02187-5

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing