The concept flourishing is based on optimal human functioning. It incorporates several constructs from the field of positive psychology.
In contrast to the commonly used hedonic approach of subjective well-being, flourishing is based on the eudaimonic approach of psychological well-being and involves some of the same constructs as self-efficacy from a mastery perspective. People reporting a higher sense of flourishing are also expected to score higher on self-efficacy. Higher self-esteem is also linked to higher levels of mastery and self-efficacy.
The Flourishing Scale has eight items with answers given on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 strongly disagree to 7 strongly agree [Diener, 2009].
- I lead a purposeful and meaningful life
- My social relationships are supportive and rewarding
- I am engaged and interested in my daily activities
- I actively contribute to the happiness and well-being of others
- I am competent and capable in the activities that are important to me
- I am a good person and live a good life
- I am optimistic about my future
- People respect me
This scale was also used as part of the New Zealand’s Sovereign Well-Being Index (N=100,009). Subsequent analyses of the underlying structures and psychometric properties of the scales were performed as well as reliability and validity checks and benchmarking to other well-being scales used in the survey. The study concluded that the Flourishing Scale “is a valid and reliable brief summary measure of psychological functioning, suited for use with a wide range of age groups and applications ” [Hone, 2013].
In the data from my own experiment the Flourishing Scale (α=.90, mean 4.07 [SD 0.65]) correlates with other measurements of well-being (PANAS and self-esteem) as expected.
Keyes CLM. Flourishing. In: The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons; Jan 30, 2010.
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2009). New measures of well-being: Flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 39, 247-266.
Diener E, Wirtz D, Biswas-diener R, Tov W, Kim-prieto C, Choi D, et al. New measures of well-being. In: Diener E, editor. Assessing Well-Being. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer; 2009:247-266.
Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.
Am Psychol 2000 Jan;55(1):68-78. [doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68] [Medline: 11392867]
Lyubomirsky S, Tkach C, DiMatteo MR. What are the Differences between Happiness and Self-Esteem. Soc Indic Res
2005 Oct 04;78(3):363-404. [doi: 10.1007/s11205-005-0213-y]
Kardefelt-Winther D. The moderating role of psychosocial well-being on the relationship between escapism and excessive
online gaming. Computers in Human Behavior 2014 Sep;38:68-74. [doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.020]
Robins RW, Hendin HM, Trzesniewski KH. Measuring Global Self-Esteem: Construct Validation of a Single-Item Measure
and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 2016 Jul 02;27(2):151-161. [doi: 10.1177/0146167201272002]
Hone L, Jarden A, Schofield G. Psychometric Properties of the Flourishing Scale in a New Zealand Sample. Soc Indic Res
2013 Nov 6;119(2):1031-1045. [doi: 10.1007/s11205-013-0501-x]