Next Article in Journal
Feasibility of a Tai Chi with Thera-Band Training Program: A Pilot Study
Previous Article in Journal
Athlete-Specific Neural Strategies under Pressure: A fNIRS Pilot Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 17
Issue 22
10.3390/ijerph17228467
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being among Koreans

by
Jieun Yoo
Department of Theology, Anyang University, Anyang 13900, Korea
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(22), 8467; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228467
Submission received: 27 October 2020 / Revised: 13 November 2020 / Accepted: 14 November 2020 / Published: 16 November 2020
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study examined the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being (life satisfaction, hope, and positive and negative affect) with individual demographic background (i.e., age, education level, perceived economic status, and religious affiliation) in a sample of 761 Korean adults participated from five universities in South Korea. Specifically, gratitude was still an essential element for the subjective well-being of Korean adults, although the meaning of gratitude under Confucian culture implies indebtedness and obligation. The relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being did not differ by gender. Implications for the subjective well-being of Koreans are discussed.

1. Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being among Koreans

The Korean phrase sohwakhaeng, which can be translated into “small but certain happiness,” has become increasingly popular in Korean society since 2018 [1]. This term was first introduced by a Japanese writer, Haruki Murakami, in his 1986 essay. In his writing, the philosophy of sohwakhaeng is based on a little happiness that an individual can get very easily in everyday life (e.g., a morning run, wake-up call from a loved one, favorite meal served warm, or simply watching a favorite movie). People do not need a significant amount of money for happiness. However, they can achieve happiness from little things. Recently, life has become exhausting for Koreans, especially young Koreans. Korea is facing an economic downturn. Over 20% of Koreans aged 25 to 29 years are unemployed, marking the highest employment rate among Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) members [2]. The pressure to be successful in the face of greater economic inequality and the higher cost of living in Korea makes happiness seem unattainable [1]. As such, more Koreans are turning to sohwakhaeng or small but certain happiness for respite from the hardships of everyday life.
Considering Korea’s increasing interest in sohwakhaeng, gratitude is expected to become more important. People who are trying to achieve happiness from small things find or create satisfaction and gratitude in their routine lives. In recent years, a great deal of literature has suggested that gratitude is strongly related to all aspects of well-being [3,4,5,6,7,8]. Several studies have investigated the relationship between gratitude and well-being with specific samples, such as nursing students [9], clinical nurses [10], university students [11], and early adolescents [12] in Korea. The current study was conducted in response to these Korean social issues. It examined the association between gratitude and subjective well-being (life satisfaction, hope, and positive and negative affect) in a sample of Korean adults.

2. Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being in Korea

Gratitude is derived from the Latin root gratia, meaning graciousness, grace, or gratefulness [13]. Emmons and McCullough (2003) defined gratitude as “the perception of a positive personal outcome, not necessarily deserved or earned, that is due to the actions of another person” [3] (p. 377). People who perceive the help of others in their positive experiences express thankfulness and feel appreciative, and this generalized tendency of emotion is called gratitude disposition [14]. Thus, the meaning of gratitude is regarded as a personal trait or emotional state [15]. In many cultures and societies, gratitude has been highly valued in that it strengthens social relationships [16,17] and has even a moral affect [18].
Research has distinguished between the concepts of gratitude and indebtedness [19,20,21]. Some research understands the difference, with the norm of reciprocity to return an equal value to the donor [22], different motivations of benefactor [23], and perceptions of benefactor intention [20]. Gratitude is more related to a sense of indebtedness or obligation in interdependent societies like Asian countries than in independent societies like Western countries [24]. Japanese and Korean people tend to relate gratitude and indebtedness with feeling sorry and gratitude when being helped spontaneously [25,26,27].
Filial piety is a central value in Confucian culture, providing a view of the family system under which parents take care of their children and children have a debt or obligation toward their parents [28]. The family system under Confucian culture is based on a reciprocity between parents and children [29]. This sense of reciprocity is so strong that it is used to relate to others and extends and applied to the community. When one provides for a man, he is obligated to repay his or her kindness besides expressing words of love or appreciation. Thus, gratitude is displayed with indebtedness or obligation, providing for someone or performing acts and sharing appreciation emotions. Gratitude should not be considered separate from indebtedness or obligation duty under Confucian culture.
Studies have shown that people with high levels of gratitude tend to be happier and more satisfied in their lives [7,30,31,32]. However, few studies have considered the meaning of gratitude in Confucian culture [24,33]. Thus, this study aimed to identify whether gratitude, mixed with the concept of indebtedness or obligation based on reciprocity, is still an important factor in subjective well-being among Korean adults. Moreover, several studies have shown that women have an advantage over men with regard to benefiting from gratitude [34,35], as well as experiencing and expressing gratitude [34,36,37]. However, one study supported that gender differences were not found in gratitude and the relationship between gratitude and life satisfaction with Korean adolescents [38]. Therefore, this study also examined whether the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being is experienced differently between genders.

3. Methods

3.1. Pariticipants and Procedure

The current study had a cross-sectional design. The procedure was confirmed with the Declaration of Helsinki [39]. For this study, 800 Korean adults who were enrolled in 2018 fall semester from five private universities in South Korea were recruited. They participated voluntarily and anonymously and were informed that they could refuse to participate in the survey at any time. In total, 761 valid and usable responses were obtained. Thus, the final sample size was 761. Of the 761 participants, 292 were male (38.4%) and 460 were female (60.4%), with 9 missing values for gender (1.2%). Participants’ age ranged from 17 to 73 years, with a mean age of 28.80 and a standard deviation of 13.609. Of the 761 participants, 68.1% identified themselves as Protestants, 4.7% as Catholic, 3.0% as Buddhists, and 24.2% as religiously unaffiliated. Participants’ education level varied as follows: 68 (8.9%) completed high school, 466 (61.2%) were currently enrolled in college, 174 (22.9%) had a bachelor’s degree, and 35 (4.6%) had a graduate degree. There were 18 (2.4%) missing values for education. Participants’ perceived economic status varied as follows: 20 (2.6%) were very low, 108 (14.2%) were rather low, 494 (64.9%) were middle, 118 (15.5%) were rather high, and 12 (1.6%) were very high. There were nine (1.2%) missing values for perceived economic status.

3.2. Measures

3.2.1. Gratitude

Gratitude was measured with two gratitude scales. The Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6 [14] is a six-item self-report tool (e.g., “I have so much in life to be thankful for”) to measure the dispositional aspect of gratitude. Each item was answered on a seven-point response scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). For the present sample, the internal consistency of the scale was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.818). The Gratitude Adjective Checklist (GAC) [14] is a three-item self-report tool (e.g., three adjectives: grateful, thankful, and appreciative) to assess gratitude. Each item was answered on a five-point response scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). The students in the present study were asked to rate the amount they experienced each feeling “during the past few weeks.” Here, the internal consistency of the scale was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.717).

3.2.2. Subjective Well-Being

Subjective well-being was measured with general life satisfaction, hope, and recent emotional experience items. Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS [40], a five-item self-report tool (e.g., “I am satisfied with my life”), was used to measure individuals’ general life satisfaction. Each item was answered on a seven–point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). For the present sample, the internal consistency of the scale was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.828). The Hope Scale [41], a 12-item self-report questionnaire, was used to measure hope in terms of a person’s perceived capacity to generate pathways to meet desired goals and motivation to undertake the routs toward the goals. Responses were scored on an eight–point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 8 (strongly agree). For the current sample, the internal consistency of the scale was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.827). The Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS [42], a 20–item self-report tool, was used to measure the positive affect (PA) (e.g., joyful, delighted, and cheerful) and negative affect (NA) (e.g., scared, lonely, and sad). Each item was answered on a five–point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). For the present sample, the internal consistency of scale was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.833 for the PA and Cronbach’s α = 0.856 for the NA).

3.3. Analysis

In the initial descriptive, a t-test was performed. To test the hypotheses on the relationships between gratitude and subjective well-being, hierarchical regression analyses were conducted. The first model contained only individual background variables, while the second model introduced the gratitude variable. All analyses were performed using SPSS 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

4. Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics

The means, standard deviations, t-test results, and ranges of the variables in this study are presented in Table 1. The Korean female group had a significantly higher score in perceived economic status, the GAC scale in gratitude variables, and the PA scale in subjective well-being variables than the male group. The Korean male group had a higher score on the NA scale than the female group. Korean male and female groups reported the same levels of education, religious affiliation, GQ-6, SWLS, and Hope.

4.2. Regression Analyses

To test the relationships between individual background variables and subjective well-being, hierarchical regression analysis was conducted. First, age, education level, perceived economic status, and religious affiliation were entered as control variables. Second, the two scales of gratitude were entered. In general, gratitude significantly predicted four outcomes of subjective well-being for both groups. Table 2 and Table 3 provide the results of the hierarchical regressions for four outcomes (SWLS, Hope, PA, and NA) and show the βs for the variables at each step.
For the male group (see Table 2), age and education level decreased the likelihood of NA (β = −0.363, p < 0.001 and β = −0.139, p < 0.05, respectively), and perceived economic status increased the likelihood of SWLS (β = 0.138, p < 0.05). However, other individual background variables did not have significant effects on any outcomes in subjective well-being. After controlling for individual demographic background (i.e., age, education level, perceived economic status, and religious affiliation), GAC was a predictor of all four outcomes. Specifically, GQ-6 was a stronger predictor of SWLS and Hope. However, GAC was a stronger predictor of PANAS. That is, GQ-6 had positive effects on SWLS and Hope (β = 0.481 and 0.550, p < 0.001, respectively), and GAC had negative effects on PA and NA (β = −0.173, p < 0.01 and β = −0.224, p < 0.001, respectively). Overall, the final models displayed a substantial amount of variance in subjective well-being. That is, 8.8–36.8% of the variance in the outcome variables was explained by the individual background variables and gratitude variables.
For the female group (Table 3), age, perceived economic status, and religious affiliation (β = 0.112, p < 0.05; β = 0.0233, p < 0.001; and β = 0.112, p < 0.05, respectively) increased the likelihood of SWLS. Perceived economic status also increased the likelihood of Hope (β = 0.163, p < 0.05). Age decreased the likelihood of NA (β = −0.252, p < 0.001). After controlling for individual demographic background, GQ-6 was a stronger predictor of SWLS, Hope, and PA. However, GAC was a stronger predictor of PANAS, that is, GQ-6 had positive effects on SWLS, Hope, and PA (β = 0.0413, p < 0.001; β = 0.449, p < 0.001; and β = 0.182, p < 0.05, respectively); GAC had negative effects on NA (β = −0.239, p < 0.001). Overall, the final models displayed a substantial amount of variance in subjective well-being. That is, 3.7–35.5% of the variance in the outcome variables was explained by the individual background and gratitude variables.

5. Discussion

This study examined the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being in a sample of Korean adults. One of the findings of this study was that the male group reported having a higher negative affect score. In contrast, the female group reported experiencing more gratitude adjectives (e.g., grateful, thankful, and appreciative) and a higher positive affect. This result is in line with previous research showing that the degree to which people experience and express emotions can differ between men and women [43]. This is also consistent with previous studies revealing that women experienced and expressed more gratitude [34,36,37], while men were expected to be less receptive to gratitude and evaluate their grateful feelings more critically [35].
The study results showed that male participants who were older and more educated reported significantly lower negative affect. However, those who had higher perceived economic status reported significantly higher life satisfaction. Female participants who were older, closer to religion, and had higher perceived economic status reported significantly higher life satisfaction. The higher the perceived economic status of female participants, the higher their levels of hope they experienced. The older they became, the lower the level of negative affect they had. The results showed that the common factor determining life satisfaction was perceived economic status for Korean men and women. Women who perceived better economic status had even more hope. Whereas Koreans have achieved rapid economic growth, which has led to a spectacular increase in per capita income, South Korea ranked one of the lowest levels of life satisfaction among OECD countries [44]. However, for the current research results, individuals’ perceived economic status rather than their absolute economic situation was likely to be associated with life satisfaction. This is concomitant with previous research showing that the degree of relative material affluence, not the objective material affluence, was the principal condition required for happiness in Koreans’ lives [45].
The results also showed that Korean women might have a stronger likelihood of engaging in religion than Korean men, and this made them more satisfied in their lives. Women are generally more affiliated with religion than men [46]. A wealth of literature has found that religious affiliation may influence subjective well-being and be beneficial to mental health outcomes [47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55]. For example, You, Yoo, and Koh [38] reported a positive relationship between different aspects of religious practices and mental health for Koreans. Religious attendance may expose believers to religious lessons that promote a positive aspect of their internal and external reality that can lead to happiness and psychological well-being [50,54]. In addition, religious attendance was associated with a higher level of happiness among Korean women and Protestants [56]. Thus, religious affiliation may be beneficial in improving Korean women’s satisfaction with life.
Another finding was that age lowered negative affect for both groups. Carstensen [57,58] explained a socioemotional selectivity theory that older individuals have higher levels of positive affect and lower levels of negative affect to maximize positive outcomes, such as social support or help, and to minimize negative outcomes, such as interpersonal conflict [59,60]. Lawton [61] suggested an optimization theory that older people tend to control emotions for the purpose of emotion optimization [62]. The key to emotion control is to avoid negative emotions and choose social situations that can provide enough static emotional and intellectual stimuli. In addition, Kim and Min’s study [63] showed that older Korean adults experienced less negative affect and more positive affect. Thus, this finding showed that Korean adults regulated their negative emotions for their emotional stability and well-being as they got older.
The results of this study revealed that gratitude was an important predictor of subjective well-being for both Korean male and female groups. As expected from previous literature [7,30,31,32], gratitude was associated with life satisfaction, hope, positive affect, and negative affect among Korean adults. The meaning of gratitude under Confucian culture was complicated by the concept of indebtedness and obligation [25,26,27], although the finding showed that gratitude was still an essential element for the subjective well-being of Koreans, especially those seeking sohwakhaeng. In addition, the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being did not differ by gender. The only gender difference was that GAC was a negative predictor of positive affect in the group of Korean males. The GAC score for the male group was significantly lower than that of the female group, and Korean men might not have been familiar with expressing three adjectives (e.g., grateful, thankful, and appreciative). However, this result alone could not fully explain the finding related to GAC and the positive affect of Korean men. Thus, further studies are needed to investigate why GAC had a negative effect on positive affect for Korean men.
The findings of this study provide a need for the practical gratitude intervention for Korean adults. Korean clinicians and researchers might need to consider how gratitude potentially affects the operation of subjective well-being. Encouraging Korean adults to develop grateful feelings and express them in their daily lives through gratitude interventions could help them use more adaptive strategies to reduce their levels of stress and improve their subjective well-being. In Seligman and his colleagues’ research [64], the gratitude intervention caused significant positive changes in a short time. For female college students, the gratitude promotion program had a significant effect on the meaning of life and subjective sense of well-being [65]. Among a community sample of adults, the gratitude intervention confirmed the improvement of positive affect, subjective happiness, and life satisfaction, and the reduction of negative affect and depression symptoms [66]. Therefore, gratitude intervention is expected to be useful in promoting a sense of subjective well-being and reducing internalized disorders such as depression and anxiety.
Despite these contributions, this study has several limitations. First, the participants exclusively consisted of college students and college graduates. Although the sample size was large, participants were recruited from five universities in South Korea. Thus, further research is required to include a more heterogeneous sample from demographic backgrounds. Second, the demographic background of the sample was limited in that the number of females was greater than the number of males. Future studies could collect more male data in order to be more representative of the whole Korean population. Finally, this finding did not consider that the two gratitude questionnaires, GQ-6 and GAC, were not designed for studying persons in Korea with non-Western cultural tradition, even though two instruments have been used widely. Therefore, future studies may use or develop other gratitude instruments for Koreans or people in non-Western cultures.

6. Conclusions

The present study is unique in examining how individuals’ demographic backgrounds affected subjective well-being in the relationship between gratitude and subjective well-being in a sample of Korean adults. In addition, this study found no gender differences in the relationship between gratitude and life satisfaction, hope, positive affect, and negative affect. The results of this study provide some practical implications for gratitude intervention that would be useful for promoting subjective well-being for Korean adults.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the participants involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chyung, E. ‘Sohwakhaeng’ Taps into Koreans’ Desire to Find Happiness in Little Things. Available online: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20180729000195 (accessed on 29 July 2018).
  2. Yonhap News S. Korea’s Ratio of Unemployed in Late 20s Ranks Highest among OECD Nations. Available online: https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20200113001900320 (accessed on 13 January 2020).
  3. Emmons, R.A.; McCullough, M.E. Counting blessings versus burdens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2003, 84, 377–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Fredrickson, B.L. Gratitude, like other positive emotions, broadens and builds. In The Psychology of Gratitude; Emmons, R.A., McCullough, M.E., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 145–166. [Google Scholar]
  5. Sansone, R.A.; Sansone, L.A. Gratitude and Well Being: The benefits of appreciation. Psychiatry (Edgmont) 2010, 7, 18–22. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Watkins, P.C. Gratitude and subjective well-being. In The Psychology of Gratitude; Emmons, R.A., McCullough, M.E., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 145–166. [Google Scholar]
  7. Watkins, P.C.; Woodward, K.; Stone, T.; Kolts, R.L. Gratitude and Happiness: Development of A Measure of Gratitude, and Relationships with Subjective Well-Being. Soc. Behav. Pers. Int. J. 2003, 31, 431–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wood, A.M.; Froh, J.J.; Geraghty, A.W. Gratitude and well-being: A review and theoretical integration. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2010, 30, 890–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Jun, W.-H.; Cha, K.-S.; Lee, K.-L. Factors Affecting Subjective Well-Being in Nursing Students. J. Korean Acad. Soc. Nurs. Educ. 2015, 21, 276–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Jun, W.-H.; Lee, E.-S.; Lee, K.-L. Relationships among Gratitude, Depression, and Psychological Well-being in Clinical Nurses. J. Korean Acad. Psychiatr. Ment. Heal. Nurs. 2015, 24, 136–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Kim, Y.R.; Lee, H.K. The effect of gratitude on well-being and depression: Cognitive emotion regulation strategies as mediating variables. J. Stud. Guid. Couns. 2012, 25, 19–35. [Google Scholar]
  12. You, S.; Lee, J.; Lee, Y.; Kim, E. Gratitude and life satisfaction in early adolescence: The mediating role of social support and emotional difficulties. Pers. Individ. Differ. 2018, 130, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Pruyser, P.W. The Minister as Diagnostician: Personal Problems in Pastoral Perspective; Westminster Press: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1976; pp. 60–79. [Google Scholar]
  14. McCullough, M.E.; Emmons, R.A.; Tsang, J. The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2002, 82, 112–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ting, S.C. The difference between gratitude and indebtedness. Am. Int. J. Contemp. Res. 2017, 7, 55–62. [Google Scholar]
  16. Buck, R. The gratitude exchange and the gratitude of caring: A developmental-interactionist perspective of moral emotion. In The Psychology of Gratitude; Emmons, R.A., McCullough, M.E., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 100–122. [Google Scholar]
  17. Emmons, R.A. Gratitude. In Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification; Peterson, A., Seligman, M.E.P., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 553–568. [Google Scholar]
  18. McCullough, M.E.; Kilpatrick, S.D.; Emmons, R.A.; Larson, D.B. Is gratitude a moral affect? Psychol. Bull. 2001, 127, 249–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Watkins, P.; Scheer, J.; Ovnicek, M.; Kolts, R. The debt of gratitude: Dissociating gratitude and indebtedness. Cogn. Emot. 2006, 20, 217–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Tsang, J.-A. The Effects of Helper Intention on Gratitude and Indebtedness. Motiv. Emot. 2006, 30, 198–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Algoe, S.B.; Gable, S.L.; Maisel, N.C. It’s the little things: Everyday gratitude as a booster shot for romantic relationships. Pers. Relatsh. 2010, 17, 217–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Greenberg, M.S. A theory of indebtedness. In Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research; Gergen, K.S., Greenberg, M.S., Willis, R.H., Eds.; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1980; pp. 3–26. [Google Scholar]
  23. Gray, S.A.; Emmons, R.A.; Morrison, A. Distinguishing Gratitude from Indebtedness in Affect and Action Tendencies; Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  24. Oishi, S.; Koo, M.; Lim, N.; Suh, E.M. When Gratitude Evokes Indebtedness. Appl. Psychol. Heal. Well-Being 2019, 11, 286–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kuranaga, H.; Higuchi, M. The effect of cognitive appraisals on emotional experiences of gratitude in the situations arousing gratitude. Jpn. J. Res. Emot. 2011, 19, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Lee, H.E.; Park, H.S. Why Koreans are more likely to favor “Apology,” while Americans are more likely to favor “Thank You”. Hum. Commun. Res. 2011, 37, 125–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Naito, T.; Wangwan, J.; Tani, M. Gratitude in University Students in Japan and Thailand. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 2005, 36, 247–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ebrey, P.B. Women and the Family in Chinese History; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  29. Knapp, K.N. Reverent caring: The parent-son relationship in early medieval tales of filial offspring. In Filial Piety in Chinese Thought and History; Chan, A.K.L., Tan, S., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 44–70. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kong, F.; Ding, K.; Zhao, J. The Relationships Among Gratitude, Self-esteem, Social Support and Life Satisfaction Among Undergraduate Students. J. Happiness Stud. 2015, 16, 477–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lambert, N.M.; Fincham, F.D.; Stillman, T.F.; Dean, L.R. More gratitude, less materialism: The mediating role of life satisfaction. J. Posit. Psychol. 2009, 4, 32–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. McCullough, M.E.; Tsang, J.-A.; Emmons, R.A. Gratitude in Intermediate Affective Terrain: Links of Grateful Moods to Individual Differences and Daily Emotional Experience. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2004, 86, 295–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Wang, D.; Wang, Y.C.; Tudge, J.R. Expressions of Gratitude in Children and Adolescents: Insights from China and the United States. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 2015, 46, 1039–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Froh, J.J.; Yurkewicz, C.; Kashdan, T.B. Gratitude and subjective well-being in early adolescence: Examining gender differences. J. Adolesc. 2009, 32, 633–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Kashdan, T.B.; Mishra, A.; Breen, W.E.; Froh, J.J. Gender Differences in Gratitude: Examining Appraisals, Narratives, the Willingness to Express Emotions, and Changes in Psychological Needs. J. Pers. 2009, 77, 691–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Becker, J.A.; Smenner, P.C. The spontaneous use of thank you by preschoolers as a function of sex, socioeconomic status, and listener status. Lang. Soc. 1986, 15, 537–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Gordon, A.K.; Musher-Eizenman, D.R.; Holub, S.C.; Dalrymple, J. What are children thankful for? An archival analysis of gratitude before and after the attacks of September 11. J. Appl. Dev. Psychol. 2004, 25, 541–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. You, S.; Yoo, J.E.; Koh, Y. Religious practices and mental health outcomes among Korean adults. Pers. Individ. Differ. 2019, 142, 7–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. World Health Organization. Declaration of Helsinki Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2013, 310, 2191–2194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Diener, E.; Suh, E.M.; Lucas, R.E.; Smith, H.L. Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 1999, 125, 276–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Snyder, C.R.; Harris, C.; Anderson, J.R.; Holleran, S.A.; Irving, L.M.; Sigmon, S.T. The will and the ways: Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1991, 60, 570–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. 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. 1988, 54, 1063–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Sohn, S.; Park, M.-S. Understanding gender differences in Korean emotional expressions for increased cultural competency of social workers. Int. Soc. Work. 2016, 59, 850–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ock, H.J. Graphic News, South Korea’s Life Satisfaction Among Lowest in OECD. Available online: http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20151019000753 (accessed on 19 October 2015).
  45. Kim, H.; Ohtake, F. Status Race and Happiness: What Experimental Surveys Tell US; (No. 2014-01); KDI (Korea Development Institute) Policy Study: Seoul, Korea, 2014; pp. 28–35. [Google Scholar]
  46. Pew Research Center. The Gender Gap in Religion around the World. Available online: https://www.pewforum.org/2016/03/22/women-more-likely-than-men-to-affiliate-with-a-religion/ (accessed on 22 March 2016).
  47. Ai, A.L.; Hopp, F.; Tice, T.N.; Koenig, H. Existential relatedness in light of eudemonic well-being and religious coping among middle-aged and older cardiac patients. J. Heal. Psychol. 2012, 18, 368–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Balboni, T.A.; Vanderwerker, L.C.; Block, S.D.; Paulk, M.E.; Lathan, C.S.; Peteet, J.R.; Prigerson, H.G. Religiousness and Spiritual Support Among Advanced Cancer Patients and Associations with End-of-Life Treatment Preferences and Quality of Life. J. Clin. Oncol. 2007, 25, 555–560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Caixeta, C.R.D.C.B.; Nascimento, L.C.; Pedro, I.C.D.S.; Rocha, S.M.M. Spiritual support for people living with HIV/AIDS: A Brazilian explorative, descriptive study. Nurs. Heal. Sci. 2012, 14, 514–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Koenig, H.G.; McCullough, M.E.; Larson, D.B. Handbook of Religion and Health; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2001; pp. 97–117. [Google Scholar]
  51. Lee, B.-J. Moderating Effects of Religious/Spiritual Coping in the Relation Between Perceived Stress and Psychological Well-Being. Pastor. Psychol. 2007, 55, 751–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Lim, C.; Putnam, R.D. Religion, Social Networks, and Life Satisfaction. Am. Sociol. Rev. 2010, 75, 914–933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. MacKenzie, E.R.; Rajagopal, D.E.; Meibohm, M.; Lavizzo-Mourey, R. Spiritual support and psychological well-being: Older adults’ perceptions of the religion and health connection. Altern. Ther. Heal. Med. 2000, 6, 37–45. [Google Scholar]
  54. Stark, R.; Finke, R. Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2000; pp. 83–113. [Google Scholar]
  55. Trevino, K.M.; Pargament, K.I.; Cotton, S.; Leonard, A.C.; Hahn, J.; Caprini-Faigin, C.A.; Tsevat, J. Religious Coping and Physiological, Psychological, Social, and Spiritual Outcomes in Patients with HIV/AIDS: Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Findings. AIDS Behav. 2007, 14, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jung, J.H. Religious Attendance, Stress, and Happiness in South Korea: Do Gender and Religious Affiliation Matter? Soc. Indic. Res. 2014, 118, 1125–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Carstensen, L.L. Selectivity theory: Social activity in life-span context. Annu. Rev. Gerontol. Geriatr. 1991, 11, 195–217. [Google Scholar]
  58. Carstensen, L.L. Evidence for a Life-Span Theory of Socioemotional Selectivity. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 1995, 4, 151–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Carstensen, L.L.; Charles, S.T. Human aging: Why is even good news taken as bad? In A Psychology of Human Strength: Perspectives on an Emerging Field; Aspinwall, L., Staudinger, U., Eds.; American Psychological Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2003; pp. 75–86. [Google Scholar]
  60. Carstensen, L.L.; Pasupathi, M.; Mayr, U.; Nesselroade, J.R. Emotion experience in the daily lives of older and younger adults. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2000, 79, 644–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Lawton, M.P. Quality of life and affect in later life. In Handbook of Emotion, Adult Development, and Aging; Magai, C., McFadden, S.H., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1996; pp. 327–348. [Google Scholar]
  62. Lawton, M.P.; Kleban, M.H.; Rajagopal, D.; Dean, J. Dimensions of affective experience in three age groups. Psychol. Aging 1992, 7, 171–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Kim, M.H.; Min, K.H. Emotional experience and emotion regulation in old age. Kor. J. Psychol. Gen. 2004, 23, 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  64. Seligman, M.E.P.; Steen, T.A.; Park, N.; Peterson, C. Positive Psychology Progress: Empirical Validation of Interventions. Am. Psychol. 2005, 60, 410–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Heo, J.-C. Effect of Gratitude Enhancement Program on Meaning of Life and Subjective Well-Being of Female Colleges. J. Korea Contents Assoc. 2016, 16, 774–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Cunha, L.F.; Pellanda, L.C.; Reppold, C.T. Positive Psychology and Gratitude Interventions: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Mean values, standard deviations, t-test results, and range of study variables.
Table 1. Mean values, standard deviations, t-test results, and range of study variables.
VariablesMale (n = 292)Female (n = 460)t-TestpRange
MeanSDMeanSD
Individual backgrounds
Age28.8512.8528.5113.890.3360.73717–73
Education2.290.702.200.661.9370.0531–5
Perceived economic status2.920.733.040.64−2.2550.024 *1–4
Religion (Yes = 1)0.770.420.760.43−0.6650.506
Gratitude
GQ-65.711.105.661.180.5540.5801–7
GAC3.290.933.600.95−4.2960.000 ***1–5
Subjective well-beings
SWLS4.961.054.841.121.3420.1801–7
Hope5.761.275.611.211.5860.1131–8
PA2.280.772.620.692.3880.017 *1–5
NA2.560.662.420.652.8570.004 **1–5
Note. GQ-6, The Gratitude Questionnaire; GAC, The Gratitude Adjective Checklist; SWLS, Satisfaction with Life Scale; PA, Positive Affect; NA, Negative Affect. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Table
Table 2. Hierarchical regression analyses: Effects of individual background and gratitude variables on subjective well-being (male group; n = 292).
Table 2. Hierarchical regression analyses: Effects of individual background and gratitude variables on subjective well-being (male group; n = 292).
VariablesSubjective Well-Being
SWLSHopePANA
Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2
Individual backgrounds
Age−0.008−0.078−0.034−0.0900.0790.099−0.363 ***−0.333 ***
Education0.0880.0730.1140.0840.0960.083−0.139 *−0.153 *
Economic status0.138 *0.0970.0710.0120.0170.0040.0430.033
Religion (Yes = 1)0.1250.0260.070−0.0310.132 *0.1220.0130.014
Gratitude
GQ-6 0.481 *** 0.550 *** 0.146 * 0.111
GAC 0.227 *** 0.121 * −0.173 ** −0.224 ***
F (df)3.037 (4)25.063 (5)1.601 (4)24.857 (5)3.598 (4)4.218 (5)15.405 (4)13.517 (5)
R2 (ΔR2)0.045 (0.030)0.368 (0.354)0.023 (0.009)0.356 (0.342)0.052 (0.037)0.088 (0.067)0.189 (0.177)0.236 (0.219)
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. β = Standardized coefficient. Model 1 contained individual background variables; Model 2 contained individual background and gratitude variables.
Table
Table 3. Hierarchical regression analyses: Effects of individual background and gratitude variables on subjective well-being (female group; n = 460).
Table 3. Hierarchical regression analyses: Effects of individual background and gratitude variables on subjective well-being (female group; n = 460).
VariablesSubjective Well-Being
SWLSHopePANA
Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2Model 1Model 2
Individual backgrounds
Age0.112 *0.024−0.027−0.097 *0.0650.066−0.252 ***−0.203 ***
Education−0.004−0.0480.0580.006−0.001−0.007−0.069−0.049 *
Economic status0.233 ***0.111 **0.163 *0.0580.0350.023−0.079−0.026
Religion (Yes = 1)0.112 * 0.0560.0980.0340.0490.0190.0440.033
Gratitude
GQ–6 0.413 *** 0.449 *** 0.182 * 0.017
GAC 0.240 *** 0.173 *** −0.072 −0.239 ***
F (df)9.788 (4)36.459 (5)4.428 (4)29.290 (5)1.016 (4)2.597 (5)8.593 (4)9.749 (5)
R2 (ΔR2)0.089 (0.080)0.355 (0.346)0.041 (0.032)0.298 (0.288)0.010 (0.000)0.037 (0.023)0.078 (0.069)0.126 (0.113)
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. β = Standardized coefficient. Model 1 contained individual background variables; Model 2 contained individual background and gratitude variables.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yoo, J. Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being among Koreans. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228467

AMA Style

Yoo J. Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being among Koreans. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(22):8467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228467

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yoo, Jieun. 2020. "Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being among Koreans" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 22: 8467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228467

APA Style

Yoo, J. (2020). Gratitude and Subjective Well-Being among Koreans. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(22), 8467. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228467

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop