Next Article in Journal
What if Employees Brought Their Life to Work? The Relation of Life Satisfaction and Work Engagement
Previous Article in Journal
Identification of Influencing Factors for Sustainable Development: Evaluation and Management of Regional Innovation Performance in Heilongjiang, China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 12
Issue 7
10.3390/su12072742
sustainability-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

Eudaimonic Well-Being in Adolescents: The Role of Trait Emotional Intelligence and Personality

by
Carlos Salavera
1,2,*,
Pablo Usán
1,2,
Pilar Teruel
1,2 and
José L. Antoñanzas
1,2
1
Research Group OPIICS, University of Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
2
Faculty of Education, University of Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2020, 12(7), 2742; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072742
Submission received: 5 February 2020 / Revised: 24 March 2020 / Accepted: 27 March 2020 / Published: 31 March 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Psychology of Sustainability and Sustainable Development)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Eudaimonic well-being is related to activities that lead to self-realization and personal development, goals and growth. Emotional intelligence and personality traits play a role in the perception of emotions, self-esteem and motivation and therefore in well-being. Although previous studies have analyzed the relationship among personality, emotional intelligence and well-being, the relationship between all three constructs and the predictive value of personality and emotional intelligence in the study of eudaimonic well-being in adolescents remains to be analyzed. This study evaluates this relationship and the predictive role of personality and emotional intelligence in eudaimonic well-being in 1031 Spanish secondary school students aged 12 to 17 (49.37% male, average age = 14.91 years). A quantitative field survey was conducted which included the distribution of the eudaimonic well-being questionnaire, the emotional intelligence questionnaire and the personality questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and correlations among eudaimonic well-being, emotional intelligence and personality well-being were calculated using SPSS Statistical Package software. Stepwise multiple regression was used to estimate the predictive value of personality and emotional intelligence in the study of eudaimonic well-being. Finally, a structural equations model was designed with AMOS software. The results show that these constructs are related and that personality and emotional intelligence are important variables for eudaimonic well-being. In addition, activity and anxiety factors (related to personality) and emotionality and well-being factors (related to trait emotional intelligence) have been shown to have predictive value in the study of eudaimonic well-being in adolescents. These results underline the value of personality and emotional intelligence in the study of eudaimonic well-being and present new research perspectives.

1. Introduction

Well-being and positive psychology are an important focus for many healthcare and education professionals. The ability of this approach to improve the psychological health of individuals, as well as their professional and academic performance, is now beyond doubt [1]. Positive psychology argues that health goes beyond the absence of illness and seeks to identify the factors that contribute to well-being [1].
An important factor of well-being is subjective well-being, which has traditionally been explained from two perspectives: hedonic and eudaimonic [2,3]. The hedonic perspective refers to that which provides or is related to pleasure and is linked to the subjective experience of pleasure regardless of its source. From this perspective, subjective well-being is thought to reflect a variety of subjective evaluations about quality of life in the broadest sense [4]. The hedonic approach considers the importance of engaging in activities that create positive emotional experiences, lack of negative feelings and general satisfaction with life [5], and thus with meeting the individual’s personal desires. On the other hand, the eudaimonic approach focuses on the factors that promote personal growth and the realization of human potential. This eudaimonic perspective regards subjective well-being as a long-term positive psychological state which results from the individual’s commitment to different development and existential life challenges, the meaning of life and self-reflection [3,6]. It can be concluded that hedonism stems from experiencing more pleasant than unpleasant emotions and is related to immediate satisfaction, happiness and enjoyment and with the idea of subjective well-being [5]. Eudaimonia is related to self-realization, the meaning of life and the development of positive psychological feelings, which stem from the realization of the individual’s full potential [7]. Eudaimonia has received much scholarly attention in recent decades, and much research has sought to identify the factors that can lead to eudaimonic well-being. There are different theories, which focus on personal expressiveness [8], psychological well-being [9] and self-determination theory [10]. However, the psychological aspects of eudaimonia, which lead individuals to this psychological state of well-being, have been paid little attention by research.
The notion of eudaimonic well-being arises from the idea that happiness or well-being should not be a person’s main goal, but the result of a life well lived [11]. Ryff suggested a multidimensional model of psychological well-being and designed a questionnaire [12] which is divided into six different psychological dimensions of optimal well-being. Each dimension represents a different challenge to a positive psychological outlook [13]. Eudaimonic well-being involves: (a) feeling good about ourselves, even when we are aware of our own limitations (self-acceptance); (b) developing and maintaining warm relationships with others (positive relationships with others); (c) shaping our environment to meet our needs and desires (environmental control); (d) having a marked sense of individuality and personal freedom (autonomy); (e) finding a purpose that unifies our efforts and challenges; and (f) maintaining a dynamic of learning and continuous development (personal growth).
Eudaimonia is measured in terms of positive psychological traits such as autonomy, personal growth, self-acceptance, purpose in life, self-control and positive relationships. Eudaimonia-inducing activities need effort and are associated with opportunities for personal development. These activities are characterized by a balance between challenges and skills and are associated with clear objectives. Hedonic activities ignore personal problems and are related to such feelings as relaxation, excitement, happiness and content. Waterman [14] suggests that working towards eudaimonia is preferable, as it offers opportunities for personal development based on a philosophical perspective which focuses on self-fulfillment.

2. Personality and Eudaimonic Well-Being

Personality can be defined as the set of individual features and differences that distinguish an individual from everybody else. In recent years, this issue has been the subject of numerous studies, and various interesting contributions have been put forward, such as the 5-Factor Model [15] or the Five-Alternatives Model: neuroticism–anxiety, aggression–hostility, activity, sociability and impulsive non-socialized sensation seeking [16], all of which are consistently framed within biological–evolutionary terms. Personality has been shown to have strong links with subjective well-being [17]. A meta-analysis [18] estimated that the five major domains accounted for 39% to 63% of the variance of subjective well-being. Therefore, it is argued that these domains have a greater effect than demographic and contextual factors such as age, gender, education and income [19]. The study reported here is based on the idea that the eudaimonic approach is related to the meaning of life and personal fulfilment and to the idea that well-being is the result of the full functioning of a person [3], including resources and personal strengths, the meaning of life, authenticity and purpose [20]. The study takes into consideration that personality can play a key role in well-being, as do such variables as anxiety, self-esteem, locus of control, optimism and depression. Previous studies have used these same variables: Diener et al. [19] argued that personality features can have an impact on levels of subjective well-being; Di Fabio and Saklofske [21] related personality to emotional intelligence as a trait; and Lampropoulou [22] presented the value of personality factors as predictors of subjective well-being, which suggests a significant relationship between these personality variables and psychological well-being.

3. Emotional Intelligence and Eudaimonic Well-Being

Emotional intelligence (EI) can be used to regulate social and emotional behavior [23,24,25]. The study of EI is currently framed within two conceptual approaches: (1) the theoretical models that regard EI as a skill; these approaches examine the mental skills that process the information provided by emotions in order to improve cognitive processing and thus help individuals to perceive, integrate, understand and regulate emotions as a way to promote personal growth; (2) mixed models or trait models; these regard mental skills as a combination of emotional self-perception and personality traits, such as the ability to perceive emotions, self-esteem, optimism and self-motivation [26,27,28].
The skill-based approach defines emotional intelligence (AEI) as a set of emotion-related skills that mirror parallel cognitive capabilities [24]. Conversely, the trait-based approach defines trait emotional intelligence (TEI) as a set of emotion-related traits that are closely connected with personality [29]. Different ways to relate indicators of well-being have been developed within the framework of the TEI-approach [30].
The emotional intelligence as a trait model measures variables by means of self-reported questionnaires, the most widely used of which are the Bar-On Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i) [31] and the Emotional Intelligence Scale of Traits [32]. The EQ-i is a “mixed model” based on the self-reporting of the different dimensions of socio-emotional personality and self-competencies [31], such as adaptability, stress control and intrapersonal and interpersonal awareness. The Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue) analyzes self-perception of the following factors: emotionality (empathy, perception of emotions, regulation of emotions, relationships), self-control (stress management, low impulsivity, regulation of emotions), sociability (emotion management, assertiveness, social awareness) and well-being (happiness, optimism, self-esteem). The Bar-On assesses the subject’s general state of mind and personality variables, but not issues related to affection or well-being. The TEIQue takes into consideration well-being issues that involve self-esteem, happiness and optimism [33]. Therefore, the TEIQue questionnaire, in which EI is regarded as a trait, can help us to understand the role played by EI in eudaimonic well-being. Some of these issues were analyzed by Extremera et al. [26], who examined emotional intelligence as a predictor of eudaimonic well-being on personality traits; Bhullar, Schutte and Malouff [34] found that emotional-trait intelligence mediated the relationship between eudaimonic processes and well-being; finally, Di Fabio and Palazzeschi [35] found that resilience significantly increases incremental variation with regard to fluid intelligence and personality traits in relation to life satisfaction, positive effects and the meaning of life.

4. The Study

Cross-sectional associations among eudaimonic well-being, personality traits and TEI have been reported. However, comprehensive analyses of the relationships among eudaimonic well-being, personality and TEI are still lacking. Similarly, none of the existing studies focus on adolescent population groups. According to the above theoretical background, eudaimonic well-being is associated with opportunities to increase potential for personal development, which are theoretically related to personality and TEI [14].
Based on the tenet that personality and TEI have a role to play in the development of eudaimonic well-being in adolescents, our research goal was to examine the relationships among these three constructs (eudaimonic well-being, personality and TEI) in Secondary Education students, as well as the value of personality and TEI as predictors of eudaimonic well-being.
This study rests on two starting hypotheses: (1) eudaimonic well-being is related to personality and TEI in adolescents; and (2) personality and TEI can be used as predictors of eudaimonic well-being in Secondary Education students.

4.1. Method

4.1.1. Participants

The research sample was constituted by 1031 Secondary Education students, years 1 to 4 (ESO—Compulsory Secondary Education), enrolled in six public secondary schools in Zaragoza. The centers were selected by convenience sampling. The final sample consisted of 509 males (49.37%) and 522 females (50.63%), with a mean age of 14.91 (age range 12–17; standard deviation: 1.611). By year, 26.47% corresponded to year 1 (N = 273); 25.50% to year 2 (N = 263); 24.73% to year 3 (N = 255); and 23.27% to year 4 (N = 240). One inclusion criterion was the ability to read and communicate in perfect Spanish to ensure that the questionnaire was perfectly understood and completed. Exclusion criteria included incomplete questionnaires. In addition, students with cognitive disorders were excluded from the study. Participation was voluntary. Both students and their parents/guardians signed informed consent forms, and the ethical standards set out in the Declaration of Helsinki, as well as all standard ethical criteria for research conducted with human beings, were fully met. In order to ensure that all the items in the questionnaires were correctly understood, questionnaires were handed out to a small pilot group of participants (N = 56) prior to the survey. Questionnaires were distributed in class in the presence of the principal investigator. The questionnaires were collected individually as the students finished them and reviewed to check for errors and to ensure that no questions were left unanswered.

4.1.2. Instruments

(1)
The Eudaimonic Well-Being Questionnaire (QEWB) [20]. This questionnaire was developed as a new instrument with which to accurately reflect the philosophical representation of eudaimonia. It includes 21 statements, seven of which are negative and thus require reverse scoring. For this study, we used a 6-point Likert scale (from 1 = I completely disagree to 6 = I completely agree) to avoid neutral values and to better express continuity in the response process, which is a maximum likelihood estimation assumption [36]. The Spanish version for adolescents was used in our survey [37]. The reliability of the scale for this survey was α = 0.84, which is similar to that yielded by the original scale (α = 0.83).
(2)
The Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire Adolescent Short Form (TEIQue-ASF) [38]. To evaluate TEI [39], the TEIQue-ASF questionnaire was used. This is a simplified-language version of the short adult TEIQue form, used with children aged 11 or older. It is based the Trait EI model, which conceptualizes TEI as a personality trait located at the low-end of the hierarchical levels of personality. It features 30 items and is structured in a 7-point Likert scale (1 = Completely disagree; 7 = Completely agree). It includes four factors: (1) well-being; (2) self-control skills; (3) emotional skills; and (4) social skills. We used the version validated by Ferrándiz, Hernández, Bermejo, Ferrando and Sáinz [40] with Spanish preadolescents and adolescents. The scale’s reliability (Cronbach’s α) in this study was 0.70 for emotionality, 0.67 for self-control, 0.70 for sociability and 0.78 for well-being. Cronbach’s reliability coefficient for all 30 items was 0.85. These scores are similar to those yielded by the original scale.
(3)
The Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (ZKPQ-50-CC) [41]. This instrument measures a subject’s personality through a self-report questionnaire divided into 50 true–false statements. This instrument evaluates different dimensions of personality following Zuckerman’s Five-Alternatives Model: neuroticism–anxiety; impulsiveness–sensation seeking; activity; sociability; and, aggression–hostility. The survey used the Spanish version [42], which has been used in previous studies with Spanish adolescents [43]. In our survey, the ZKPQ-50-CC questionnaire yields a Cronbach’s α value of 0.86 for neuroticism–anxiety; 0.90 for impulsiveness–sensation seeking; 0.89 for activity; 0.89 for sociability; and, 0.79 for aggression–hostility, which are similar to those yielded by the original scale.

4.1.3. Procedure

In order to select the sample, educational centers were contacted by telephone. Centers were selected because they were representative of the city of Zaragoza (Spain). All schools contacted expressed their interest in participating. After handing out the questionnaires, the research aim of the survey was explained to all participants, and emphasis was laid on the importance of completing all items. In general, students had 20 min to respond, although a flexible approach was followed to account for the age and characteristics of participants. Participants were reminded that all the information collected would remain anonymous and confidential. Before completing the tests, although they had previously given their written consent, all gave their verbal consent to participate in the study. The students who did not want to participate did not do so, and those who wished to leave the process half-way (N = 17) were removed from the study. The data collected for this study were collected between October and November 2017.

4.1.4. Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to outline the socio-demographic profile of the data and the various variables under study. Correlations among eudaimonic well-being, trait emotional intelligence and personality variables were calculated prior to being processed and analyzed with SPSS Statistical Package ver. 26 software (IBM, Armonk, NY, U.S.). Stepwise multiple regression was used to estimate the predictive value of personality and emotional intelligence on eudaimonic well-being. Finally, a structural equations model was applied using the maximum likelihood method to quantify and validate the causal relations between the variables described using AMOS ver. 24 software (IBM, Armonk, NY, U.S.). For all the operations, a p ≤ 0.05 level of significance was adopted, with a 95% confidence level.

5. Results

5.1. Eudaimonic Well-Being, Emotional Intelligence and Personality

First, we examined the scores yielded by all three constructs (eudaimonic well-being, TEI and personality) (Table 1). The average scores for most factors were off-center, veering towards the top-end of the scale, especially concerning eudaimonic well-being and anxiety. This suggests that participants showed high levels of eudaimonic well-being, as well as a certain level of anxiety, which are common in adolescence, a period during which a positive perspective on life and uncertainty are frequently found in combination. In order to make our data as detailed as possible, the scores yielded by male and female participants were differentiated. Males yielded higher scores in two personality factors (anxiety and sociability) and two TEI factors (well-being and self-control). Females yielded higher scores for TEI factors impulsivity, activity and emotionality and for one eudaimonic well-being factor: contribution and social competence. Factors were compared with Cohen’s d values. Due to the large size of the sample, Student’s t-test erroneously detected statistically significant differences. For this reason, we included the d index, as suggested by Cohen [44] (average standard difference), which allowed us to evaluate the magnitude and impact of the differences detected.

5.2. Correlations between Variables

QEWB correlations were analyzed by means of personality questionnaires TEIQ-ASF and ZKPQ-50-CC (Table 2). Pearson’s correlation coefficient, which enables both quantitative and continuous estimates, was used to calculate correlation coefficients between variables. QEWB questionnaire dimensions yielded statistically significant correlations with the other two instruments. In the personality section, the aggression factor did not correlate with any of the eudaimonic well-being factors, while impulsivity yielded weak negative correlations with three eudaimonic well-being factors; it was found that greater impulsivity and sociability entail less eudaimonic well-being. All TEI factors were found to be correlated with eudaimonic well-being, the strongest correlations concerning feeling of meaning and purpose and personal growth and self-acceptance.
Finally, in order to verify the relationship among eudaimonic well-being, personality and TEI, a structural equations analysis was run using the maximum likelihood extraction method (Figure 1), which confirmed the suitability of the three-construct model used in this study. For this analysis, eudaimonic well-being was taken as a whole (i.e., the sum of its factors), following the design of the eudaimonic well-being questionnaire [20].
Personality proved to be an important factor for eudaimonic well-being (r = 0.79), which suggests that higher personality scores correspond to greater values of eudaimonic well-being. Meanwhile, emotional intelligence yielded a weak negative correlation (r = −0.10) with well-being, suggesting that higher EI values lead to lower eudaimonic well-being values. In addition, personality and TEI present a strong positive correlation (r = 0.95). Fit indices proved suitable for the model’s goodness of fit, which means that the three-factor model used is sustainable: χ2(9) = 9.312; p < 0.001; χ2/gl = 1.034; Confirmatory Fit Index (CFI) = 0.992; Normed Fit Index (NFI) = 0.977; Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) = 0.979; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.040, 95%CI (0.002–0.088).

5.3. The Predictive Value of Personality and TEI in Eeudaimonic Well-Being

In order to evaluate the predictive value of personality and TEI in the study of eudaimonic well-being, multiple hierarchical regressions were undertaken by selecting gender, age and personality, TEI-related factorial scores as predictor variables and eudaimonic well-being as the criterion variable. Gender and age were not used as predictors of well-being. Table 3 shows the steps followed by the models to predict the likelihood of eudaimonic well-being. The predictor factors selected were activity and anxiety—which are personality traits—and well-being and emotiveness—which are TEI factors.
Factors activity (−0.905), anxiety (0.601), emotiveness (2.600) and well-being (2.346) directly and significantly affected eudaimonic well-being. The Durbin–Watson test score (2.019) indicated independence of errors. The selected predictor variables explained 47.6% of the variance of the dependent variable (R2 = 0.476) for the regression model used.

6. Discussion

These results show that eudaimonic well-being, TEI and personality are related. In addition, factors activity and anxiety (personality) and emotionality and well-being (TEI) proved capable of predicting eudaimonic well-being in adolescents. These results can be extrapolated.
In our study, eudaimonic well-being was correlated with personality traits (r = 0.79), in agreement with previous studies, which have already suggested that personality is an important factor in terms of well-being [45,46]. However, some authors [47] have put forward the idea that eudaimonic well-being and personality traits are different constructs, and that minor changes in personality traits can have a major impact on a person’s cognitive subjective well-being, and also on psychological or eudaimonic well-being.
Our results agree with the conclusions reached by recent studies [21,22,48] and also reflect the characteristics of the sample and the role of adolescence in personal development. Adolescents undergo two key processes: the search for self-knowledge and increasing autonomy. These factors are crucial in reaching a state of happiness, which explains the link between these two constructs [49,50].
Regarding the relationship between eudaimonic well-being and TEI, previous studies have pointed out that TEI can be used to explain hedonic and eudaimonic well-being [51,52,53]. Our results suggest that, overall, eudaimonic well-being and emotional intelligence show a weak correlation (r = −0.10). However, when this relationship is analyzed factor by factor, more solid relationships between TEI and factors personal growth and self-acceptance emerge, whereas factors sense of control and autonomy show weak correlations with TEI. This might be a consequence of the characteristics of the sample; adolescents go through a development period characterized by EI development (the capacity to administrate or self-regulate their emotions) and increasing social competence (the capacity to effectively interact with others). Adolescents move from specific thought to abstract thought and begin developing more advanced reasoning skills, which allows them to better control their emotions and to seek well-being in a broader sense. Such development facilitates an increasing degree of autonomy and contributes to their well-being and psychosocial development, while protecting them from problems and helping them to face stressful experiences. Eudaimonic well-being and good emotional functioning are fundamental traits in adolescence [54].
Among the three constructs used in the model, personality was regarded as being more relevant in terms of eudaimonic well-being than TEI, even when the issue is analyzed with the TEIQ-ASF, an instrument that examines it from a trait perspective and centers on the self-perceptions of the socio-emotional factors of personality, such as self-control, emotiveness and sociability. This is relevant, even when we take into account that the TEIQue-ASF includes a dispositional welfare measure which implies self-esteem, happiness and optimism as a trait [30]. The results show that eudaimonic well-being has closer links with personality than with TEI, because adolescents perceive emotions in the present time, but they may be anchored in the past [55]. Eudaimonic well-being could be linked to future questions, as eudaimonia focuses on the individual’s wishes [30], which is a matter of great importance for adolescents.
Our second research goal was to evaluate the predictive value of personality and TEI for eudaimonic well-being. The predictor factors selected were activity and anxiety (personality) and well-being and emotiveness (TEI). This suggests that such factors have an effect on personal well-being, as also reported by previous studies [22,56,57], which pointed out that EI must be considered a personality trait [30]. In this survey, activity was shown to be negatively correlated with well-being, whereby the less activity, the more well-being, and vice versa. However, factors well-being and emotiveness (TEI) were shown to be significant predictors of well-being: It was shown that a suitable TEI (the scale in which EI is regarded as a trait) leads, to a great extent, to high levels of eudaimonic well-being and, in turn, to a sense of fulfillment and meaning of life [3,7]. This is explained and emphasized from a eudaimonic approach if we consider that psychological well-being is achieved when true personal potential is developed, and aims and the true “ego” are aligned—hence the importance of EI in personal well-being [11].
The main limitation of this study is that, although the size of the sample is large, more lateral approaches are needed for eudaimonic well-being to be assessed in conjunction with personality and TEI. Positive psychologists are often criticized for the fact that their research largely focuses mainly on Western developed countries [58], a matter that should be addressed in the near future. Similar lines of enquiry should address other constructs, such as hedonic well-being, affects or self-esteem and their relationship with other variables. Finally, although we regarded TEI and personality as predictors of eudaimonic well-being, the link between them was causal and, of course, ambiguous, insofar as the cross-sectional data collected, and the three investigated constructs considered, could affect one another, leading to their measurements overlapping [39,50]. In addition, other important factors that may affect the social well-being of adolescents, such as social convenience, general cognitive ability, AEI, academic performance or family environment, were not taken into consideration and are interesting research avenues for future studies.
Although much work remains to be done, the results indicate that eudaimonic well-being is related to personality and TEI. It is therefore important to address this issue at the school level by implementing specific educational programs that help to develop eudaimonic well-being, which dramatically improves social, personal and emotional performance. Our results encourage us to continue asking new questions and seeking new answers, as well as defining methodologies with which to continue advancing in terms of personal social-affective development.

7. Conclusions

Our main conclusion is the confirmation of the relationship among eudaimonic well-being, personality and TEI. Two personality factors (activity and anxiety) and two TEI factors (well-being and emotiveness) act as predictors of eudaimonic well-being. These results provide some preliminary evidence for the potential value of the EI trait and personality in upholding a positive frame of mind, and also in developing aspects of human functioning (eudaimonia). Finally, this research helps to improve the measurement of well-being in adolescents, which can help teachers and healthcare professionals to identify and deal with low levels of well-being, develop it and provide clearer guidelines for education professionals. These are important matters, and the development of well-being should be made a priority for all those working with adolescents.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.S., P.U., P.T. and J.L.A. Data curation, C.S. and P.U.; Investigation, C.S., P.U., P.T. and J.L.A.; Methodology, C.S. and P.U.; Supervision, C.S., P.U., P.T. and J.L.A.; Writing—original draft, C.S., P.U., P.T. and J.L.A.; Writing—review & editing, C.S., P.U., P.T. and J.L.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was performed by Research Group OPIICS (S46_17R), University of Zaragoza (Zaragoza, Spain) and was supported by research funds provided by the Department of Science and Technology of the Government of Aragón (Spain) and the European Social Fund.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Seligman, M.E.P.; Csikszentmihalyi, M. Positive psychology—An introduction. Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Cooke, P.J.; Melchert, T.P.; Connor, K. Measuring well-being: A review of instruments. Couns. Psychol. 2016, 44, 730–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001, 52, 141–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Kahneman, D.; Diener, E.; Schwarz, N. Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology; Sage: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  5. Diener, E. Subjective well-being. Psychol. Bull. 1984, 95, 542–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Waterman, A.S. Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1993, 64, 678–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ryff, C.D. Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1989, 57, 1069–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Waterman, A.S. Eudaimonic identity theory: Identity as self-discovery. In Handbook of Identity Theory and Research; Schwartz, S.J., Luyckx, K., Vignoles, V.L., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011; Volume 12. [Google Scholar]
  9. Ryff, C.D.; Keyes, C.L. The structure of psychological well-being revisited. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1995, 69, 719–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol. 2000, 55, 68–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ryff, C.D.; Singer, B.H. Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to Psychological well-being. J. Happiness Stud. 2008, 9, 13–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ryff, C.D. Psychological well-being in adult life. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 1995, 4, 99–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ryff, C.D. Psychological well-being revisited: Advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia. Psychother. Psychosom. 2014, 83, 10–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Waterman, A.S. Reconsidering happiness: A eudaimonist’s perspective. J. Posit. Psychol. 2008, 3, 234–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. McCrae, R.R.; Costa, P.T. Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. J.Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1987, 52, 81–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zuckerman, M.; Kuhlman, D.M.; Joireman, J.; Teta, P.; Kraft, M. A comparison of three structural models for personality: The big three, the big five, and the alternative five. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1993, 65, 757–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Costa, P.T.; McCrae, R.R. Still stable after all these years: Personality as a key to some issues in adulthood and old age. In Life Span Development and Behaviour; Baltes, P.B., Brim, O.G., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1980; pp. 65–102. [Google Scholar]
  18. Steel, P.; Schmidt, J.; Shultz, J. Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychol. Bull. 2008, 134, 138–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Diener, E.; Suh, E.N.; Lucas, R.E.; Smith, H.L. Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 1999, 125, 276–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Waterman, A.S.; Schwartz, S.J.; Zamboanga, B.L.; Ravert, R.D.; Williams, M.K.; Agocha, V.B.; Yeong Kim, S.; Donnellan, M.B. The Questionnaire for Eudaimonic Well-Being: Psychometric properties, demographic comparisons, and evidence of validity. J. Posit. Psychol. 2010, 5, 41–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Di Fabio, A.; Saklofske, D.H. The contributions of personality and emotional intelligence to resiliency. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2018, 123, 140–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lampropoulou, A. Personality, school, and family: What is their role in adolescents’ subjective well-being. J. Adolesc. 2018, 67, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Petrides, K.V. Technical Manual for the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue); London Psychometric Laboratory: London, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  24. Salovey, P.; Mayer, J.D. Emotional intelligence. Imag. Cogn. Pers. 1990, 9, 185–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zeidner, M.; Matthews, G.; Roberts, R.D. The emotional intelligence, health, and well-being nexus: What have we learned and what have we missed? Appl. Psychol. Health Well-Being 2012, 4, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Extremera, N.; Ruiz-Aranda, D.; Pineda-Galan, C.; Salguero, J.M. Emotional intelligence and its relation with hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: A prospective study. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2011, 51, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fernández-Berrocal, P.; Extremera, N. La inteligencia emocional en la educación. Rev. Electron. Investig. Psicoeduc. 2008, 15, 421–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Mayer, J.D.; Salovey, P.; Caruso, D.R. Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic mix of traits? Am. Psychol. 2008, 63, 503–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Petrides, K.V. Four thoughts on Trait Emotional Intelligence. Emot. Rev. 2016, 8, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Prado, V.; Villanueva, L.; Górriz, A. Trait emotional intelligence and subjective well-being in adolescents: The moderating role of feelings. Psicothema 2018, 30, 310–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bar-On, R. The Emotional Intelligence Inventory. Psicothema 2006, 18, 13–25. [Google Scholar]
  32. Petrides, K.V.; Furnham, A. Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. Eur. J. Personal. 2001, 15, 425–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Mikolajczak, M.; Petrides, K.V.; Coumans, N.; Luminet, O. The moderating effect of trait emotional intelligence on mood deterioration following laboratory-induced stress. Int. J. Clin. Health Psychol. 2009, 9, 455–477. [Google Scholar]
  34. Bhullar, N.; Schutte, N.S.; Malouff, J.M. The Nature of Well-Being: The Roles of Hedonic and Eudaimonic Processes and Trait Emotional Intelligence. J. Psychol. 2013, 147, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Di Fabio, A.; Palazzeschi, L. Hedonic and eudaimonic well-being: The role of resilience beyond fluid intelligence and personality traits. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Finney, S.J.; DiStefano, C. Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course; Hancock, G.R., Mueller, R.O., Eds.; Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC, USA, 2013; pp. 439–492. [Google Scholar]
  37. Salavera, C.; Usán, P. Propiedades psicométricas del cuestionarios QEWB de bienestar eudaimónico en adolescentes. Psicol. Educ. 2019, 25, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Petrides, K.V.; Sangareau, Y.; Furnham, A.; Frederickson, N. Trait emotional intelligence and children’s peer relations at school. Soc. Dev. 2006, 15, 537–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Pérez-González, J.C.; Sánchez-Ruiz, M.J. Trait emotional intelligence anchored within the Big Five, Big Two and Big One frameworks. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2014, 65, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ferrándiz, C.; Hernández, D.; Bermejo, R.; Ferrando, M.; Sáinz, M. La inteligencia emocional y social en la niñez y adolescencia: Validación de un instrumento para su medida en lengua castellana. Rev. Psicodidáctica 2012, 17, 309–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Aluja, A.; Rossier, J.; García, L.F.; Angleitner, A.; Kuhlman, M.; Zuckerman, M. A cross-cultural shortened form of the ZKPQ (ZKPQ-50-CC) adapted to English, French, German, and Spanish languages. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2006, 41, 619–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Fernández-Artamendi, S.; Martínez-Loredo, V.; Fernández-Hermida, J.R.; Carballo-Crespo, J.L. The impulsive sensation Seeking (ImpSS): Psychometric properties and predictive validity regarding substance use with Spanish adolescents. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2016, 90, 163–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Secades-Vila, R.; Martínez-Loredo, V.; Grande-Gosende, A.; Fernández-Hermida, J.R. The relationship between impulsivity and problema gambling in Adolescence. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 1931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  45. Karaś, D.; Cieciuch, J. The relationship between identity processes and well-being in various life domains. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2018, 121, 111–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kokko, K.; Tolvanen, A.; Pulkkinen, L. Associations between personality traits and psychological well-being across time in middle adulthood. J. Res. Personal. 2013, 47, 748–756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Houben, M.; Van Den Noortgate, W.; Kuppens, P. The relation between short-term emotion dynamics and psychological well-being: A meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 2015, 141, 901–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Di Fabio, A.; Saklofske, D.H. Positive relational management for sustainable development: Beyond personality traits-The contribution of emotional intelligence. Sustainability 2019, 11, 330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. André, C.; Lelord, F. La Fuerza de Las Emociones; Kairós: Barcelona, Spain, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  50. Soto, C.J. Is happiness good for your personality? Concurrent and prospective relations of the big five with subjective well-being. J. Personal. 2015, 83, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Balluerka, N.; Gosostiaga, A.; Alonso-Arbiol, I.; Aritzeta, A. Peer attachment and class emotional intelligence as predictors of adolescents’ psychological well-being: A multilevel approach. J. Adolesc. 2017, 53, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Di Fabio, A.; Kenny, M.E. Promoting Well-Being: The Contribution of Emotional Intelligence. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. de la Barrera, U.; Schoeps, K.; Gil-Gómez, J.-A.; Montoya-Castilla, I. Predicting Adolescent Adjustment and Well-Being: The Interplay between Socio-Emotional and Personal Factors. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4650. [Google Scholar]
  54. Salavera, C.; Usán, P.; Pérez, S.; Chato, A.; Vera, R. Differences in happiness and coping with stress in Secondary Education students. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2017, 237, 1310–1315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Gadwat, M. El Algoritmo de la Felicidad; Zenith: Barcelona, Spain, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  56. Sánchez-Álvarez, N.; Extremera, N.; Fernández-Berrocal, P. The relation between emotional intelligence and subjective well-being: A meta-analytic investigation. J. Posit. Psychol. 2016, 11, 276–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Van der Linden, D.; Tsaousis, I.; Petrides, K.V. Overlap between general factors of personality in the big five, giant three, and trait emotional intelligence. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2012, 53, 175–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Selin, H.; Davey, G. Introduction. In Happiness Across Cultures: Views of Happiness and Quality of Life in Non-Western Cultures; Selin, H., Davey, G., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2012; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 12 02742 g001 550
Figure 1. Model structural equations among eudaimonic well-being, personality and emotional intelligence.
Figure 1. Model structural equations among eudaimonic well-being, personality and emotional intelligence.
Sustainability 12 02742 g001
Table
Table 1. Scores in eudaimonic well-being, personality and trait-emotional intelligence.
Table 1. Scores in eudaimonic well-being, personality and trait-emotional intelligence.
MalesFemales
VariableMeanSDMeanSDMeanSDSkewnessKurtosisd
QEWB
Feeling of meaning and purpose 14.373.1614.492.9714.303.27−0.404−0.2590.060
Contribution and social competence16.192.2515.772.1816.412.27−0.5250.648−0.287
Personal growth and self-acceptance15.502.6515.732.4215.382.760.5310.0250.013
Sense of control or autonomy15.672.0515.531.9015.752.13−0.137−0.086−0.010
Personal expressiveness8.451.558.201.638.581.49−1.0730.920−0.024
Feeling of belonging9.661.609.751.699.621.540.2320.6410.080
ZKPQ-50-CC
Anxiety16.852.6317.782.0316.342.71−0.782−0.1330.601
Impulsiveness14.202.3113.892.2914.372.280.234−0.455−0.210
Activity15.182.9514.752.8615.422.93−0.026−1.202−0.231
Sociability14.802.6415.142.6514.622.590.268−0.8520.198
Aggressiveness15.532.4715.622.5215.482.42−0.209−0.6620.056
TEIQ-ASF
Well-being5.210.885.360.815.120.90−0.7480.7950.280
Self-control4.390.864.600.874.280.83−0.1550.0340.376
Emotionality5.190.855.020.925.280.76−0.6370.703−0.308
Sociability4.690.824.770.814.640.80−0.170−0.1110.161
Table
Table 2. Correlations with the factors of the Eudaimonic Well-Being Questionnaire (QEWB), Emotional Intelligence Scale of Traits—Adolescent Short Form (TEIQ-ASF) and personality ZKPQ-50-CC.
Table 2. Correlations with the factors of the Eudaimonic Well-Being Questionnaire (QEWB), Emotional Intelligence Scale of Traits—Adolescent Short Form (TEIQ-ASF) and personality ZKPQ-50-CC.
QuestionnaireVariableFeeling of Meaning and PurposeContribution and Social CompetencePersonal Growth and Self-AcceptanceSense of Control or AutonomyPersonal ExpressivenessFeeling of Belonging
ZKPQ-50-CCAnxiety0.351 **0.203 **0.503 **−0.0580.188 **0.177 **
Impulsiveness−0.038−0.163 **−0.055−0.246 **−0.037−0.157 **
Activity−0.359 **−0.355 **−0.201 **−0.245 **−0.130 *−0.225 **
Sociability−0.283 **−0.217 **−0.196 **−0.079−0.097−0.129 **
Aggressiveness0.0570.0200.042−0.0590.0990.093
TEIQ-ASFWell-being0.385 **0.425 **0.459 **0.161 **0.276 **0.257 **
Self-control0.267 **0.148 **0.374 **−0.0700.189 **0.221 **
Emotionality0.327 **0.351 **0.396 **0.151 **0.356 **0.235 **
Sociability0.296 **0.193 **0.425 **0.0850.204 **0.185 **
Note: * p > 0.01, ** p < 0.001.
Table
Table 3. Personality and emotional intelligence as predictors of eudaimonic well-being.
Table 3. Personality and emotional intelligence as predictors of eudaimonic well-being.
StepVariable Be.t.R2tSig
Step 1Activity −0.9050.1190.282−7.6200.000
Anxiety0.6010.1500.3764.0120.000
Step 2Well-being2.3460.4410.4405.3150.000
Emotionality 2.6000.4080.4766.3720.000
Note. B: Beta coefficient equal; e.t.: Error estimate R2: R square; t: t-value; Sig: Signification; Excluded variables: gender, age, personality (impulsiveness, sociability and aggressiveness) and emotional intelligence (self-control and sociability).

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Salavera, C.; Usán, P.; Teruel, P.; Antoñanzas, J.L. Eudaimonic Well-Being in Adolescents: The Role of Trait Emotional Intelligence and Personality. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2742. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072742

AMA Style

Salavera C, Usán P, Teruel P, Antoñanzas JL. Eudaimonic Well-Being in Adolescents: The Role of Trait Emotional Intelligence and Personality. Sustainability. 2020; 12(7):2742. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072742

Chicago/Turabian Style

Salavera, Carlos, Pablo Usán, Pilar Teruel, and José L. Antoñanzas. 2020. "Eudaimonic Well-Being in Adolescents: The Role of Trait Emotional Intelligence and Personality" Sustainability 12, no. 7: 2742. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072742

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