Shaping livable cities is an enduring issue for urban planning, which came dramatically to the forefront of relevant policies with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. This study explores ...what makes cities livable by using neighborhood satisfaction and neighborhood happiness as measures of urban livability. The determinants of neighborhood satisfaction and neighborhood happiness are examined and compared, using geospatial and survey data from two cities, one from the South and the other from the North European context: Thessaloniki, Greece and Oslo, Norway. A structural equation model is developed and tested. In both cities, common determinants of neighborhood satisfaction are found to be the proximity to city center, neighborhood perceived safety, and place attachment, whereas common determinants of neighborhood happiness are found to be neighborhood perceived safety, neighborhood perceived quietness, neighborhood social cohesion, place attachment, and lower neighborhood density. Important differences between the two cities were also observed. Numerous local amenities seem to positively contribute to urban livability in Thessaloniki, but not in Oslo. Parks and trees are positively linked to neighborhood happiness in Oslo, but not in Thessaloniki. These differences support the view that some of the links between neighborhood characteristics and livability depend on the local context related to local culture, attitudes, and preferences, all of which might also be influenced by the local built environment.
•Sense of safety and place attachment are important predictors of neighborhood satisfaction and neighborhood happiness.•Short distance to the city center linked to higher neighborhood satisfaction.•Conversely, higher neighborhood density linked to lower neighborhood happiness.•Green space is associated with neighborhood happiness in Oslo.•Numerous amenities are associated with neighborhood satisfaction in Thessaloniki.
•Limiting the frequency of checking email throughout the day reduced daily stress.•Lower daily stress predicts greater well-being (e.g., higher positive affect).•The frequency of checking email did ...not directly impact other well-being outcomes.
Using email is one of the most common online activities in the world today. Yet, very little experimental research has examined the effect of email on well-being. Utilizing a within-subjects design, we investigated how the frequency of checking email affects well-being over a period of two weeks. During one week, 124 adults were randomly assigned to limit checking their email to three times a day; during the other week, participants could check their email an unlimited number of times per day. We found that during the limited email use week, participants experienced significantly lower daily stress than during the unlimited email use week. Lower stress, in turn, predicted higher well-being on a diverse range of well-being outcomes. These findings highlight the benefits of checking email less frequently for reducing psychological stress.
Facing increasing critique that PISA focuses too narrowly on cognitive achievement and human/knowledge capital, the OECD has recently shifted some of its focus to student happiness. The 2017 ...Students' Well-Being report distinguishes between 'happy schools' and 'unhappy schools', showing that among students who combined high performance and life satisfaction, northern European countries topped the charts. Meanwhile, students in East Asian countries including Japan, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Korea registered the lowest 'life satisfaction' scores among all participating countries. This piece points out some of the problems inherent in the OECD's recent turn to happiness, problematizing the OECD yardstick of life satisfaction. Attempting to keep the critique constructive, we suggest that the OECD may want to consider using alternative metrics, then briefly highlight one developed in East Asia from different first assumptions: the Interdependent Happiness Scale. In conclusion we flag, but cannot answer, some related educational questions concerning policy, pedagogy, and priorities for the future.
We defined home-related subjective well-being by constructing sets of its elements and examined its factor structure. The following findings were obtained:1. A statistically supported three-factor ...model of home-related SWB, comprising home satisfaction, emotion at home and eudaimonia derived from home, was identified through factor analysis.2. The domain of ‘eudaimonia derived from home’ can be characterized by the elements of ‘engagement and accomplishment,’ ‘aesthetic experience,’ ‘meaning,’ and ‘self-acceptance and self-esteem’.3. ‘Attachment to home’ was found not to be associated with a specific domain of the home-related SWB.4. Each domain of the home-related SWB has distinct determinants.
本稿では，介護者のwell-beingとは何か，またwell-beingの獲得を確認する方法とはどのようなものか，理論と実践，二側面の先行研究を用いて考察した．well-beingとは何かについての回答は，立場によって大きく異なる．哲学的側面では，“amounts to the notion of how well a person's life is going for that ...person”という概念に相当するとされている．しかし，正確さに欠ける懸念もあり，well-beingを定義する際には，定義のStrategy（分析対象・議論領域・定義の方向性），subjective well-beingかpsychological well-beingかのスタンスを検討する必要性がある．そして，心理学領域から，“feeling good and functioning well”“個人の人生における快い主観的な経験，意味・意義のある活動，人間としての可能性を実現する社会的な関係から成る複合的な概念”という定義がなされている．これらの定義の根底にあるのはthe whole human pictureを捉える重要性である．さらに発展させた形態としてWell-beingの構成要素がPERMA（Positive Emotion，Engagement，Relationships，Meaning，Accomplishment）という仮説的定義があり，この構成要素がwell-beingの予測因子になりうるか研究が進められている．一方，介護領域の介入試験のアウトカムで用いた既存尺度の探索Review研究では，1．Global Measure of well-being（Depressive Symptoms・Mental health・QOL・Satisfaction with life・Health），2．Caregiver-Specific Well-being measures（Burden・Role strain・Personal strain/Stress・Competence/self-efficacy）に大別された．そしてDepression，Burdenなどwell-beingのnegativeな側面に焦点化した測定が大半を占めた．この結果は，従来の疾病管理的側面の体験により，Patho-genesis的な志向（健康にとって望ましくない要素・問題を除去し改善することが善）への親和性を示している．認知症介護を巨視的，包括的に捉え，介護者のWell-beingを定量的に評価する簡便な測定ツールが無いとするならば，当面は，複数のツールで評価せざるをえない．測定する内容（種別・項目）を増やすことは，測定対象者（介護者）のQOLを著しく下げることになりかねない．認知症介護を巨視的，包括的に捉え，介護者のwell-being状態を簡便に把握するにはどのようにすればいいのか，その解として，介護者向け心理教育的介入試験で実施したSocial Work手法のEco-mapにヒントがあることを示した．
This paper discusses what well-being means to caregivers and how it can be measured to confirm its acquisition by using previous research on theoretical and practical aspects.Within the field of ...psychology, the two types of well-being (subjective and psychological well-being) are combined to form "feeling good and functioning well", which refers to "pleasant subjective experiences, meaningful activities and the realization of human potential in an individual's life".On the other hands, a review study reported on the Global Measure of well-being, that is, depressive symptoms, mental health, QOL, satisfaction with life and health, also on caregiver-specific well-being measures that are burden, role strain, personal strain, stress, competence and self-efficacy. The majority of measures focused on the negative aspects of well-being.If there is no simple measurement tool that captures both the positive and negative aspects of well-being, a comprehensive and quantitative evaluation of dementia care, so for the present there is no alternative but to using multiple tools for evaluation.The Eco-map of the Ecological Social Work method, which was used in a psycho-educational intervention for caregivers, was shown to provide a hint as to how to take a macroscopic and comprehensive view of dementia care and how to easily grasp an understanding of the well-being of caregivers.
PDF
