ReviewFrontiers in psychology2025
The hierarchical framework of wellbeing (HiFWB).
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Prospective Study of the Association Between School Connectedness in Adolescence and Social Connection in Adulthood.The Journal of school health · 2026Article
- A scoping review and research agenda: Psychological flexibility and wellbeing in organisations.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2026Article
- Developing a wellbeing framework for employees working from home within a South African government entity.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Several decades of research on wellbeing has resulted in a variety of conceptual models used to measure wellbeing. The historical motivations behind these conceptual models have emphasized their differences to the point of clouding the wellbeing measurement landscape. A synthesis of the wellbeing literature is needed to move the field forward and guide future research. Methods: In this review, we synthesize literature on the measurement of wellbeing from the past 50 years and present The Hierarchical Framework of Wellbeing (HiFWB) that organizes multiple prior models. Results: We propose a general factor of wellbeing (i.e., "h" factor) at the top level of the hierarchy analogous to "g" in the intelligence literature and "p" in the psychopathology literature. Building off prior conceptualizations, we define general well-being as "the experience of personally valued fulfillment within one's life." We detail the theoretical rationale and empirical evidence behind four hierarchical levels: general (i.e., "h" factor), lenses (e.g., subjective wellbeing), contents (e.g., affects), and characteristics (e.g., positive affect). Example wellbeing constructs are proposed for each level of HiFWB while emphasizing the hierarchical structure is prioritized above any (arbitrary) list of constructs. We discuss various approaches to distinguishing predictors of wellbeing from wellbeing itself (i.e., preventing tautologies) and how they fit into our framework. Considering the bulk of the empirical evidence comes from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic (WEIRD) cultures, constraints on generalizability are important. Throughout, we compare and contrast HiFWB to other hierarchical structures in psychological science (e.g., five factor model of personality). Conclusion: The HiFWB is a flexible, encompassing, evidence-based framework for wellbeing conceptualization and measurement in WEIRD populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.