English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The present study investigates the possible variables that may explain subjective well-being based on Relative Deprivation Theory. Subjective well-being includes subjective cognitive considerations about the general life satisfaction of the person and affective evaluations about his/her emotional states such as presence of positive affect and absence of negative affect (Diener, 1984; Diener & Ryan, 2009). In point of fact, subjective well-being can be defined as an umbrella term which contains mental health, life satisfaction, happiness and positive affect (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, & Schkade, 2005). In addition, personal growth initiative (including readiness for change) is considered as a part of subjective well-being (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Robitschek et al., 2012; Ryff & Singer, 1998). In the present study, the positive subjective well-being is composed of positive affect, life satisfaction and readiness for change, whereas negative affect and perceived stress are evaluated as the indicators of the negative subjective well-being in the proposed structural equation models. The approach of the present study – investigating both positive and negative dimensions of subjective well-being – is used by other researchers as well (Clark & Watson, 1991; Huppert & Whittington, 2003; Karademas, 2007). Subjective comparisons and interpretations define individuals’ awareness and responses toward life events (Osborne & Sibley, 2013). Relative deprivation theory (Crosby, 1976; Davis, 1959; Gurr, 1970; Runciman, 1966) has proposed that people subjectively compare themselves with other individual(s), groups or oneself at different points in time, and these subjective comparisons lead to cognitive appraisal in which the individual perceives own or in-group’s disadvantaged position. Egoistic (individual-level) relative deprivation has mostly predicted individual-based outcomes, and was negatively associated with well-being (Schmitt, Maes, & Widaman, 2010), life satisfaction (Osborne & Sibley, 2013), self-worth and personal self-esteem (Walker, 1999). Deprived individuals tended to indicate more depressive symptoms, frustration, anxiety, shame and stress (Walker & Mann, 1987). However, studies did not focus on the qualitative characteristics of the desired outcome; the possible distinction between material relative deprivation and emotional relative deprivation has not been made clear in the literature. In the present study, material egoistic relative deprivation and emotional egoistic relative deprivation and their possible different associations with individual level outcomes (including subjective well-being, perceived intrinsic strength, perceived extrinsic strength) will be investigated for the first time, to our knowledge. Secondly, although the related literature has tested the direct relationship between egoistic relative deprivation and subjective well-being, indirect associations have been ignored. The present research also tests the mediating role of perceived intrinsic strength (including optimism, hope and self-esteem) and perceived extrinsic strength (including perceived social support from family, friends and significant others). Based on the related literature, it is known that subjective well-being is positively related with optimism (Carver, Scheier, & Segerstrom, 2010; Forgeard & Seligman, 2012; Wong & Lim, 2009), hope (Krypel & Henderson-King, 2010; Irwing, Snyder, & Crowson, 1998), self-esteem (Diener, 1984; Lucas, Diener, & Suh, 1996) and perceived social support (Holland & Holahan, 2003; Kessler & McLeod, 1985; Prati & Pietrantoni, 2010). Egoistic relative deprivation may be negatively associated with subjective well-being due to the negative effect of deprivation on perceived intrinsic strength and perceived extrinsic strength. In this regard, positive subjective well-being includes positive affect, life satisfaction, and readiness for change; negative subjective well-being includes negative affect, and perceived stress; perceived intrinsic strength includes optimism, hope, and self-esteem; and perceived extrinsic strength includes perceived social support from family, friends, and significant others.

Birey Düzeyinde Göreli Yoksunluk ve Öznel Esenlik Arasındaki Dolaylı İlişki