Psychological well-being as a result of person-environment relationships

Within the field of psychology the psychological well-being concept takes on different meanings. Currently they tend to be framed (Ryan and Deci, 2001) in a hedonistic orientation (Kahneman links it to the presence of positive affect and the absence of negative affect) or a eudaimonic (term coined by Aristotle in the Ethics from him to Nicomachus) in which well-being is the consequence of a full psychological functioning from which the person develops all his potential.

Notwithstanding this distinction, it is accepted that both the affective component of well-being, that expresses the complacency and satisfaction that the person perceives through her feelings and emotions, such as the development of their potential, are related and usually occur together, since psychological well-being is not limited to being a mental state freedom from physical ailments and worries, should include the satisfaction of developing one's own capabilities.

In this PsychologyOnline article, we will talk of psychological well-being as a result of person-environment relationships.

Index

1. Introduction
2. The seth model
3. Properties of the factors that sustain the experiences
4. Choosing the objectives for each factor
5. Conclution

In this sense, the psychologist Martin Seligman points out in his Wellness Theory:

"Well-being is a combination of feeling good and really making sense in an activity that we like or are passionate about," in addition to maintaining good interpersonal relationships and having goals that are challenging for us so that they can become achievements".

Similarly, Ryff and Keyes (1995) comment that "a more accurate characterization of psychological well-being is to define it as the effort to improve oneself and the realization of one's own potential."

If you look at some of the models of psychological well-being more widespread, such as Ryff's Multidimensional Model of Psychological Well-being (1989), Keyes's (1998) social well-being, the Pyramid of human needs of Maslow (1998), the model of Myers and Diener (2000) and the PERMA model of Seligman (2011), all of them point towards the following factors: self-acceptance, life purpose, growth personal, self-realization, satisfactory interpersonal relationships, mastery of the environment, integration and social contribution, positive affectivity, spirituality, and a simple observation about them indicates that they are related in one way or another with the interaction of two basic elements: the person and the environment in which they develop their existence, understood as around the set of elements of any nature external to the person that intervene in the interactions: living beings, physical structures, natural ecosystems and material goods and immaterial.

It is evident that the daily life of people is intimately linked to its environment with whom they maintain relationships within a certain context (physical, family, work, social, playful), and the way in which they interact with it has repercussions on stability and balance between the two and when these relationships take place in harmony and equanimity they experience a feeling of well-being (physical and psychological). Taking the person-environment relationship as an axis of reference, the question that concerns us is to build a model based on it that allows us to allows to identify the factors that contribute, or may contribute in the future, to the state of psychological well-being of each person.

From the perspective of the human-environment relationship, the concept of psychological well-being could be seen through a systemic approach interactional, which considers the human being as a complex biological system intimately linked to its environment and forming the human being-environment supersystem (SH-E). In this complex supersystem, multiple relationships develop between the two, although for the purposes of psychological well-being only those whose objective It is the satisfaction of the needs required by the person to fulfill their transcendental life expectations, leaving aside those more trivial or circumstantial. Psychological well-being would emerge as a result of these relationships when they generate a sense of satisfaction and complacency (obviously, if this is harmful, unpleasant or regrettable, the result will be discomfort, suffering).

The interaction between a person and the element of the environment with which he interacts can lead to different types of relationships, and each of them generates a subjective experience to which we denominate aexperience, which is defined as the experiences and realities that a person lives and is the basic entity on which well-being is supported when it is satisfactory. The psychological well-being derived from the rewarding experience has a limited time dimension as long as it lasts, however, throughout their lives people can experience a large number of them and generate a more global and lasting feeling of well-being (could be associated with terms such as happiness, quality of life or satisfaction vital).

Although these experiences are personal, their content depends largely on the structure and characteristics of the environment where they take place, since it is this that allows or prevents a certain type of possible relationship.

In this model it is considered that those most directly linked to a person's daily life can be associated with three situations related to the environment: to be (to occupy a parcel of the environment), have (to have elements of the environment) and make (intervene in processes in the environment).

Following this approach, it can be affirmed that the person-environment relationship rests on four basic factors or "pillars" on which little by little they settle all the interactions: the subject of the interaction (the being), the place where the interaction takes place (the being), the elements of the environment that it has (having) and the actions that it develops in its environment (doing), which as a whole are grouped under the acronym SETH.

Any daily situation of the person will be referenced in one or more of these factors and each one of them contains various elements, including for guidance and not limitation the following:

• To be: refers to the physical and psychological characteristics, and qualities (intellectual, professional, artistic, sports, etc.) that are inherent to the person.
• IsA: these are the usual scenarios where he develops his life (city, street, home, workplace, leisure spaces, etc.). It is the physical space where they carry out their activities and relationships with the rest of the elements of the environment.
• Have: indicates the elements of the environment that you can have to interact with, whether they are materials (food, housing, transport vehicles, clothing, electronic devices, etc.) or immaterial (time, freedom, prestige, etc.), as well as interpersonal ties (partner, children, friends, partners, colleagues, etc.).
• Make: actions carried out in the environment where he is and with the elements that he has at his disposal to obtain the satisfaction of his needs and objectives (professional, sports, artistic, social, recreational activities, etc.).

Considering this description, the key to psychological well-being is to achieve affinity and harmony between the four pillars or factors and the person-environment relationships supported by them, in such a way that they maintain the psychological balance (the so-called psychological homeostasis of W. Canon, 1932) and generate a satisfactory vital status.

When a person is pleased to be like he is, he is satisfied to be where he is, he has everything he needs and he likes what he does, it is very likely that maintain rewarding relationships with the environment (experiences based on interpersonal, economic, commercial, social, cultural, etc.) enjoying a harmony with him and remaining in a balanced psychological state (cognitive and emotional) and open to new experiences. In this situation, the experiences of the person are associated with a feeling of satisfaction and satisfaction and we say that he enjoys a state of psychological well-being.

The problem arises when this affinity and harmony do not exist, when the person is not satisfied with any of the four factors that prevent you from enjoying well-being and you would like them to be from another shape. A gap then appears between the current situation and the one I wish it were, causing the appearance of unsatisfactory experiences that lead to psychological imbalance and instability emotional. In these cases, the person faces a dilemma: if I am not comfortable with my current situation, what should I do? Accept it and conform, or try to achieve what I would like it to be? The choice is usually not easy given the many aspects, both personal and environmental, that must be weighed in order to make a decision.

The Theory of Self-Determination proposed by Ryan and Deci (2000) indicates that people can be proactive and committed, or inactive or alienated. Human beings would have certain innate psychological needs that would be the basis of a self-motivated and self-motivated personality. integrated and that, in addition, the social environments in which they develop would promote or hinder these processes positive. These social contexts are key to successful development and functioning. Contexts that do not provide supports for these psychological needs contribute to the alienation and illness of the subject. In application of this theory, the person who chooses to achieve psychological well-being must choose the components (elements and characteristics) that he wants for each factor (for example, being bold instead of shy, living in the country instead of the city, being a teacher instead of a researcher, etc.) and the kind of relationships that can be established with them, but always taking into account the conditions and circumstances of the environment where the experiences will take place, as well as the way in which they should be carried out (this is the constructivist aspect of the model).

The psychological well-being defined in this model is based on the existence of relationships of affinity and complementarity between the four factors, so they must meet certain properties, highlighting the following:

• Each factor is made up of a set of elements that may be capable of intervening in the same relationship and contribute to the satisfaction of the experience (although it may affect the level of satisfaction), and if For whatever reason we cannot get the one we want, it can be supplied with another (if it is not possible to live on the street that I would like, maybe I can do it on another street close to is; if I cannot have a working relationship with the company I want, I can have it with another in the same sector).
• Are given interdependence relationships between factors, so that the existence of one may depend on the existence of another (to be a doctor you must have a degree; to do mountaineering you have to be in the mountains, etc.).
• The elements of each factor that contribute to well-being are specific for each person (diversity is the prevailing norm in nature, which justifies the differences between needs, tastes and illusions); for example, one person “feels good” living in the city and working in the world of finance and another does so living in the mountains and growing vegetables and fruit trees.
• The composition of each factor, as well as the relationships of complementarity and affinity between them they are not static, can vary over time, disappear or increase, since both the person and the environment are dynamic systems and are subject to variations in virtue of the prevailing circumstances at each moment (a young person does not have the same faculties, desires and needs as a adult). However, the capacity for change and flexibility is not the same for the four factors; for example, personal traits and qualities (being) are more difficult to change than housing (being), car (having) or work (doing).
• The four of them contribute to psychological well-being, but not necessarily with the same intensity, it will depend on the assessment that the person gives to each factor, taking into account the importance and significance for their life and the level of satisfaction required of each of them (a person may better value living in a certain city, even if this means having less free time or giving up the job that would like).

The tendency to improve living conditions in search of a situation of well-being is normal in humans. You tend to get what you don't have or to recover what you had and have lost, but you have to keep an important rule in mind: you can't always get what you want, because the path that must be traveled between the current situation and the desired one is usually full of difficulties. Circumstances related to the person himself or to the environment may arise that are not under his control and make the process difficult (accident, natural disaster, illness, dismissal, divorce, etc.).

Getting the desired elements of each factor overcoming these difficulties thus becomes the goal to be achieved.

The plausible existence of limitations and obstacles to achieve the desired objective in each factor forces us to establish a intermediate point between what it is (the current situation of the factors) and what we would like it to be (the wishes for each of the they). This point is what can be achieved under the circumstances (potentiality). This forces us to introduce a new objective for the factor to replace the desired one: the achievable or potential. The existence of this distinction between desire / potentiality in the person requires responding to new questions: who can I become, where can I be, what can I get to have and what can I achieve make. From the combination of these three basic dimensions of the person-environment relationship that can occur with respect to the four factors: actuality, desire or expectation and potentiality, the following scheme is formed:

Since the psychological state of well-being requires specific characteristics for each person, it is she, either by herself or with help from professionals (psychologist, counselor or coach), who must find an answer to these questions raised (which involve the knowledge of oneself and the environment in which life situations take place) and choose the elements of each factor susceptible to provide well-being. However, there are general rules of action to take into account:

Avoid setting irrational or illusory goals

to these four factors. The objectives must be proportionate to our possibilities, because if you don't get what you want, failure and frustration ensues. In addition, exaggerated expectations and unfounded aspirations are often sources of anxiety and stress. Experience shows us that many people tend to target factors guided more by illusion than by reason, and this leads to very difficult or impossible goals to achieve: they want to be more than they can be, to be where they cannot be, to have what they cannot have and to do what they cannot they can do.

Not being too guided by emotions

The repeated experiences establish cognitive and emotional links with the elements of the environment with which they are related (family, friendship, companionship, etc.). The strength of these links can influence the choice of the desired elements for a factor other than the appropriate (love or hate may cause a person to choose the new component of the form factor irrationally and foolish).

Establish a hierarchy

Since experience tells us that it is unlikely that the desired objectives can be achieved in all factors, a hierarchical relationship between them according to the value they have for the person and the circumstances in which they are. It would be a matter of choosing which need or concern to satisfy is considered more important: to be as I would like to be, to be where I would like to be, to have what I want or to do work that excites me. Likewise, as each factor is made up of numerous options (various personal traits and qualities, different material goods, as well as places to be and activities to be carried out) should also establish a hierarchy between they.

Determine the acceptable satisfaction threshold

The satisfaction obtained in a factor is not a unique value, it ranges from total dissatisfaction to maximum satisfaction through intermediate states. In this sense, not having reached the desired objective in a factor (maximum satisfaction) does not prevent experiencing a feeling of well-being if a lower-level goal that is acceptable is achieved (being brave but not as brave as desired, being on a good team even if this is not the best, having friends but not getting as many as you would like, occupying an important management position even if it is not the one you aspired, etc.). In this case, it should be found out what is the acceptable satisfaction threshold in each factor to consider that psychological well-being and "feel good" have been achieved.

Analyze what probabilityexists to achieve what we want andstudy the cost-benefit ratio

of the process to achieve it. It is evident that it is not worth spending more effort if with it we cannot improve the situation up to the chosen satisfaction threshold. According to the psychologist Herbert Simon, the effort is directly related to the prize obtained, and this depends on the usefulness of what has been achieved and the satisfaction it has generated. Therefore, obsessively looking for the optimal situations in each factor could be classified as misfit or foolish. There are times when the attempt to overcome current deficiencies and seek a more satisfactory situation makes the person dedicate a large part of his time and effort to this mission, leaving aside other parts of his daily life capable of generating satisfactions and joys in the Present.

Notwithstanding the above rules and following the principle of positive psychology, psychological well-being requires more than a feeling of serenity and calm due to the absence of psychological disturbances and worries that lead to a calm and balanced state of mind, implies also the illuminate exciting life projects in which these factors are involved. The well-founded expectation of carrying out a rewarding project that excites us and gives us a feeling of complacency, satisfaction and enjoy what has been achieved (starting a business, starting a family, traveling to an exotic country, etc.) contributes greatly to the welfare state, and For a project of this type (to do) to be successful it is required that the other three factors: being, being and having, be related and complementary East.

Anyone wants to maintain balanced and harmonious relationships with their environment that make them feel good and enjoy a state of psychological well-being. To achieve this, you must find a combination of elements of the four factors that creates a rewarding and satisfying life situation, since it is proven that there is not only a single combination of these capable of generating a state of psychological well-being, rather, it can be achieved through numerous combinations.

Each factor contains several possibilities and / or elements (from 1 to n): a person can be defined by many traits, both physical and psychological; it can be in different spaces (city, home, workplace, leisure center, etc.); have numerous personal ties and tangible and intangible objects and do various activities; And with all these possibilities, an endless number of related combinations can be generated that facilitate satisfactory person-environment relationships capable of providing states of well-being (there is no "empty" factor of elements, that is, whose value is 0, because in any interaction there will always be someone somewhere doing something with some thing).

The goal of each person is to find the factorial combination that best suits your wishes and illusions within its possibilities and in the circumstances and conditions offered by the environment; a combination that is capable of convincing him that life is worth living, because when a person does not love himself as he is, he is not in the desired place, he does not have what needs and does not find satisfaction in what he does, he has within him the germ of the "meaninglessness" of his life (there have been many cases of depression and suicide due to these deficiencies).

The expression in mathematical terms of well-being would be given by the formula:

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELLNESS = f (S1-n, E1-n, T1-n, H1-n)

But get one combination of the four factors that promote a psychological well-being of full and total satisfaction is not available to everyone. However, what is within the reach of many is to achieve, taking into account their resources, a factorial combination that enables relationships with the environment capable of generating a situation of welfare "adapted to the circumstancesThat it is feasible, and later, to accept it even if it is not the desired one (in this sense, in 1995 Diener and Fujita investigated a covariation of resources: money, family support, social skills and intelligence, obtaining an index of resources that they associated with well-being, concluding that it appeared that people can often achieve their psychological well-being by matching their goals with the resources that they possess).

However, it must be taken into account that there are situations where a lack in more than one factor elements considered fundamental for the person, which makes it very difficult to accept and adapt to new circumstances due to the difficulty of finding a new combination of factors capable of generating wellness. An example can illustrate this situation: can a prisoner who is in a penitentiary establishment enjoy psychological well-being, with his qualities personal "parked", who do not have freedom or material goods and who can only do a small number of very specific things that are alien to their tastes and wishes?; Can someone with an intellectual or physical disability do the same? In both cases, acceptance and adaptation are required by circumstances, but this does not prevent some people from achieving well-being in them.

In any case, acceptance, to be effective and can generate a state of psychological well-being, it cannot consist of assuming the impossibility of getting what one wants and would like, conforming to what is within your reach and learn to resign yourself and tolerate the frustration generated by the dissatisfaction of desires and delusions; Rather, it must be the conviction, without any kind of doubt, that the combination of elements obtained was the one that could be achieved. after having exhausted all the possibilities within our reach, and this achievement should be accompanied by complacency and personal satisfaction with what has been achieved (sometimes we accept the situation and learn to live with it, but we do not have the feeling of wellness).

When a person does everything possible and uses all the means available to him to become what he wants to be, to be where he wants to be, have and do what he likes, and he does not get it, he should feel satisfied even if he has not reached the level that wished; should not fall into frustration and undervaluation of oneself and the environment in which he lives, but to enjoy the status obtained and not lament for what "should have been and is not. Finally, in this situation, it would be advisable to ask yourself:it's worth spending so much time and so much effort to get what you want and don't have, instead of dedicating it to enjoying and intensely savoring the good things that you already have?

This article is merely informative, in Psychology-Online we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.

If you want to read more articles similar to Psychological well-being as a result of person-environment relationships, we recommend that you enter our category of Emotions.

• Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well - being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist.
• Diener, E. and Fujita, F. (1995). Resources, Personal striving, and subjective well-being: A nomothetic and idiographic approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
• Maslow, Abraham Harold (1998). The Self-Realized Man: Towards a Psychology of Being (Barcelona: Editorial Kairós).
• Myers, D. G. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people. American Psychologist.
• Ryff, Carol & Keyes, C. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
• Seligman, M. (2005). True happiness. (Barcelona: Ed. B, S.A.).
• Seligman, M. (2011). Flourish: A New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being - and how to Achieve Them. (London: Ed. Hodder & Stoughton General Division).