Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Feng Kong
 -- 1108 2024-02-08 03:29:48 |
2 format correct
Catherine Yang
Meta information modification 1108 2024-02-17 04:36:31 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Wei, C.; Su, J.; Zhao, J.; Ding, K.; Kong, F. Strength Use and Well-Being at Work among Teachers. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/54887 (accessed on 06 May 2024).
Wei C, Su J, Zhao J, Ding K, Kong F. Strength Use and Well-Being at Work among Teachers. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/54887. Accessed May 06, 2024.
Wei, Cangpi, Jiahe Su, Jingjing Zhao, Ke Ding, Feng Kong. "Strength Use and Well-Being at Work among Teachers" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/54887 (accessed May 06, 2024).
Wei, C., Su, J., Zhao, J., Ding, K., & Kong, F. (2024, February 08). Strength Use and Well-Being at Work among Teachers. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/54887
Wei, Cangpi, et al. "Strength Use and Well-Being at Work among Teachers." Encyclopedia. Web. 08 February, 2024.
Strength Use and Well-Being at Work among Teachers
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/bs14020095

Teachers’ well-being at work is an important indicator of their mental health. Strengths use has been identified as a significant predictor of enhanced well-being at work.

strength use hedonic well-being at work eudaimonic well-being at work

1. Introduction

Teachers are the most important resource for the high-quality development of education. They are responsible for teaching students knowledge and for the prosperity of the country. Improving teachers’ well-being at work not only directly contributes to their mental health and work performance [1] but also promotes schools’ sustainable educational effectiveness and student growth [2]. Consequently, examining the factors contributing to teachers’ well-being is of great importance.
Since the emergence of positive psychology, the concept of strength use (SU) has gained prominence, denoting the extent to which individuals utilize their strengths in their daily lives [3]. SU has been found to be closely related to well-being in its general context [4], but there are few studies examining SU and the well-being at work of college teachers [5]. 

2. SU and Well-Being at Work

Well-being is considered an optimal state of mind and involves living human life to the best. It is not just about feeling good; it is about working well and living a good life [6]. William [7] believed that well-being encompasses how people experience and evaluate their lives positively. In the literature [7], well-being was conceptualized through two foundational theoretical perspectives: the hedonic and eudaimonic. From the hedonic approach, well-being focuses on the pursuit of happiness and life satisfaction. The eudaimonic approach emphasizes the pursuit of the realization of human potentials [8]. Huang et al. studied the effect of job characteristics on hedonic well-being and concluded that trust in colleagues was positively correlated with teachers’ self-esteem and hedonic well-being [9]. In addition, Wang et al. analyzed the hedonic well-being and eudaimonic well-being of students through machine learning and traditional statistical analysis, and they obtained different influencing factors for the two types of well-being [10]. Several studies have separately explored hedonic and eudaimonic well-being at work. For example, Nina [11] demonstrated that hedonic well-being among female workers could be predicted by work–family balance and optimism. As for eudaimonic well-being at work, Kundi, et al. [12] found that eudaimonic well-being at work was related to job performance and affective commitment. Although many scholars have studied either kind of well-being at work, few studies have examined both kinds of well-being together in organizational psychology. Therefore, conducting research that compares and synthesizes the two kinds of well-being at work is imperative and holds substantial value in elucidating a more holistic understanding of teachers’ overall satisfaction and productivity in their professional roles.
SU has been hypothesized to have a positive relationship with well-being at work. Character strengths theory suggests that SU has a positive effect on well-being because people naturally engage in activities aligned with their inherent strengths [13]. A study on character strengths and subjective well-being confirmed that SU mediates the association between character strengths and hedonic well-being—in particular, that different character strengths could lead to different degrees of strength use [14]. In addition, SU also resonates with the Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, which recommends individuals to maintain, protect, and preserve their resources [15]. According to the COR theory, when people develop a resource surplus, they may experience positive well-being [16]. Moreover, the theory also posits that interventions that promote resource building and resource protection may improve well-being and prevent stress and burnout. Taken together, SU could be an important predictor of well-being at work. Consistently, SU has been found to be related to well-being in its general context [4], yet there remains a scarcity of research on its relationship to well-being at work, with only one study identifying a positive association between SU and work engagement—an indicator of eudaimonic well-being at work among college teachers [5].

3. The Mediating Role of Basic Need Satisfaction

There are many studies that show people can increase their well-being by consciously engaging in a variety of positive activities. Lyubomirsky and Layous [17] proposed the positive-activity model to indicate when and why positive activity enhances well-being and examined the moderating and mediating mechanisms in the relationship. One of the important moderating factors is the person–activity fit, with SU happening to be a positive activity that brings the individual’s strengths into full utilization and fits a person to a high degree. Therefore, SU can improve individuals’ well-being by meeting basic psychological needs. However, limited research has been conducted on how this potential mechanism works through the lens of basic need satisfaction.
Among the theories in positive psychology, the most important theory on satisfaction of basic life needs is the self-determination theory (SDT). The SDT divides basic human needs into three components: autonomy (the need to authentically integrate experience and self-feeling), competence (the need to effectively control one’s environment) and relatedness (the need to foster a sense of connection and belongingness with others) [18][19][20]. It emphasizes basic psychological need satisfaction as a necessary condition for integrity, psychological growth, and well-being [21][22]. Several studies have demonstrated that the satisfaction of three basic psychological needs is related to overall well-being [23][24]. For example, Yang et al.’s research suggested that the satisfaction of basic psychological needs could account for the relationship between nature benefits and psychological well-being [25]. However, Deci proposes a model of eudaimonia based on the SDT. This model argues that behaving in ways that satisfy these three psychological needs reflects eudaimonic living, which thus contributes to high levels of EWB [26].
Furthermore, many studies have demonstrated the relationship between SU and basic need satisfaction [27][28][29][30][31]. For example, Kong and Ho investigate the role of strength use in the workplace by drawing on SDT to propose that strength use at work can yield performance benefits in terms of task performance and discretionary help [28]. SU can fulfill the need for competence by stimulating positive self-feedback and a sense of mastery [29]. Moreover, when employees use their strengths, they perceive their actions as spontaneous, which gives them a sense of autonomy [27]. Employees with a strong sense of autonomy possess the freedom to choose among work-related activities, thereby increasing the likelihood of engagement in many other areas in workplace [30]. In addition, individuals inherently seek respect and acknowledgement from others [30]. Using personal strengths allows individuals to perceive themselves as valuable contributors to a team while preserving their unique identity [31]. Together, these studies have suggested that SU may facilitate the satisfaction of basic needs.
In summary, SU, well-being, and basic need satisfaction seem to be correlated with each other. According to the positive-activity model, which suggests that positive activities such as SU may improve personal well-being by basic need satisfaction [17], it is reasonable to assume that basic psychological needs can mediate the association between SU and well-being at work. However, limited studies have explored this mediation effect.

References

  1. Abdullah, A.; Ling, Y.L.; Peng, C.S. An exploratory analysis of happiness at workplace from Malaysian teachers perspective using performance-welfare model. Int. J. Asian Soc. Sci. 2016, 6, 340–346.
  2. Gorli, M.; Angelo, C.; Corvino, C. Innovation, participation and tutoring as key-leverages to sustain well-being at school. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5622.
  3. Govindji, R.; Linley, P.A. Strengths use, self-concordance and well-being: Implications for strengths coaching and coaching psychologists. Int. Coach. Psychol. Rev. 2007, 2, 143–153.
  4. Bakker; Hetland, J.; Olsen, O.K.; Espevik, R. Daily strengths use and employee well-being: The moderating role of personality. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2019, 92, 144–168.
  5. JIN, W.; Zheng, X.; Gao, L. Basic psychological needs satisfaction mediates the link between strengths use and teachers’ work engagement. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2330.
  6. Satici, S.A.; Uysal, R.; Akin, A. Investigating the relationship between flourishing and self-compassion: A structural equation modeling approach. Psychol. Belg. 2013, 53, 85–99.
  7. Tov, W. Well-Being Concepts and Components. In Handbook of Subjective Well-Being; Noba Scholar: Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 2018.
  8. Momtaz, Y.A.; Hamid, T.A.; Haron, S.A.; Bagat, M.F. Flourishing in later life. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2016, 63, 85–91.
  9. Huang, S.; Yin, H.; Lv, L. Job characteristics and teacher well-being: The mediation of teacher self-monitoring and teacher self-efficacy. Educ. Psychol. 2019, 39, 313–331.
  10. Wang, Y.; King, R.B.; Fu, L.K.; Leung, S.O. Understanding Students’ Subjective and Eudaimonic Well-Being: Combining both Machine Learning and Classical Statistics. In Applied Research in Quality of Life; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2023.
  11. Nina, M.; Pratiwi, H.D.; Wahyuni, A.S.; Wahyuniar, L. Work family balance and optimism as a predictor of women worker’ subjective well-being. In Proceedings of the 2019 Ahmad Dahlan International Conference Series on Education & Learning, Social Science & Humanities (ADICS-ELSSH 2019), Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 26–27 August 2019.
  12. Kundi, Y.M.; Aboramadan, M.; Elhamalawi, E.M.I.; Shahid, S. Employee psychological well-being and job performance: Exploring mediating and moderating mechanisms. Int. J. Organ. Anal. 2020, 29, 736–754.
  13. Harzer, C.; Ruch, W. The application of signature character strengths and positive experiences at work. J. Happiness Stud. 2012, 14, 965–983.
  14. Zhang, Y.; Chen, M. Character Strengths, Strengths Use, Future Self-Continuity and Subjective Well-Being Among Chinese University Students. Front Psychol 2018, 9, 1040.
  15. Hobfoll, S.E.; Halbesleben, J.; Neveu, J.-P.; Westman, M. Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 2018, 5, 103–128.
  16. Hobfoll, S.E. Conservation of resources. Am. Psychol. 1989, 44, 513–524.
  17. Lyubomirsky, S.; Layous, K. How do simple positive activities increase well-being? Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2013, 22, 57–62.
  18. Kwon, M.S.; Jin, J. Exploring the basic psychological needs necessary for the internalized motivation of university students with smartphone overdependence: Applying a self-determination theory. J. Korean Acad. Psychiatr. Ment. Health Nurs. 2019, 28, 26–36.
  19. Deci, E.L.; Ryan, R.M. The \“What\” and \“Why\” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol. Inq. 2000, 11, 227–268.
  20. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. Handb. Self-Determ. Res. 2002, 2, 3–33.
  21. Cuevas, R.; García, T. Basic psychological needs, motivation and engagement in adolescent students. Rev. De Psicol. Del Deporte 2018, 27, 97–104.
  22. Molinari, L.; Mameli, C. Basic psychological needs and school engagement: A focus on justice and agency. Soc. Psychol. Educ. 2017, 21, 157–172.
  23. Krause, A.E.; North, A.C.; Davidson, J.W. Using self-determination theory to examine musical participation and well-being. Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 405.
  24. Church, A.T.; Katigbak, M.S.; Locke, K.D. Need Satisfaction and Well-Being. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 2012, 44, 507–534.
  25. Yang, Y.; Cai, H.; Yang, Z.; Zhao, X.; Li, M.; Han, R.; Chen, S.X. Why does nature enhance psychological well-being?A Self-Determination account. J. Environ. Psychol. 2022, 83, 101872.
  26. Ryan, R.; Huta, V.; Deci, E. Living well: A self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia. J. Happiness Stud. 2008, 9, 139–170.
  27. Bakker; van Woerkom, M. Strengths use in organizations: A positive approach of occupational health. Can. Psychol. Psychol. Can. 2018, 59, 38–46.
  28. Kong, D.T.; Ho, V.T. A self-determination perspective of strengths use at work: Examining its determinant and performance implications. J. Posit. Psychol. 2016, 11, 15–25.
  29. Van Woerkom, M.; Mostert, K.; Els, C.; Bakker, A.B.; de Beer, L.; Rothmann Jr, S. Strengths use and deficit correction in organizations: Development and validation of a questionnaire. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 2016, 25, 960–975.
  30. Cerasoli, C.P.; Nicklin, J.M.; Nassrelgrgawi, A.S. Performance, incentives, and needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness: A meta-analysis. Motiv. Emot. 2016, 40, 781–813.
  31. Farmer, S.M.; Van Dyne, L.; Kamdar, D. The contextualized self: How team-member exchange leads to coworker identification and helping OCB. J. Appl. Psychol. 2015, 100, 583–595.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Psychology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Cangpi Wei
,
Jiahe Su
,
Jingjing Zhao
,
Ke Ding
,
Feng Kong
View Times: 72
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 17 Feb 2024
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Feedback