Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Communal Pathways to Well-Being
An extensive review of the literature on communal pathways to well-being indicates the prevalence of four major themes related to the importance of social relationships for well-being: social connectedness, social harmony, social mutuality and flocking.
Social connectedness refers directly to the notion that people live and function in relation to others. In this light, a complex interplay exists between being independent and able to cope on one’s own, being dependent but feeling as if one can ask for and accept help where necessary and being willing and feeling able to give assistance to others in their time of need (Constantine et al., 2004; Fozdar, 2008; Ingersoll-Dayton et al., 2004; King et al., 2009; Shu & Zhu, 2009). Various studies have highlighted the role that both affective and instrumental support play (Constantine & Sue, 2006; Cox, 2012; Siu & Phillips, 2002; Suh & Oishi, 2002) in well-being. Friends and family both play an important role in providing for the affective and instrumental needs of others. In terms of affective support (Siu & Phillips, 2002), family and friends seem to come together to create an internal support network for people, which functions as a source of personal empowerment and cultural resources for facilitating coping schemata, coping strategies and adaptive coping resources (Constantine & Sue, 2006).These affective support resources enable individuals to adjust their outlook on adversity, as well as their subjective interpretations of their environment when they are faced with various hardships. The term ‘provision of instrumental support’ refers to the ability to offer or receive practical support strategies: these would typically include having someone to help with the provision of fresh food; looking after another’s children while he or she is at work; or helping out around the house, all of which play a role in uplifting morale and the sense of being able to cope with one’s day-to-day responsibilities (Siu & Phillips, 2002).
Social connectedness involves a degree of striving for independence because it is important to ensure that others are not burdened to the degree that they are not able to cope. This may occur because their perceived sense of responsibility to others in the community exceeds whatever they are realistically able to offer both affectively and instrumentally (Ingersoll-Dayton et al., 2004). Maintaining harmony and equilibrium between ‘give-and-take’ in the community becomes important, because without this balance, additional stressors in the community may be created (Ingersoll-Dayton et al., 2004).
Social harmony refers to the importance of feeling included (sense of belonging) in one’s community, living with a sense of safety and experiencing peace. Social harmony is integrally connected to social connectedness, as well as to social mutuality and flocking. In order to experience social harmony, people need to be socially connected to and socially engaged (referring to social mutuality) with their social sphere. People must also be able to capitalise on the social resources available within their environment (referring to flocking). Social harmony differs from social connectedness because it focusses on the quality of relationships with others in one’s environment (Fozdar, 2008; King et al., 2009; Lu & Gilmour, 2006; Pflug, 2009; Sotgiu, Galati, Manzano & Rognoni, 2011). For example, Thomas, Cairney, Gunthorpe, Paradies and Sayers (2010) argue that indigenous perspectives on mental health include being in harmony with one’s country, lawfulness, social and kinship relationships. Ingersoll-Dayton et al. (2004) regard the avoidance of conflict, healthy relationships with one’s life partner, children and extended family, as well as with friends and neighbours as important to well-being. Ingersoll-Dayton et al. (2004) also believe that in maintaining positive relationships with others, individuals are more likely to experience feelings of security and a sense of inclusion in their community. Lu and Gilmour (2006) maintain that the collective welfare of one’s community (defined by the health of the social relationships that make up a community) is more important than the interests of individuals living within that community. Therefore, if an individual is to contribute positively to the quality of relationships within a community (so that social harmony may be experienced) then that person may sometimes need to make sacrifices for the good of the village (King et al., 2009).
Social mutuality refers to the notion that in order to experience well-being from a non-Western perspective, one must act in accordance with one’s cultural group (Diener, Gohm, Suh & Oishi, 2000; Ingersoll-Dayton et al., 2004; Kitayama, Markus & Kurokawa, 2000; Oishi, 2000). For example, it may be necessary to ensure that one’s required roles and responsibilities are performed in line with certain cultural norms and standards. Moreover, it may be necessary to act on the basis of others’ needs and expectations when making decisions and engaging in certain behaviours. Kitayama et al. (2000) argue that in striving for social mutuality, it is important to ‘fit in’ with one’s culture and social group. Individuals may need to adjust the status and nature of their relationships so that they become members of that group. They may also need to constrain, tame or condition their desires and wishes to facilitate interpersonal harmony and unity (Uchida, Norasakkunkit & Kitayama, 2004).
Acting in line with community-based values such as respect is important in ensuring social mutuality. In most indigenous societies, respect is regarded as fundamental to well-being. In the context of Ingersoll-Dayton et al.’s (2004) study, respect is defined as listening to, and following the advice of the others in the community, particularly one’s elders. Respect is regarded as important to the experience of well-being, because it is seen as a marker of success, as well as an indicator of one’s social standing in the community. Moreover, the level of respect which an individual receives is regarded as a reflection of the wisdom which that individual holds. Respect affirms an individual’s success as a parent and indicates that the individual’s children will care for them in the future. All these markers of respect are also important cultural indicators of social mutuality, and are strived for by most non-Western societies.
The goals which people strive towards also play an important role in the degree of social mutuality which they are able to achieve. According to Oishi (2000), pathways to well-being differ across cultures depending on their salient needs and values. The goals which a culture or society strives toward will also be determined by its needs and values. Therefore, if people are to live happily and in relation with others, they must take into account the external standards which their culture, family or village may exert on their lifestyle, and try to live in accordance with these standards. For example, marriage is typically regarded as an important cultural institution which non-Western young men and women strive towards. In pursuing a healthy marriage, many young men and women are able to uphold the traditional values of their culture and realise one of the goals which their parents and community as a whole have set for them (Diener et al., 2000).
The last theme related to communal pathways to well-being which emerged from the literature pertains to the idea of ‘flocking’ (Ebersöhn, 2012; 2014). The central tenet of flocking is that individuals are regarded as related to or connected with others (as discussed in previous sections) via relationships. These relationships imply that individuals are also connected with many resources through the relationships that they build with others, which may be used to address adversity. By virtue of the relationships which individuals develop with others in their community, they also develop relationship skills which can be used to “access, mobilise and sustain resources used to counteract ongoing risk” (Ebersöhn, 2012; p. 30). Yip, Subramanian, Mitchell, Lee, Wang and Kawachi (2007), make use of the term “cognitive social capital” (p. 35) to explain a phenomenon similar to flocking, where collective action (such as trust, reciprocity and sense of belonging) and emotional support are used to facilitate social networks and support mechanisms with a view to experiencing well-being. Farid and Lazarus (2008) refer to “social capital” (p. 1053) as processes such as trust, social support and cooperation which can be accessed and mobilised to enhance relationships and improve the experience of well-being. One factor that all of these terms have in common is that they involve a process of mobilising networks of kinship, acquaintances and ties in order to manage and address stress and risk.
Human Pathways to Well-Being
Human pathways to well-being are defined as pathways important to individuals in their personal capacity that affect well-being. In order to understand human pathways to well-being, we need to acknowledge the role that one’s indigenous well-being knowledge system plays in one’s perceptions and experiences of certain phenomena. For example, Suh (2009) argues that the self stands at the juncture of culture and well-being. In order to understand how and why certain cultures perceive well-being in a given light, it is necessary to understand how certain cultures influence the self. This is because culture provides form and shape to the self and influences how individuals think and feel about various aspects of their lives. As mentioned previously, most non-Western cultures believe that an individual exists in relation to others. Thus, individuals are considered to be fundamentally socially-oriented (Yang, 2000), situation-centred (Hsu, 1953), interdependent (Markus & Kitayama, 1991) and inextricably bound with others through emotional ties (Kim & Choi, 1994).
Research (Suh, Diener, Oishi & Triandis, 1998; Suh, 2009) suggests that the self plays a central role in determining the relative weight which is assigned to internal or external information when making judgements about one’s life satisfaction. Traditional Western psychology approaches maintain that the most effective way to judge one’s life is to become introspective and reflect on one’s internal feelings and thoughts (Suh et al., 1998). Individualistic communities, where the independent elements of self-esteem are endorsed, match this traditional assumption. However, when individuals regard themselves first and foremost as living in relation to others, the way in which they evaluate themselves seems to be based most significantly on external social information.
Four prevalent human pathways to well-being could be considered in relation to the greater indigenous well-being system: the importance of the past self, acceptance of one’s life circumstances, physical health and enjoyment of simple pleasures. According to Kim, Cai, Gilliland, Chiu, Xia and Tam (2012), the way that individuals consider their past selves may be just as important as how they judge their present selves when talking about well-being in a non-Western context. People originating from European American cultures seem to discount the past when evaluating their present lives. However, people from non-Western cultures appear to respect the past when evaluating their current lives. The amount of attention paid to one’s past (while considering one’s present) may be linked to the fact that the self is perceived differently in various cultures (Kim et al., 2012). The fact that the self is either intertwined with or separated from the present and past thus influences how much thought is given to one’s past when making judgements about the state of one’s well-being. Non-Western populations appear to have a greater tendency to consider their present selves as a reflection of and connection to, their past selves (Briley, 2009; Briley & Aaker, 2006; Ji, Guo, Zhang & Messervey, 2009; Morris & Peng, 1994; Wang & Conway, 2004). Moreover, indigenous communities believe that they may benefit by reflecting on and learning from the past (Briley, 2009; Stevenson & Stigler, 1992; Wang & Conway, 2004).
Insight into how past selves are incorporated into current experiences of well-being may have important implications for understanding the ways in which non-Western societies choose to live their lives. For instance, Asian Americans may be more culturally-prepared to gain life satisfaction by indulging in nostalgic memories of glory from the past even though this type of nostalgia may actually lead to them losing life satisfaction through the recollection of unpleasant experiences in the past (Kim et al., 2012). Both pleasant and unpleasant events in the past may have a longer lasting impact on the subjective well-being of Asian Americans than they would have on European Americans. On the one hand, this tendency may prepare Asian Americans to learn from past experience and would support them in improving their current selves (Cheng & Schweitzer, 1996; Stevenson & Stigler, 1992). On the other hand, they may be more inclined than European Americans to indulge in past glory or allow themselves to be haunted by their past (Kim et al., 2012). This would make it very difficult for them to move forward with their current lives.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 PURPOSE AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.3 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
1.4 CLARIFICATION EXISTING CONCEPTS USED IN THE STUDY
1.5 PARADIGMATIC LENSES
1.6 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
1.7 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
1.8 DELIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
1.9 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
1.10 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 WESTERN KNOWLEDGE ON EXISTING PATHWAYS TO RESILIENCE AND WELL-BEING
2.3 NON-WESTERN KNOWLEDGE ON EXISTING PATHWAYS TO RESILIENCE AND WELL-BEING
2.4 EXPLORING THE DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES BETWEEN WESTERN AND NON-WESTERN WELL-BEING KNOWLEDGE
2.5 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK INSPIRED BY BRONFENBRENNER’S BIO-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS THEORY
2.5 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND STRATEGIES
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN: COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY DESIGN
3.3 OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS AND ACTIVITIES
3.4 PRA DATA GENERATION AND DOCUMENTATION
3.5 DATA SOURCE PREPARATION
3.6 DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
3.7 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
3.8 QUALITY CRITERIA OF THE STUDY
3.9 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4
THEME 1: DIMENSIONAL CONNECTEDNESS AS PATHWAY TO WELL-BEING
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 SUBTHEME 1.1: COMMUNAL PATHWAYS TO WELL-BEING
4.3 SUBTHEME 1.2: SPIRITUAL PATHWAYS TO WELL-BEING
4.4 LITERATURE CONTROL: SYNOPSIS OF FINDINGS ON THIS SUBTHEME
4.5 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS REGARDING COMMUNAL AND SPIRITUAL CONNECTEDNESS AS INDIGENOUS PATHWAY TO WELL-BEING
4.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5
THEME 2: HUMAN PATHWAYS TO WELL-BEING
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 SUBTHEME 2.1: SELF-PERCEIVED SELF-EFFICACY AS PATHWAY TO WELL-BEING
5.3 SUBTHEME 2.2: MAINTAINING HEALTH AS PATHWAY TO WELL-BEING
5.4 SUBTHEME 2.3: ENJOYING SIMPLE PLEASURES AS PATHWAY TO WELL-BEING
5.5 SUMMARY OF SIMILARITIES, CONTRADICTIONS AND NEW INSIGHTS IN THEME
CHAPTER 5
THEME 2: HUMAN PATHWAYS TO WELL-BEING
5.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 ANSWERING RESEARCH QUESTIONS
6.3 SUGGESTIONS
REFERENCE LIST
