Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 367

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Measuring well-being: A comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA

Goodman, Fallon R., Disabato, David J., Kashdan, Todd B., Kauffman, Scott Barry·2018·The Journal of Positive Psychology

Abstract

We compared Seligman’s PERMA model of well-being with Diener’s model of subjective well-being (SWB) to determine if the newer PERMA captured a type of well-being unique from the older SWB. Participants were 517 adults who completed self-report measures of SWB, PERMA, and VIA character strengths. Results from four analytic techniques suggest the factor underlying PERMA is capturing the same type of well-being as SWB. Confirmatory factor analysis yielded a latent correlation of r = 0.98 between SWB and PERMA. Exploratory structural equation modeling found two highly related factors (r = 0.85) that did not map onto PERMA and SWB. SWB and PERMA factors showed similar relationships with 24 character strengths (average correlation difference = 0.02). Latent profile analyses yielded subgroups of people who merely scored high, low, or mid-range on well-being indicators. Our findings suggest that while lower-order indicators SWB and PERMA have unique features, they converge onto a single well-being factor.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17439760.2017.1388434

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 77 references

Cited by

See all 367

Metadata

Authors
Goodman, F. R., Disabato, D. J., Kashdan, T. B., & Kauffman, S. B.
Venue
The Journal of Positive Psychology
Published
2017-10-10
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
321-332
ISSN
  • 1743-9760 (ISSN-L)
  • 1743-9779
OpenAlex
W2762801325
Cited by
367
References
77
FWCI
22.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Measuring well-being: A comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/17439760.2017.1388434
The paper
Goodman, F. R., Disabato, D. J., Kashdan, T. B., & Kauffman, S. B. (2018). Measuring well-being: A comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA. The Journal of Positive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2017.1388434

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.