PreprintCited by 30Health, psychology, and well-beingPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionMedicine, History, and Philosophy

Rethinking wellbeing: Toward a more ethical science of wellbeing that considers current and future generations

Open access
mead, Jessica, Fisher, Zoe, Wilkie, Lowri, Gibbs, Katie, Pridmore, Julia, Tree, Jeremy, Kemp, Andrew·2019

Abstract

The construct of wellbeing has been criticised as a neoliberal construction of western individualism that ignores wider systemic issues including increasing burden of chronic disease, widening inequality, concerns over environmental degradation and anthropogenic climate change. While these criticisms overlook recent developments, there remains a need for biopsychosocial models that extend theoretical grounding beyond individual wellbeing, incorporating overlapping contextual issues relating to community and environment. Our first GENIAL model \cite{Kemp_2017} provided a more expansive view of pathways to longevity in the context of individual health and wellbeing, emphasising bidirectional links to positive social ties and the impact of sociocultural factors. In this paper, we build on these ideas and propose GENIAL 2.0, focusing on intersecting individual-community-environmental contributions to health and wellbeing, and laying an evidence-based, theoretical framework on which future research and innovative therapeutic innovations could be based. We suggest that our transdisciplinary model of wellbeing - focusing on individual, community and environmental contributions to personal wellbeing - will help to move the research field forward. In reconceptualising wellbeing, GENIAL 2.0 bridges the gap between psychological science and population health health systems, and presents opportunities for enhancing the health and wellbeing of people living with chronic conditions. Implic…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.22541/au.156649190.08734276

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Cited by 30

Authors
mead, J., Fisher, Z., Wilkie, L., Gibbs, K., Pridmore, J., Tree, J., & Kemp, A.
Affiliations
  • Swansea University (GB)
  • Morriston Hospital (GB)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Kemp, Andrew
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-08-22
OpenAlex
W2972474750
Cited by
30
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, psychology, and well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Medicine, History, and Philosophy
Keywords
well-being, biopsychosocial model, social ties, sociocultural factors, chronic disease, population health, transdisciplinary model, future generations, climate change, environmental degradation, inequality, longevity, therapeutic innovation

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