4.5 Article

Character Strength-Based Intervention to Promote Satisfaction with Life in the Chinese University Context

Journal

JOURNAL OF HAPPINESS STUDIES
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages 1347-1361

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10902-013-9479-y

Keywords

Intervention; Character strengths; Positive psychology; Satisfaction with life

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study examined the efficacy of a strength-based intervention program among Chinese undergraduates to increase satisfaction with life. A total of 285 undergraduates enrolled in an 18-week elective course participated in this study. A 2 (informed about the purposes of the intervention vs. not informed about the purposes of the intervention) x 2 (strength-training intervention vs. experiential control) experimental design was adopted. The Values in Action Inventory of Strengths (VIA-IS) was completed during week two of the course to obtain the personal character strengths profile of each participant. The Satisfaction with Life Scale was adopted as an indicator for this study. Baseline (2nd week), short-term post-test (9th week), and long-term follow-up (18th week) test scores were obtained. All participants increased their satisfaction with life from the baseline to the peaks after the 6-week interventions, and then showed a slow downward trend. In the short-term, the students who were informed about the purpose of the study, as well as those in the strength-training group exhibited more increase in satisfaction with life. However, in the long-term, only those students in the strength-training group sustained the change in satisfaction with life. Strength-based intervention to promote satisfaction with life among Chinese undergraduates was effective. Placebo effect gradually decreased with the passage of time, and eventually disappeared. The results can facilitate the easy-to-use positive intervention in university context.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available