Towards an integrated scientific agenda on happiness, well-being and human flourishing. A conceptual, exploratory bibliometric and editorial review of the field

Síguenos en Pinterest

Incluido en la revista Ocronos. Vol. IX. N.º 5–Mayo 2026.

Pág. Inicial: Vol. IX; N.º 5: 688

Autor principal (primer firmante): Ignacio Bonasa Alzuria

Fecha recepción: 02/05/2026

Fecha aceptación: 29/05/2026

Ref.: Ocronos. 2026;9(5): 688

https://doi.org/10.58842/ELTP5108

A conceptual, exploratory bibliometric and editorial review of the field

Dr. Ignacio Bonasa Alzuria

Liderarte, Madrid, España / Spain

ORCID iD: 0009-0001-3940-4278

Abstract

Happiness has become a scientific object of growing relevance not only for positive psychology, but also for public health, education, economics, public policy, leadership, technology, culture and organizational studies. The expansion of research on subjective well-being, psychological well-being, quality of life, positive mental health and human flourishing has generated a broad, dynamic and highly interdisciplinary field. Yet this growth coexists with editorial fragmentation: research is distributed across journals in psychology, health, economics, education, quality of life, sociology and management, without a platform specifically designed to integrate happiness as a multidimensional, culturally situated and socially applicable phenomenon.

This article analyzes the academic relevance of an integrated editorial platform such as Happiness Journal: International Journal of Happiness, Well-being and Human Flourishing. It develops a conceptual and exploratory bibliometric review based on three sources of evidence: published bibliometric literature on well-being, happiness and positive psychology; comparative analysis of established journals in related areas; and official criteria for good editorial practice and scientific indexing. The purpose is not to produce a promotional document, but to assess academically whether the field requires a specific, rigorous and indexable editorial platform.

The findings indicate that the happiness field has expanded steadily, that valuable journals already exist in adjacent domains and that, precisely for this reason, a scientific opportunity emerges for a distinct editorial mission: to integrate empirical research, theory, measurement, intervention, public policy, education, health, organizations, art, technology, culture and Global South perspectives under the common axis of human flourishing. The article concludes that a journal such as Happiness Journal would have academic legitimacy if launched with rigorous peer review, editorial transparency, methodological plurality, an international board, multilingual policy, robust publication ethics and a gradual indexing strategy.

Keywords: happiness; subjective well-being; human flourishing; indexed journal; bibliometrics; positive psychology; mental health; education; public policy; editorial ethics.

Introduction

Happiness has been a philosophical question since the origins of ethical reflection. In recent decades, however, it has moved beyond moral philosophy, spirituality and private experience to become a scientific, social, economic and political category. The behavioral sciences have advanced the measurement of subjective well-being; psychology has distinguished hedonic well-being, eudaimonic well-being and optimal functioning; economics has questioned the sufficiency of gross domestic product as an indicator of progress; public health has incorporated positive mental health as a central dimension; and education is increasingly recognizing that learning to live is as important as learning to produce.

The need for a scientific journal specialized in happiness does not arise from commercial intuition, but from a transformation of the knowledge field. Well-being is no longer a peripheral issue or an academic luxury: it has become a strategic question for governments, universities, companies, health systems and communities. The World Happiness Report has consolidated international comparison of well-being as a global conversation; the OECD has promoted the paradigm of measuring progress beyond GDP; the WHO has warned of the scale of the global mental health crisis; and universities increasingly incorporate programs, centers and research lines on well-being, purpose, resilience, mental health, digital life and flourishing.

In this context, the central question of this article is the following: is there a sufficiently strong scientific and editorial gap to justify an international indexable platform devoted to happiness, well-being and human flourishing? The answer defended here is affirmative, but not for a merely nominal reason. A journal such as Happiness Journal would only be justified if it provides an editorial architecture that addresses a real gap: the dispersion of a growing field that needs conceptual integration, methodological plurality, interdisciplinary dialogue and social transfer.

This article does not claim that relevant journals in the area do not exist. On the contrary, it begins by recognizing the value of established publications such as Journal of Happiness Studies, International Journal of Wellbeing, The Journal of Positive Psychology, Applied Research in Quality of Life and Social Indicators Research. The thesis is more precise: although these journals are valuable, the field requires an additional platform that positions happiness as an integrating axis between science, life, institutions and society, with an explicit vocation to connect research, measurement, intervention, public policy and cultural transformation.

Problem statement and research question

The growth of happiness research has produced a paradox. The more well-being is studied, the more difficult it becomes to integrate it. Happiness appears in articles on life satisfaction, positive emotions, meaning in life, quality of life, resilience, mental health, school climate, work engagement, loneliness, trust, inequality, leisure, culture, spirituality, technology, cities, justice, public policy and human development. This richness confirms the vitality of the field, but it also reveals its dispersion.

Fragmentation appears at three levels. First, there is conceptual fragmentation: happiness, subjective well-being, psychological well-being, social well-being, flourishing, positive mental health, quality of life and life satisfaction are sometimes used as synonyms and sometimes as differentiated constructs. Second, there is methodological fragmentation: experimental studies, comparative surveys, qualitative analyses, longitudinal models, systematic reviews, philosophical essays, intervention evaluations and bibliometric approaches coexist. Third, there is editorial fragmentation: results are published in journals from diverse fields, which makes it difficult to build a shared scientific conversation.

The research question may be formulated as follows: what bibliometric, epistemological and editorial evidence justifies the creation of an indexed scientific journal specifically devoted to happiness, well-being and human flourishing? Three objectives follow from this question: first, to analyze the maturity and expansion of the field; second, to identify the editorial gap within the constellation of comparable journals; and third, to propose a scientific architecture that allows Happiness Journal to be launched with legitimacy, differentiation and indexing readiness.

Methodology

The article adopts a conceptual review design supported by exploratory bibliometric evidence. It is not presented as a closed bibliometric study based on a direct Scopus or Web of Science export performed by the author, because such a study would require the complete primary file of records, cleaning criteria, reproducible search strategy, software and technical appendices. To avoid methodological overstatement, this work is defined as a secondary bibliometric and meta-scientific validation: it uses published bibliometric studies, public journal information, official indexing criteria and institutional frameworks on well-being.

The methodological strategy consists of four steps. First, international frameworks confirming the contemporary relevance of happiness and well-being are reviewed: the World Happiness Report, OECD and WHO. Second, recent bibliometric studies on psychological well-being, subjective well-being and positive psychology are synthesized, with attention to temporal growth, dominant areas, productive journals, central authors and geographical gaps. Third, the positioning of related journals is compared in order to identify editorial convergences and gaps. Fourth, the needs of the new journal are contrasted with quality criteria used by DOAJ, Scopus, Web of Science and principles of editorial transparency.

The unit of analysis is not a closed set of articles, but the scientific-editorial ecosystem of happiness as a consolidated emerging field. Therefore, the result does not seek to provide definitive rankings or proprietary metrics, but a robust justification of scientific opportunity. This methodological decision is consistent with the purpose of the article: to demonstrate that Happiness Journal should not be born as a commercial brand, but as an academic response to a real need for integration, quality and international projection.

Theoretical framework: from subjective happiness to human flourishing

Scientific research on happiness is organized around several traditions. The first is subjective well-being, classically represented by Diener, combining life satisfaction, positive affect and negative affect. This tradition made it possible to turn happiness into an empirical construct measurable through scales and comparable surveys. The second tradition is psychological well-being, developed by Ryff, centered on autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations, purpose in life and self-acceptance. The third tradition comes from positive psychology, which opened a systematic research program on strengths, virtues, positive emotions, engagement, meaning and achievement.

A fourth tradition is linked to quality of life and social indicators, connecting subjective experience with objective life conditions: health, income, education, housing, security, relationships, environment and participation. A fifth line comes from moral and political philosophy, especially from capability, dignity and good life approaches. A sixth line develops from public health, which understands well-being not only as absence of illness but as the capacity to live with balance, meaning and healthy bonds.

The concept of human flourishing allows these traditions to be integrated. Flourishing does not simply mean feeling good. It means living meaningfully, developing capabilities, maintaining high-quality relationships, participating in just communities, caring for health, deploying creativity, experiencing purpose and contributing to something beyond individual interest. This breadth is precisely why a journal on happiness cannot be limited to a single disciplinary approach.

A scientific platform such as Happiness Journal should sustain a central premise: happiness is a personal, relational, institutional and cultural phenomenon. It does not belong only to the interiority of the individual. It depends on habits, relationships, organizations, educational systems, economic conditions, cultural norms, technologies, public policies and real opportunities. This ecological understanding turns the journal into a necessary platform for studying happiness as an architecture of life rather than as a superficial emotion.

International evidence: well-being as scientific and public agenda

The relevance of a scientific journal on happiness increases when the centrality that well-being has acquired in the international agenda is observed. The World Happiness Report defines itself as a leading global publication on well-being and combines open data from more than 140 countries with interdisciplinary analysis. Its 2026 edition places the relationship between social media, trust, social connections and youth well-being as a problem of research and public policy.

The OECD has developed a well-being framework that seeks to monitor societal progress beyond GDP. This shift is scientifically relevant because it moves attention from economic production to the real quality of people’s lives. Measuring progress requires evaluating not only how much an economy grows, but whether people live better, with more health, security, relationships, opportunities, trust and capacity for the future.

The WHO has pointed out that more than one billion people live with mental health disorders, with anxiety and depression imposing an immense human and economic burden. This reality does not turn happiness into a lightweight topic; on the contrary, it shows that promoting well-being, preventing avoidable suffering and understanding the determinants of positive mental health constitute scientific and social priorities.

Taken together, these institutional frameworks show that happiness has become a boundary object between science, public policy and culture. A specialized journal would have the function of organizing, evaluating and projecting research capable of guiding decisions in education, health, work, cities, technology and development.

Exploratory bibliometric evidence

Recent bibliometric literature confirms that the well-being field has expanded steadily. Yigit and colleagues analyzed 16,885 academic studies on psychological well-being published in Web of Science between 1980 and 2022, showing continuous growth in publications and citations, with a particular intensification after 2016. This should not be interpreted only as quantitative growth, but as a sign of scientific maturity: a field begins to need specialized journals when it moves beyond dispersed production and requires synthesis, standards and a shared conversation.

Other bibliometric works on well-being and happiness identify relevant increases since the 2000s, associated with the development of positive psychology, the expansion of well-being measurement and the incorporation of the topic into health, education and organizations. Bibliometrics on positive psychology and well-being in Africa also shows that production does not grow homogeneously: there are regional asymmetries, dependence on certain countries and institutions, and a need for culturally sensitive frameworks.

The integrated reading of these studies allows five findings to be extracted. First, research on happiness and well-being is growing. Second, the field is diversifying thematically. Third, central authors and journals come from several disciplines. Fourth, research maintains geographical and linguistic biases. Fifth, the future agenda requires integrating contextual, bio-psycho-social, cultural and ecological factors of well-being. These findings justify a new journal if its editorial identity responds to these needs and does not merely replicate existing journals.

Table 1. Secondary bibliometric synthesis of the field

See table appended at the end of the document.

Comparison of existing journals and editorial gap

A new journal is justified only if it recognizes the value of existing journals and, at the same time, identifies a legitimate differential contribution. Journal of Happiness Studies offers a consolidated international forum for theoretical and applied advances in well-being research, with attention to hedonic and eudaimonic perspectives. International Journal of Wellbeing presents itself as an interdisciplinary, open access, fee-free journal devoted to all aspects of well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology focuses on the science and application of positive psychology and optimal human functioning. Applied Research in Quality of Life and Social Indicators Research connect quality of life, social indicators and evaluation of progress.

The existence of these journals does not remove the need for a new integrated scientific platform; on the contrary, it reinforces it if its editorial identity is genuinely distinctive. It reinforces it, provided that the new publication is not redundant. The editorial gap is not that there is no research on well-being, but that there is a need for a journal designed from the beginning to integrate happiness, well-being and human flourishing with seven simultaneous features: strong interdisciplinary perspective, intercultural sensitivity, public policy orientation, connection with education and organizations, openness to art and culture, critical study of technology and multilingual vocation.

A journal such as Happiness Journal should avoid two risks. The first would be to become a positive psychology journal under another name. The second would be to become a divulgative space without scientific demands. Its value would be to occupy an intermediate and rigorous position: high-quality science, but oriented toward real problems of human and social life. This position would allow the publication of empirical articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, theoretical essays, intervention studies, methodological articles, policy papers and comparative studies.

Table 2. Comparable journals and proposed differentiation

See table appended at the end of the document.

Results: scientific reasons for an integrated editorial platform

The review allows seven scientific reasons for an integrated platform such as Happiness Journal to be formulated. The first is the expansion of the field. A growing volume of literature requires editorial spaces capable of organizing trends, raising standards and generating cumulative conversations. The second is transversality. Happiness appears in health, education, economics, sociology, philosophy, leadership, technology and culture, but few journals are designed to integrate all these languages organically.

The third reason is the need for conceptual clarity. The journal could become a space for discussion on definitions, models and measurements of happiness, well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life and flourishing. The fourth reason is applied urgency. Well-being is no longer only an academic topic, but a need for public policies, educational intervention, mental health prevention and organizational management. The fifth reason is epistemic equity. The field needs more voices from the Global South, more multilingual research and more cultural sensitivity.

The sixth reason is digital transition. Technological life is changing attention, relationships, identity, loneliness, social comparison, work and learning. A happiness journal must address the relationship between well-being, artificial intelligence, social media, the attention economy and digital ethics. The seventh reason is humanistic integration. Happiness cannot be studied only with scales: it also requires ethics, meaning, beauty, art, culture, dignity and purpose.

These reasons are not slogans. They constitute a cumulative scientific argument: when a field grows, disperses, impacts public policy, contains open conceptual debates and requires cultural plurality, the creation of a specialized journal is an academically legitimate response.

Table 3. Evidence supporting an integrated scientific platform on happiness

See table appended at the end of the document.

Proposed scientific identity of the journal

From this perspective, Happiness Journal could be defined as an international, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary, multilingual scientific journal oriented toward the rigorous study of happiness, well-being and human flourishing. Its mission should not be to promote a naive view of happiness, but to investigate critically the conditions that allow fuller lives, healthier societies and more humane organizations.

The journal should accept quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, theoretical, bibliometric and intervention research. It should also encourage articles of high social relevance when they maintain methodological rigor: studies on youth well-being, education for happiness, positive mental health, healthy organizations, well-being policies, loneliness, aging, digital well-being, art and transformation, meaning in life, spirituality, community resilience and well-being in contexts of poverty or inequality.

The editorial identity can be summarized in a formula: scientific rigor, human depth and social impact. This triad differentiates the journal from purely psychological, exclusively economic, strictly clinical or merely divulgative publications. The journal would not treat happiness as a consumer product, but as a transversal academic field with implications for the good life, social justice and the sustainability of human development.

Proposed editorial architecture

The editorial architecture of a journal such as Happiness Journal should be organized into stable sections reflecting the complexity of the field. A first section, Science of Happiness and Subjective Well-being, would address measurement, life satisfaction, emotions, affect, scales and comparative models. A second, Psychological Well-being and Human Flourishing, would integrate purpose, personal growth, strengths, meaning and optimal functioning. A third, Mental Health, Prevention and Positive Functioning, would connect well-being with public health, prevention and promotion of positive mental health.

A fourth section, Education for Happiness and Well-being, would study educational programs, university well-being, emotional education, habit-based learning, art-based learning and pedagogies of meaning. A fifth, Organizations, Leadership and Workplace Well-being, would investigate healthy cultures, humanistic leadership, engagement, trust, purpose and workplace well-being. A sixth, Public Policy, Inequality and Beyond GDP, would address indicators, public policies, social justice, poverty, inequality, national well-being and evaluation of progress.

A seventh section, Technology, Digital Life and Well-being, would study social media, artificial intelligence, the attention economy, digital well-being and technological ethics. An eighth, Art, Culture and Meaning, would integrate art, beauty, creativity, aesthetic experience and transformation. A ninth, Global South and Intercultural Perspectives, would give prominence to non-Western studies, community knowledge and intercultural comparisons. Finally, a Methodology, Measurement and Bibliometrics section would allow publication of instrument validation, bibliometric analyses, evaluation models and methodological innovations.

Indexing readiness and editorial ethics

To be indexable, a journal such as Happiness Journal must be born with quality criteria from its first issue. Indexing cannot be improvised later. DOAJ requires open access journals to publish scholarly research, target researchers or practitioners, comply with transparency best practices and, in the case of newly launched journals, accumulate more than one year of publishing history or ten open access research articles before applying. Scopus evaluates editorial policy, peer review, geographical diversity, content quality, regularity, citedness and online availability. Web of Science uses quality and impact criteria oriented toward editorial rigor, good practice and citation activity.

This means that the journal should design from the outset a clear editorial policy, double-blind peer review, publication ethics guidelines, conflict of interest statements, correction and retraction policy, declaration on the use of artificial intelligence, plagiarism screening, DOI, ORCID, digital preservation, open licenses, author instructions, acceptance criteria, stable publication calendar and international editorial board.

Ethical compliance is not a formality. It is the foundation of credibility. A journal on happiness must be especially careful not to fall into trivialization, pseudoscience, unevaluated self-help or therapeutic promises without evidence. Happiness needs serious science precisely because it is an attractive topic and therefore vulnerable to superficial uses.

Table 4. Indexing readiness by design

See table appended at the end of the document.

Discussion

The main finding of this article is that a journal such as Happiness Journal is not justified by an attractive name, but by a structural need in the field. Happiness is increasingly researched, but the conversation remains dispersed. Existing journals contribute greatly, but none exhausts the possibility of a platform that integrates happiness, well-being and flourishing with an editorial matrix simultaneously oriented to science, life, institutions and society.

The discussion must acknowledge that creating a new journal in a saturated editorial ecosystem requires prudence. Declaring a broad mission is not enough. Breadth may become weakness if it is not accompanied by rigorous criteria. For this reason, Happiness Journal should be launched with a broad but not diffuse scope: every article should demonstrate an explicit relationship with happiness, well-being or human flourishing and provide verifiable evidence, theory or methodology.

The journal would also need to balance universality and context. Happiness is not identical across cultures. Comparable indicators are necessary, but not sufficient. An international publication must avoid imposing a Western, individualistic or economistic definition of happiness. The inclusion of intercultural, Latin American, African, Asian and indigenous perspectives would not be an inclusive ornament, but a scientific requirement to improve the external validity of the field.

Finally, the journal can add value if it operates as a bridge between research and transformation. The science of happiness should not remain in the description of correlations. It must evaluate interventions, guide policies, improve organizations, enrich education, humanize technology and contribute to a culture of care. This bridge function, if maintained with rigor, constitutes the greatest differential of Happiness Journal.

Limitations

This article presents a conceptual and exploratory bibliometric validation, not a complete primary bibliometric study. Its conclusions are supported by published bibliometric literature, official sources and comparative analysis, but they do not replace an original extraction from Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions or OpenAlex with full record cleaning. For final empirical validation, a primary bibliometric study should be conducted with a PRISMA strategy, record export, Keywords co-occurrence analysis, co-authorship networks, bibliographic coupling, co-citation, country productivity and thematic evolution.

Another limitation is that the field changes rapidly. New journals, indexes, editorial criteria and research trends may modify the diagnosis. Therefore, the creation of Happiness Journal should be accompanied by an annual observatory of the field, capable of updating metrics, detecting emerging topics and guiding special issues.

Conclusions

The creation of Happiness Journal is scientifically defensible if it is formulated as a response to a real gap: the need for an international, interdisciplinary, ethical and indexable platform devoted to integrating research on happiness, well-being and human flourishing. The bibliometric growth of the field, thematic diversity, social relevance of well-being, contemporary crises of mental health and meaning, and the need for intercultural approaches justify a new journal with its own identity.

The journal would be different not because it promises happiness, but because it studies it rigorously. Its legitimacy will depend on avoiding commercial tone, rejecting pseudoscience, sustaining demanding peer review, publishing high-quality research and building an international editorial community. If launched in this way, Happiness Journal can become a necessary scientific infrastructure to study how people, organizations and societies can live better.

The central conclusión can be expressed as follows: happiness has reached sufficient scientific maturity, social urgency and interdisciplinary complexity to require its own journal, one that does not reduce well-being to positive psychology, quality of life, mental health or public policy, but integrates them into a broader vision of human flourishing. Happiness Journal should not be a brand; it should be an architecture of knowledge at the service of a healthier, more conscious and more dignified humanity.

References

1. Aknin, L. B., Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., De Neve, J.-E., Sachs, J. D., & Wang, S. (Eds.). (2025). World Happiness Report 2025. University of Oxford: Wellbeing Research Centre.
2. Aknin, L. B., Helliwell, J. F., Huang, H., Rojas, M., Wang, S., Guerra, V., & Danyluk, A. (2026). International evidence on happiness and social media. In World Happiness Report 2026. University of Oxford: Wellbeing Research Centre.
3. Aristotle. (1999). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, Trans.). Hackett Publishing.
4. Boniel-Nissim, M., Marino, C., Galeotti, T., Blinka, L., Ozoliņa, K., Craig, W., & Inchley, J. (2024). Problematic social media use and adolescent well-being across countries. Journal of Adolescent Health, 74(4), 657-665.
5. Clarivate. (2026). Journal evaluation process and selection criteria. Web of Science Core Collection.
6. Committee on Publication Ethics, Directory of Open Access Journals, Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association, & World Association of Medical Editors. (2022). Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing.
7. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
8. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542-575.
9. Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2018). Advances and open questions in the science of subjective well-being. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), 15.
10. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 253-260.
11. Directory of Open Access Journals. (2026). Guide to applying. DOAJ.
12. Elsevier. (2026). Scopus content policy and selection. Elsevier.
13. Fadiji, A. W., Khumalo, I. P., & Wissing, M. P. (2024). A bibliometric review of positive psychology and well-being research in Africa. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1384362.
14. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218-226.
15. Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., Sachs, J. D., De Neve, J.-E., Aknin, L. B., & Wang, S. (Eds.). (2024). World Happiness Report 2024. University of Oxford: Wellbeing Research Centre.
16. Hendriks, T., Schotanus-Dijkstra, M., Hassankhan, A., de Jong, J., & Bohlmeijer, E. (2019). The efficacy of positive psychology interventions from non-Western countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Wellbeing, 9(1), 71-98.
17. Hone, L. C., Jarden, A., Schofield, G. M., & Duncan, S. (2014). Measuring flourishing: The impact of operational definitions on the prevalence of high levels of wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing, 4(1), 62-90.
18. Huppert, F. A. (2009). Psychological well-being: Evidence regarding its causes and consequences. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1(2), 137-164.
19. International Journal of Wellbeing. (2026). About the journal. International Journal of Wellbeing.
20. Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 3-24.
21. Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), 207-222.
22. Krys, K., Vauclair, C.-M., Capaldi, C. A., Lun, V. M.-C., Bond, M. H., Domínguez-Espinosa, A., & Uchida, Y. (2025). Happiness maximization is a WEIRD way of living. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 20(1), 3-22.
23. Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. Penguin.
24. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect. Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803-855.
25. Nussbaum, M. C. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Harvard University Press.
26. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being. OECD Publishing.
27. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2024). How’s Life? 2024: Measuring well-being. OECD Publishing.
28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2025). OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being: 2025 update. OECD Publishing.
29. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2026). Measuring well-being and progress. OECD.
30. Ozkok, Z., Rosborough, J., & Malloy, B. (2026). Internet use, social media, and wellbeing: The role of trust, social connections, and emotional bonds. In World Happiness Report 2026. University of Oxford: Wellbeing Research Centre.
31. Priem, J., Piwowar, H., & Orr, R. (2022). OpenAlex: A fully-open index of scholarly works, authors, venues, institutions, and concepts. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.01833
32. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141-166.
33. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069-1081.
34. Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719-727.
35. Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. Free Press.
36. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14.
37. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press.
38. Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.
39. Taylor & Francis. (2026). The Journal of Positive Psychology: Aims and scope. Taylor & Francis.
40. VanderWeele, T. J. (2017). On the promotion of human flourishing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(31), 8148-8156.
41. Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 678-691.
42. World Health Organization. (2022). World mental health report: Transforming mental health for all. WHO.
43. World Health Organization. (2025). Over a billion people living with mental health conditions: Services require urgent scale-up. WHO.
44. Yiğit, B., Özdemir, S., & Baran, H. (2024). Discovering psychological well-being: A bibliometric review. Journal of Happiness Studies, 25, 1-28.

Anexos: PDF

Síguenos en Pinterest