The purpose of the article is to analyze modern concepts that are used to describe the optimal functioning of an individual. The most common concepts in positive psychology are: happiness, psychological well-being, flourishing. The plurality of terminology is associated with the existence of different approaches to determining the existential goal of human life: pleasure or benefit. Attempts to operationalize the components of well-being cause some difficulty. They are difficult to separate from predictors and psychological consequences of well-being. Attempts to overcome the methodological limitations of each of the approaches are concentrated in two directions. The structural-tiered approach focuses on identifying structural components, types of well-being, and finding ways to relate them to each other. The integral approach tries to find a new generalizing definition for all concepts of optimal human functioning.

Personal well-being is a concept that unites all the signs of optimal conditions and human functioning. First, subjectivity is the individual experience of their own functioning in everyday life as a result of self-determination in the present and expectations for the future, which depend on the implicit concept of well-being. Second, the affective component is emotional and evaluative attitude to individual events and life in general. Third, a prerequisite is the positivity of such an assessment – the presence of certain positive experiences as a result of perception of an objective life situation, the balance of positive and negative emotions. Fourth, the presence of external and internal criteria: on the one hand, compliance with the system of values inherent in this culture, on the other, the assessment of daily efforts and living conditions. Fifth, self-determination is the ability of a person to determine the nature of the optimal interaction between him and the environment, to some extent to control it and be responsible for the consequences.

Personal well-being is interpreted as an existential multi-concept that reflects the balance between the subject’s search for satisfaction in various spheres of life according to the implicit concept of well-being and the disclosure of personal potential and harmony between inner and outer world, based on significant emotional characteristics and positive personality traits.

Key words: happiness, psychological well-being, flourishing, subjective well-being, personal well-being.

References

1. Gasper, D. (2004), “Human well-being: concepts and conceptualizations” / in M. McGillivray (Ed.), Measuring well-being, UNU-WIDER, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 1–44.
2. La Placa, V., McNaught, A. and Knight, A. (2013), “Discourse on wellbeing in research and practice”, International Journal of Wellbeing, Vol. 3, 1, pp. 116–125. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v3i1.7
3. Dodge, R., Daly, A., Huyton, J. and Sanders, L. (2012), “The challenge of defining wellbeing”, International Journal of Wellbeing,2, No. 3, pp. 222–235.https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v2i3.4
4. Boniwell, І., David, S. and Ayers A. C. (2013), The Oxford handbook of happiness, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
5. Alkire, (2002), “Dimensions of human development”, World Development, pp. 181–205.
6. Seligman, (2011), Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being, Free press, New-York. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00109-7
7. Huppert, F.  (2009), “A new approach to reducing disorder and improving well-being” / in E. Diener (Ed.), Perspectives on Psychological Science, pp. 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01100.x
8. Huppert, А. and So, T. C. (2013), ““Flourishing across Europe: application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being”, Social Indicator Research, Vol. 110, pp. 837–861.
9. Raibley, (2011), “Happiness is not Well-being”, Journal of Happiness Studies,Vol. 19, pp. 1–25.
10. Diener, E., Suh, E., Lucas, R.E. and Smith, H. L. (1999), “Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 125, pp. 276–302.
11. Kulikov, L. (2004), Personality psychohygiene. Issues of psychological stability and psychoprophylaxis, St.Petersburg, Piter.
12. Danylchenko, T. V. (2016), Subjective social well-being: psychological measuring, Desna Poligraph, Chernihiv. https://doi.org/10.29038/2227-1376-2016-28-93-107
13. Brulde, B. (2007), “Happiness theories of the good life”, Journal of Happiness Studies, No.8, pp.15–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-006-9003-8
14. Diener, E. and Lucas, R. (2000), “Explaining differences in societal levels of happiness: Relative standards, need fulfilment, culture and evaluation theory”, Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol. 1, pp. 41–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276/em>https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010076127199
15. Kashdan, T. , Biswas-Diener, R. and King, L.A. (2008), “Reconsidering happiness: the costs of distinguishing between hedonics and eudaimonia”, The Journal of Positive Psychology,Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760802303044
16. Parducci, A. (1995), Happiness, pleasure, and judgment: The contextual theory and its applications, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
17. Sozontov, A. (2006), “Hedonic and eudemonic approaches to psychological well-being”, Voprosy psikhologii, No. 4, pp. 105–114.
18. Troshikhina, E. and Manukyan, V.R. (2017), “Anxiety and stable emotional states in the structure of psycho-emotional well-being”, Vestnik SPbGU, Psikhologiya i pedagogika, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. С. 211–223.
19. Grishina, N. (2018), Existential psychology, SPbGU, St.Petersburg.
20. Diener, Е. (2013), “The Remarkable Changes in the Science of Subjective Well-Being”, Perspectives on Psychological Science,8, No. 6, pp. 663–666. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613507583
21. Gilbert, D. (2015),Stumbling on Happiness, Al’pina Pablisher, Moscow. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972622520150108
22. Zimbardo, P. and Boyd, J. (2010), The paradox of time. A new psychology of timing that will improve your life, Rech, Petersburg.
23. Kahneman, D. (2010), “Objective happiness” / inKahneman, E. Diener, N. Schwarz (Eds.), Wellbeing: The foundations of hedonic psychology, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp.3–25.
24. Zotova, O. (2017), Psychological well-being of the personal, Humanitarian University, Yekaterinburg.
25. Leontiev, D., Rasskazova, E.I. (2006), What is needed for happiness: cultural, regional and individual differences and invariants of sources of happiness, Vestnik KRAUNTS, No. 2, pp. 3–12.
26. Rath, T. and Harter, J. (2011), Five elements of well-being: Tools for improving the quality of life, Al’pina Pablisherz, Moscow.
27. Hettler, (1984), “Wellness: Encouraging a life time pursuit of excellence”, Health values, Vol. 8, No.4, pp. 13–17.
28. Pollard, and Lee, Р. (2003), “Child Well-Being: A Systematic Review of the Literature”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 59–78. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021284215801
29. Masters,N. (2004), Conceptualising and Researching Student Wellbeing, Research conference, available at: http://research.acer.edu.au /cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=research_conference_2004 (accessed 15 January 2016).
30. Michaelson,, Abdallah, S., Steuer, N., Thompson, S. and Marks, N. (2009), National accounts of well-being: Bringing real wealth onto the balance sheet, New Economics Foundation, London.
31. Levit, L. (2016), Psychology of development and implementation of the living potential of the sub’ect: avtoref. dys. … dokt. psykh. nauk, 19.00.01, Kyiv.
32. Gallagher,W., Lopez, S.J. and Preacher, K. J. (2009), “The Hierarchical Structure of Well-Being”, Journal of Personality, Vol. 77, No. 4, pp. 1025–1049. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00573.x
33. Levit, L. and Radchikova, N.P. (2012), “Personality-Centered Concept of Happiness: Theory and Practice”, National Psychological Journal, Vol. 2, No. 8, pp. 81–89.
34. Voronina, A. (2002), Assessment of the psychological well-being of schoolchildren in the system of preventive and corrective work of the psychological service: avtoref. diss. … kand. psikh. nauk, 19.00.04, Tomsk.
35. Busseri, M. and Sadava, S.W. (2011), “A review of the tripartite structure of subjective well-being: Implications for conceptualization, operationalization, analysis, and synthesis”, Personality and social psychology review, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 290–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868310391271
36. Karapetyan, L. (2017), “Psychological correlates of emotional-personality well-being”, Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, Vol. 4, pp. 132–140.
37. Baturyn, N. A., Bashkatov, S. A., Gafarova, N. V., (2013), “Theoretical model of personality well-being”, Bulletin of the South Ural State University. Psychology series, Vol. 6, 4, рр. 4–14.
38. Kozenko, O. (2019), “Approaches to determining the content and structure of the concept of personal well-being”, International scientific research: integration of science and practice as a mechanism of effective development: materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference (Kyiv, April 26–27, 2019), Kyiv,pp. 99–102.