Keywords

Psychological Wellbeing, Happiness, Self-esteem.

Introduction

Psychological well-being (PWB) has been defined in various ways and no definition can sum up all its aspects. PWB is a way of explaining mental health; it is also a term to describe the quality of life. It has been defined as an emotional state of an individual (Bradburn, 1969) it is an evaluation of one's life by a person. These evaluations can be done in cognitive form or in the form of effective (Diener, 2000). PWB comprises of valuable relationships with others, individual strength, self-administration, an estimation of direction, significance for the duration of regular day to day existence, and personal growth and advancement. PWB is achieving a state of equality impacted by both testing and remunerating life events. Psychological well being (PWB) is exceptionally alike various terms that gather to positive mental states, happiness or fulfillment, and from varying standpoints, it isn't fundamental or consistent to stress over exceptional abilities between such terms.

Psychological well-being is about lives working out in a good way. It is the blend of feeling better and working viably. By definition, consequently, individuals with high PWB report feeling upbeat, fit, well-supported, happy with life, etc. Argyle & Crossland (1987) related the PWB with "self-esteem, perceived control, relationships, the purpose of life, etc" Diner (1999) too found out the association of PWB with optimism, purpose to life, self-sufficiency. The first of these allude to the degree to which individuals encounter positive feelings and sentiments of satisfaction. In some cases, this part of PWB is meant to as abstract prosperity (Diener, 2000). Emotional prosperity is an important piece in general PWB.

The idea of happiness has gained too much attention of everyone in almost every sphere of life. The concept of happiness is more valued than the pursuit for the luxury of life like money or having moral goodness. The concept of positive psychology has turned all the wheels that were going in different directions towards happiness and psychological well being (PWB).

The word happiness is the synonym of “quality of life” (Veenhoven, 2005), it is subjective well-being; it varies from person to person (Levett, 2010), Bekhet e.al. (2008) defines happiness as satisfaction with life, experiences, and maintaining good health. Abdel-khalek (2005) SAYS it is the main aim of human beings is to be happy, all seek out for happiness. Happiness has been defined differently by different people and explained different means to achieve it. Happiness has been defined as a "positive inner experience which is the ultimate motivator for a human being” (Argyle & Crossland, 1987, Bekhhet e.al., 2008).Tashi (2008) says that happiness is something that is non-materialistic and it is something that depends on the state of mind. He insisted that happiness can be generated with the help of the right efforts. Lynch (2008) concluded that happiness is an inside thing which can be increased by showing gratitude and money, fame and glory are not the ways to be happy.

Evans & Green (2006) reasoned that "changing how individuals live, what they do, how they think and what they accept" can't guarantee that it will make us happy, contented or satisfied, until and unless his belief system undergoes a change and he becomes a person of different ideology or belief.

The term "self-esteem" was first-authored by William James in 1890. It is utilized to depict a person's feeling about the worth that he associates with self or say "self-worth” or “individual worth”. As it is the amount is acknowledged. It is a regularly observed “character” characteristic, which means to be balanced and persisting. Self-esteem is that a term that can include an assortment of contemplating According to Branden (1969) “it is the experience of being competent to cope with the basic challenges of life and being worthy of happiness". He has given definition keeping its dual aspect in mind, which is considered by researchers as a balanced definition by explaining self-esteem as competence or worth. Branden (1969) definition has got two properties like it is a basic need of every human which should be there for proper development and survival of human being. And it is the sum of conscious choices that one makes. Self-esteem is self-acceptance (Rosenberg, 1965). Everyone has a feeling of self-worth and it is termed as self-esteem.

Literature Review

Levett (2010), explains that different people have different assumptions about Happiness, they have diverse means and ways to achieve it as well as no one can guarantee that by performing a particular act or using the particular way they will be happy that's why they make choices of their own and it varies from person to person.

Happiness has varied advantages for general well being, Research results specify that happiness improves physical well being by improving the immune system as well as Psychological Well Being of individuals. It shows that happy people are generally preferred in social relations, efficiency at the workplace is more OF happy people and such people lead a longer life (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005).

Heizomi et al. (2015) studied different aspects like happiness, self-efficacy, optimism, life satisfaction along with PWB and established a noteworthy relationship in the two variables the researcher studied have i.e. happiness and PWB, according to the researcher good relationship affected happiness, mental status i.e PWB. Happiness in turn affects performance too. The happiness of a person not only affects PWB of person but it also has an impact on the people who come in contact with such people (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2011). Happiness or pleasure is considered as the final motive of a person, Diener (2000); Abdel-Khalek (2005) defined Happiness as a crucial aim of human being, and everyone seeks happiness out of the things they pursue.

Skaalvik & Skaalvik (2011) confirmed the relationship between job satisfaction and happiness; he concluded self-esteem plays vital role in the association amid teacher’s happiness and their health.

The relationship between happiness and satisfaction was investigated in detail by Tenaglia and proved the increased happiness with good marriage life, job satisfaction. All these provide a by-product of happiness. Rojas (2005) added that the theories of happiness are divided into two categories: the first category of theories explain that external entities give happiness while the other set of theories explain happiness as an endogenous process. Fisher (2010) explains happiness as a charming state of mind. Feelings, prosperity, and positive mentalities have been drawing in expanding consideration all through brain science. The enthusiasm for happiness and bliss has likewise stretched out to working environment experiences.

Ryff (2014) considers, "self-acceptance, positive relations with others, autonomy, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and personal growth" as determinants of PWB. Bradburn (1969) who developed the structure of PWB studied the influence of certain social changes that affected the life situations of individual and their sense. Baumeister et al. (2003) defines as psychological well being as "totality of the individual's thoughts and feelings with concerning reference to himself as an object." Besides self-esteem, the two most important parts of the selfconcept are self-efficacy and self-identity. Happiness in one’s mind and Self-esteem has been impacting one's mind on a large basis. It is been observed by every single human being that selfesteem helps in getting an individual to generate a sense of pride and that sense of pride helps a certain individual to generate a sense of happiness. Hence, it can be collectively said that they are both interrelated with one another.

Schimmack & Diener, (2003) examined that self-esteem is strongly associated with job satisfaction and it’s one of the factors which helps identify the wellness factors means the factors which enhance and capitalize on individual wellness. Skaalvik & Skaalvik (2011) said that if an employee performs good or his performance is up to the mark, his self-esteem will be high and high Self-esteem shows a strong relationship with happiness. If Self-esteem is in the classification of improved initiative and pleasurable feelings then it is highly beneficial.

Siddiqui (2015) found out the strong correlation between self-efficacy and PWB he determined a significant relationship in self- esteem, PWB, self-efficacy, and happiness. he concluded in his study that emotional self-efficacy was not affecting happiness directly but was mediated by self-esteem. Diener (2000) says Self-esteem is a subjective work experience hence measured about personality disposition and the effective components of self-esteem both. Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi (2000), According to this relevant self-esteem and job-satisfaction are generating happiness. It has been proven that it is strongly connected with job satisfaction. The test that is been used by the Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi (2000) is the KS test and Two way ANOVA which helps them in utilizing the secondary data to its best way possible and get the best possible results.

Several studies have been done to identify the relation between happiness and selfesteem. Self-esteem is considered as an important signifier of happiness. The studies have given an outcome that it is one of the very important antecedents of happiness and have a significant positive relationship with happiness Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi (2000) PWB is another portraying significant parts of human working going from positive connections, to sentiments of ability, to having importance and reason of day to day life or purpose in life (Diener et. al., 2010)

PWB is one of the important aspects of human being; it can be on the continuum of optimistic relationships to the perceptive of self-competence and meaning or purpose in life (DeNeve& Cooper, 1998)

Dogan et al. (2013) self-efficacy, self PWB and affect of these balance variables on happiness. The participants that were included in the study were around 340, all from the University of Turkey. It was concluded by the researchers that about 51% of variance gets affected by happiness.

From the above literature review following null hypothesis were framed for the study

H1: There is no significant impact of self-esteem on Happiness.

H2: There is no significant impact of happiness on psychological well being (PWB)

H3: There is no significant impact of self-esteem on psychological well being (PWB)

Research Methodology

To fulfill the purpose of the present descriptive study is to find out the cause and effect relationship among the variables of the study, it used survey method to collect the data from the population of school teachers of Gwalior region India, out of the whole population the data was collected from the sample size of 230 respondents, chosen with the help of non-probability purposive sampling technique.

To collect the data a standardized questionnaire for Psychological well-being and Oxford happiness questionnaire for Happiness and Dahlberg LL, Tafarodi & Swan(2001) for Selfesteem. The scale was 5 point likert scale.

• The collected data was checked with the help of Cronbach's alpha reliability for measuring the consistency of the constructs, researchers were willing. Confirmatory factor analysis and modeling(SEM) is used to develop a model based on independent variables happiness And self-esteem and ward variable psychological well being to discover the effect of happiness and self-esteem on PWB of educators'

• The model which the study is trying to explain is the impact of happiness and self-esteem on the psychological well being of the academicians of the Gwalior region. Before checking the model Cronbach's alpha reliability was checked and the results of reliability analyses have been shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Cronbach's Alpha Reliability Results
Measures	Cronbach’s alpha value	No. of Items
Self esteem	0.724	11
PWB	0.879	17
Happiness	0.771	7

It is evident that reliability values are greater or equal than the acceptable standard value of 0.7 (Cortina 1993; Taber 2018). It is viewed as that all measures are having satisfactory reliability. So the questions or items in the survey could be considered as dependable articulations.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Happiness questionnaire: The questionnaire that was used for confirmatory factor analysis was the adaption of oxford happiness questionnaire resatandardised by Dogon and Cotok (2011) which had 7 questions. The model fit for the same was checked using chi square value which should be more than 0.05 to decide the model fits the data. In the present model, the value of chi square is 14.568 and the significance level is 0.325 indications a good fit. The CMIN/DF value of 1.324 is also indicating a good fit. AGFI= 0.931, GFI= 0.973 is higher than the desired value indication good fit, and RMR value is 0.050 which is again an indicator of a good fit.

The comparat ive fi t index is also showing good fi t model , the values should be more than 0.9 and the values of CFI= 0.983, NFI=0.925 IFI= 0.95

The parsimony goodness of fit indexes value should be more than 0.5 and the analysis is showing value are also showing the value of PRATIO is O.524, PNFI IS 0.484 and PCFI is 0.515 which means data fits the model.

The RMSEA which is considered as the badness of fit should be smaller than 0.05 and As it is evident from the table over the estimation of RMSEA = 0.042 showing a solid match of the model to the information.

Self Esteem Questionnaire: The confirmatory factor analysis for self-esteem was done on (Dahlberg LL, et al.,2001). The questionnaire had 16 questions in it. The two factors of selfesteem were used for confirming the final items in factors. The goodness of fit indexes has given the following values.

The chi-square value should be more than 0.05 to decide the model fits the data. In the present model, chi-square value is 14.568 and the significance level is 0.325 indications a good fit. The CMIN/DF value of 1.324 is also indicating a good fit. AGFI=0.931, GFI=0.973 is higher than the desired value indication good fit, and the value of RMR is 0.050 which is again an indicator of a nice or good fit. The comparative fit index gave the value of CFI=0.983, NFI=0.925 and IFI=0.95, all these values are more than the critical value of 0.09, which can be concluded as the model to be a good fit.

The parsimony goodness of fit indexes value should be more than 0.5 and the analysis is showing value is also showing the value of PRATIO =0.524, PNFI=0.484, and PCFI= 0.515 respectively indicating a good fit of the model to the data.

The RMSEA which is considered as the badness of fit should be smaller than 0.05 and as it is evident from the table over the estimation of RMSEA = 0.045 showing a solid match of the model to the information.

Psychological Wellbeing

The standardized scale was used to collect data of Psychological well being from the academicians and the two factors were used to confirm the factors.

The Chi Square (X²) test of association is used to check model fit. The chi square value has to be more than 0.05 to decide the model fits the data. In the present model, the value of chi square is 23.724 and the significance level is 0.477 indications a good fit. The CMIN/DF value 0.988 is also indicating a good fit. AGFI=0.948, GFI=0.972 are higher than the desired value indication good fit and RMR value=0.050 which is again an indicator of a good fit. The comparative fit index gave the value of CFI=1.0, NFI=0.905, and IFI=0.95, all these values are more than the critical value of 0.09, which can be concluded as the model to be a good fit

The parsimony goodness of fit indexes value should be more than 0.5 and the analysis is showing value are also showing the value of PRATIO, PNFI and PCFI are 0.522, 0.454, and 0.525 respectively indicating a good fit of the model to the data.

The RMSEA which is considered as the badness of fit should be smaller than 0.05 and As it is evident from the table over the estimation of RMSEA=0.047 showing a solid match of the model to the information.

Structural Equation Model

In the present model, the two independent variables are Happiness and self esteem and its impact on independent variable Psychological well being is tested using SEM Figure 1.

The Structural Equation Model of the hypothesized model, determined that the positive and significant relations of variables happiness, self esteem and psychological well being, but self esteem is not having any impact on happiness.

The Chi Square (X²) test for the association has to be larger than .05 to conclude that the model which is theoretically described fits the data. The results are showing The X² value for the model is 11.179 having significance level at 0.428 showing a good fit of the information collected in the model and on this criteria model fit is okay according to Barrett (2007) a good model fit should give insignificant result at a threshold value of 0.05 .CMIN/DF value is 1.016 Table 2.

Table 2 Model fit Indices
Crieteria	Obtained value
X2	11.179
DF	11
P VALUE	0.428
CMIN/DF	1.016
GFI	0.987
AGFI	0.954
PGFI	0.376
IFI	0.988
TLI	0.989
CFI	0.998
P RATIO	0.524
PNFI	0.521
PCFI	0.523
RMSEA	0.12

There are three different gatherings of proportions of the goodness of fit estimations of GFI is 0.987 and AGFI is 0.987 which are on the higher side than the ideal least level for model fit the values can be acknowledged (Miles & Shevlin 1998). above demonstrates that three of the comparative fit lists IFI=0.988, TLI=0.989, and CFI=998 and are in this manner more noteworthy than the base prerequisite of 0.9, which is offered as a decent incentive to acknowledge the model (Bentler & Bonett, 1980; Geurts et al., 2003) the Parsimony Goodness of Fit Indexes values should be than 0.5, the values of PRATIO=0.524, PNFI=0.498 and PCFI is 0.523 respectively stipulating good fit of the model.

The RMSEA should have a value less than 0.05 or close to 0.06 RMSEA is required to the model that fits the data satisfactorily (Hu & Bentler, 1999). As can be analysed from the table values that RMSEA is 0.012 indicating a good fit of the model to the data.

H4: Self-esteem of academicians contributes significantly in Happiness.

Evident from the table above the standardized estimate value indicating a causal relationship between self-esteem as independent variable and Happiness as the dependent variable is 0.163 with a p-value of 0.120 and is therefore insignificant (significant value above 0.05). The null hypothesis is thus not supported Table 3.

Table 3 Causal Relationship
			Estimate	Std Estimate	S.E.	C.R.	P	Label
Happiness	<---	Self esteem	0.202	0.163	0.130	1.554	0.120	Not supported
PWB	<---	Happiness	0.859	0.761	0.232	3.696	***	Supported
PWB	<---	Self esteem	0.607	0.435	0.192	3.157	0.002	Supported

H5: Happiness of the academicians contributes significantly in Psychological well-being of teachers.

As can be seen from the table above the standardized estimate value indicating a causal relationship between happiness as the independent variable and psychological well being as the dependent variable is 0.761 with a p-value of 0.000 and is therefore significant (p-value below 0.05). The null hypothesis is thus supported.

H6: Self-esteem of the academicians contributes significantly psychological well being of the teachers.

As can be seen from the table above the standardized estimate value indicating a causal relationship between self esteem as an independent variable and psychological well being as the dependent variable is 0.435 with a p-value of 0.002 and is therefore significant (p-value below 0.05).

The results are in line with the results given by Kringelbach & Berridge (2010), who says that happiness is an important contributor in deciding well being and sense of well being the study was done 10 years back and it is still applicable that happy people, who think good about themselves are psychologically strong and their psychological state is well. Paradise & Kernis (2002) also inferred that high self-esteem was related to more prominent well-being than was low self-esteem.

Limitations

The study revealed a positive and significant relationship between happiness, self-esteem, and PWB and but there are certain limitations of the study. One restriction is that the review was directed uniquely in a particular zone and private area. Thusly, it will be smarter to utilize expanded example size for future examination and similar investigation will have the option to uncover all the more fascinating outcomes and it can likewise be utilized to look at the representatives who have a place with two unique divisions. Another constraint is that representatives might not have given the real outcomes possibly they were not having information or they may have doubts about the utilization of information. Future exploration can be directed by including some more factors and intervening or directing impacts of variables like future examination can utilize other autonomous factors work uncertainty, hierarchical equity, degenerate workplace conduct, and so forth.

Conclusion

The descriptive study done on the academicians of Gwalior (MP, India), concluded that the more happy the teachers are they will be more psychologically fit, and if they take pride or they have a good self-concept, self-esteem then it will affect their psychological well being. The study though has the limitation that it is done on a limited number of the respondent and in the limited geographical area but it clearly shows the result that the happy and self-esteem teachers are mentally stronger and they can transfer the same to their pupil.

References

Abdel-Khalek, A.M. (2005). Happiness and death distress: Two separate factors. Death Studies, 29(10), 949-958.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Argyle, M., & Crossland, J. (1987). The dimensions of positive emotions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26(2), 127-137.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Baumeister, R.F., Campbell, J.D., Krueger, J.I., & Vohs, K.D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or healthier lifestyles?. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1-44.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Bekhet, A.K., Zauszniewski, J.A., & Nakhla, W.E. (2008). Happiness: theoretical and empirical considerations. In Nursing Forum. 43(1), 12-23.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Bentler, P.M., & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological bulletin, 88(3), 588.

Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Branden, N. (1969). The psychology of self-esteem: a new concept of man's psychological nature.

Cortina, J.M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98.

Google Scholar, Cross Ref

DeNeve, K.M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: a meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 197.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American psychologist, 55(1), 34.

Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D.W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97, 143-156.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Dogan, T., Totan, T., & Sapmaz, F. (2013). The role of self-esteem, psychological well-being, emotional self-efficacy, and affect balance on happiness: A path model. European Scientific Journal, 9(20).

Google Scholar

Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics. Edinburgh University Press.

Fisher, C.D. (2010). Happiness at work. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 384-412.

Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Geurts, S.A., Kompier, M.A., Roxburgh, S., & Houtman, I.L. (2003). Does work–home interference mediate the relationship between workload and well-being?. Journal of vocational behavior, 63(3), 532-559.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Heizomi, H., Allahverdipour, H., Jafarabadi, M.A., & Safaian, A. (2015). Happiness and its relation to psychological well-being of adolescents. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 16, 55-60.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Levett, C. (2010). Coral: Wellbeing and Happiness-Worth Striving For. Australian Nursing Journal: ANJ, The, 18(5), 48.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success?. Psychological bulletin, 131(6), 803.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Paradise, A.W., & Kernis, M.H. (2002). Self-esteem and psychological well-being: Implications of fragile self-esteem. Journal of social and clinical psychology, 21(4), 345-361.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Rojas, M. (2005). A conceptual-referent theory of happiness: Heterogeneity and its consequences. Social Indicators Research, 74, 261-294.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE): Acceptance and commitment therapy. Measures package, 61. Society and the adolescent self-image.

Ryff, C.D. (2014). Psychological well-being revisited: Advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia. Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 83(1), 10-28.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Schimmack, U., & Diener, E. (2003). Predictive validity of explicit and implicit self-esteem for subjective well-being. Journal of Research in personality, 37(2), 100-106.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Seligman, M.E.P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive Psychology: An Introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14.

Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Siddiqui, S. (2015). Impact of self-efficacy on psychological well-being among undergraduate students. The International Journal of Indian Psychology, 2(3), 5-16.

Google Scholar

Skaalvik, E.M., & Skaalvik, S. (2011). Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(6), 1029-1038.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Taber, K.S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48, 1273-1296.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Tashi, K. (2008). Role of Meditation in Achieving Gross National Happiness.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Received: 02-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. JOCCC-23- 13338; Editor assigned: 03-Feb-2023, Pre QC No. JOCCC-23- 13338(PQ); Reviewed: 17-Feb-2023, QC No. JOCCC-23- 13338; Revised: 24-Feb-2023, Manuscript No. JOCCC-23- 13338(R); Published: 28-Feb-2023