本校學位論文庫
CITYU Theses & Dissertations
論文詳情
陈妍
胡海建
教育學院
教學研究碩士學位課程(中文學制)
碩士
2023
粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質與主觀幸福感的關係研究
Research On the Relationship Between Personality Traits and Subjective Well-being of Young University Teachers in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area
粵港澳大灣區 ; 高校青年教師 ; 人格特質 ; 主觀幸福感
Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area ; Young teachers in colleges and universities ; Personality traits ; Subjective well-being
公開日期：27/6/2027
自20世紀50年代以來關於主觀幸福感的研究持續不斷，如今已經成為世界各國關注的焦點。本研究基於理論發展和現實困境，調查分析當前粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師主觀幸福感的現狀以及存在的問題，獲知域內不同背景的高校青年教師在主觀幸福感方面的差異情形，並介入人格特質作為影響高校青年教師主觀幸福感的內在因素，並對兩者關係進行探討。與此同時，結合主觀幸福感的外部影響因素進一步分析主觀幸福感的本質，探討切實提升粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師主觀幸福感的策略和建議。
為達成研究目的，本研究以自上而下理論和目的理論等作為理論基礎，對主觀幸福感的結構及其內涵進行界定，編製了粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質和主觀幸福感調查問卷，粵港澳大灣區域內收集了351位高校青年教師樣本。通過對量化研究結果的描述分析、差異分析、相關分析、影響分析、結構方程模型分析，對粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師主觀幸福感及其影響因素展開進一步探究，主要研究內容及結論如下：
一、粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感整體情況存在一定提升空間，具體表現為主觀幸福感量表中單題平均分數為3.762，低於中位數，其中生活滿意度維度的均值最低，說明粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師對其生活狀態、工作、人際、家庭關係的滿意度不高。而其人格特質均值也低於中位數，只有3.528，其中宜人性水準最弱，也就是說，粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師與他人合作意願較低，對他人缺少足夠的同情和包容，不善於避免衝突。
二、不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師在人格特質和主觀幸福感方面存在部分差異。其中，不同性別、年齡、學歷、教齡、職稱、學校層次的高校青年教師在人格特質和主觀幸福感上均有顯著差異，但不同婚姻狀況的高校青年教師在人格特質和主觀幸福感上無顯著差異。
三、粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的人格特質與主觀幸福感之間存在顯著的正相關關係，且相關係數值均介於0.3～0.5之間,為中度正相關。
四、粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感分別受內外部因素影響。從外部看，主要有學歷、教齡、職稱、學校層次等因素。內部因素主要以性別、年齡、人格特質為主。
五、當前，粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師面臨著：（1）教學任務眾多，以至於缺少提升自身學歷和素質的精力和時間，平台和機會也略顯不足；（2）晉升難度大、競爭激烈；（3）科研任務繁重，個人空間被嚴重擠壓、身心健康水平明顯不足，生活滿意度大大下降；（4）女性教師面臨著“職場歧視”等困境；（5）年輕教師對於生活的把控能力不足，生活壓力大主觀幸福感水準等問題，導致其主觀幸福感水準不足，亟待提升。
針對調研結果，本研究提出學習力提升建議：（1）當前亟需從制度和文化等多個層面出發，深入研究和探討高校女性教師權益保障問題，以期為其創造一個更加公正、平等和有利於職業發展的環境，真正做到“優待”女性；（2）高校青年教師可以結合自身特點，開發自身人格特質中積極的部分，增強其開放性、宜人性、嚴謹性、外向性水平，同時降低神經質水平，進而增加人格特質中積極有益的成分，從而達到增強其主觀幸福感的目的。
為達成研究目的，本研究以自上而下理論和目的理論等作為理論基礎，對主觀幸福感的結構及其內涵進行界定，編製了粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質和主觀幸福感調查問卷，粵港澳大灣區域內收集了351位高校青年教師樣本。通過對量化研究結果的描述分析、差異分析、相關分析、影響分析、結構方程模型分析，對粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師主觀幸福感及其影響因素展開進一步探究，主要研究內容及結論如下：
一、粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感整體情況存在一定提升空間，具體表現為主觀幸福感量表中單題平均分數為3.762，低於中位數，其中生活滿意度維度的均值最低，說明粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師對其生活狀態、工作、人際、家庭關係的滿意度不高。而其人格特質均值也低於中位數，只有3.528，其中宜人性水準最弱，也就是說，粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師與他人合作意願較低，對他人缺少足夠的同情和包容，不善於避免衝突。
二、不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師在人格特質和主觀幸福感方面存在部分差異。其中，不同性別、年齡、學歷、教齡、職稱、學校層次的高校青年教師在人格特質和主觀幸福感上均有顯著差異，但不同婚姻狀況的高校青年教師在人格特質和主觀幸福感上無顯著差異。
三、粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的人格特質與主觀幸福感之間存在顯著的正相關關係，且相關係數值均介於0.3～0.5之間,為中度正相關。
四、粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感分別受內外部因素影響。從外部看，主要有學歷、教齡、職稱、學校層次等因素。內部因素主要以性別、年齡、人格特質為主。
五、當前，粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師面臨著：（1）教學任務眾多，以至於缺少提升自身學歷和素質的精力和時間，平台和機會也略顯不足；（2）晉升難度大、競爭激烈；（3）科研任務繁重，個人空間被嚴重擠壓、身心健康水平明顯不足，生活滿意度大大下降；（4）女性教師面臨著“職場歧視”等困境；（5）年輕教師對於生活的把控能力不足，生活壓力大主觀幸福感水準等問題，導致其主觀幸福感水準不足，亟待提升。
針對調研結果，本研究提出學習力提升建議：（1）當前亟需從制度和文化等多個層面出發，深入研究和探討高校女性教師權益保障問題，以期為其創造一個更加公正、平等和有利於職業發展的環境，真正做到“優待”女性；（2）高校青年教師可以結合自身特點，開發自身人格特質中積極的部分，增強其開放性、宜人性、嚴謹性、外向性水平，同時降低神經質水平，進而增加人格特質中積極有益的成分，從而達到增強其主觀幸福感的目的。
Since the 1950s, continuous research has been conducted on subjective well-being, which has now become a global focal point. This study investigates and analyzes the current status and existing issues regarding the subjective well-being of young teachers in universities and colleges within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, taking into account theoretical advancements and practical challenges. It aims to understand variations in subjective well-being among young teachers from diverse backgrounds within this region while considering personality traits as internal factors influencing their subjective well-being. Additionally, it explores the relationship between these factors and examines external influences on subjective well-being to further analyze its nature. Ultimately, strategies and suggestions are proposed for effectively enhancing the subjective well-being of young teachers in universities and colleges within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.
In order to achieve the research objective, this study adopts top-down theory and purpose theory as the theoretical foundation. It defines the structure and connotation of subjective well-being and designs a questionnaire on personality traits and subjective well-being for young university teachers. A total of 351 samples were collected from young university teachers in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Through the quantitative research results of description analysis, difference analysis, correlation analysis, impact analysis, structural equation model analysis, this paper further investigates the subjective well-being of young teachers in universities and colleges in the Greater Bay Area, as well as its influencing factors. The main research findings are summarized as follows:
First, the overall subjective well-being of young teachers in universities and colleges in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area has certain room for improvement, as shown in the average score of a single question in the scale of subjective well-being is 3.762, which is lower than the median, and the mean value of life satisfaction dimension is the lowest, indicating that young teachers in universities and colleges in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area are not satisfied with their life status, work, interpersonal and family relationships. The mean value of their personality traits is also lower than the median, only 3.528, among which the agreeableness level is the weakest. In other words, young teachers in universities and colleges in the Greater Bay Area have low willingness to cooperate with others, lack sufficient sympathy and tolerance for others, and are not good at avoiding conflicts.
Second，there are variations in personality traits and subjective well-being among young teachers in the Greater Bay Area with different background variables. Specifically, significant differences exist in personality traits and subjective well-being based on gender, age, education level, teaching experience, professional title, and school level; however, no significant differences were found regarding marital status among young teachers' personality traits or subjective well-being.
Third, there is a significant positive correlation between personality traits and subjective well-being of young college teachers in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, and the correlation values are between 0.3 and 0.5, indicating a moderate positive correlation.
Fourth, the subjective well-being of young college teachers in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area is influenced by both internal and external factors. From an external perspective, key factors include education level, teaching experience, professional title, and school ranking. Internal factors mainly consist of gender, age, and personality traits.
Currently, young teachers in universities and colleges within the Greater Bay Area face several challenges: (1) They lack sufficient time and energy to enhance their academic qualifications and quality due to numerous teaching responsibilities; additionally, they have limited platforms and opportunities for growth. (2) Promotion prospects are highly competitive and challenging. (3) Heavy scientific research tasks significantly restrict personal space leading to inadequate physical and mental health; consequently resulting in decreased life satisfaction. (4) Female teachers encounter difficulties such as workplace discrimination. (5) Insufficient ability to manage life effectively combined with high life pressure among young teachers leads to inadequate subjective well-being that requires urgent improvement.
Based on the research findings, this study proposes suggestions for enhancing learning abilities: (1) At present, it is urgent to deeply study and discuss the protection of the rights and interests of female teachers in colleges and universities from multiple aspects such as system and culture, in order to create a more just, equal and conducive to career development environment for them, and truly "give preferential treatment" to women；(2) Young teachers in colleges and universities can combine their own characteristics to develop the positive part of their personality traits, enhance their openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness and extroversion, and reduce the neuroticism level, so as to increase the positive and beneficial components of personality traits, so as to achieve the purpose of enhancing their subjective well-being.
In order to achieve the research objective, this study adopts top-down theory and purpose theory as the theoretical foundation. It defines the structure and connotation of subjective well-being and designs a questionnaire on personality traits and subjective well-being for young university teachers. A total of 351 samples were collected from young university teachers in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. Through the quantitative research results of description analysis, difference analysis, correlation analysis, impact analysis, structural equation model analysis, this paper further investigates the subjective well-being of young teachers in universities and colleges in the Greater Bay Area, as well as its influencing factors. The main research findings are summarized as follows:
First, the overall subjective well-being of young teachers in universities and colleges in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area has certain room for improvement, as shown in the average score of a single question in the scale of subjective well-being is 3.762, which is lower than the median, and the mean value of life satisfaction dimension is the lowest, indicating that young teachers in universities and colleges in Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area are not satisfied with their life status, work, interpersonal and family relationships. The mean value of their personality traits is also lower than the median, only 3.528, among which the agreeableness level is the weakest. In other words, young teachers in universities and colleges in the Greater Bay Area have low willingness to cooperate with others, lack sufficient sympathy and tolerance for others, and are not good at avoiding conflicts.
Second，there are variations in personality traits and subjective well-being among young teachers in the Greater Bay Area with different background variables. Specifically, significant differences exist in personality traits and subjective well-being based on gender, age, education level, teaching experience, professional title, and school level; however, no significant differences were found regarding marital status among young teachers' personality traits or subjective well-being.
Third, there is a significant positive correlation between personality traits and subjective well-being of young college teachers in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, and the correlation values are between 0.3 and 0.5, indicating a moderate positive correlation.
Fourth, the subjective well-being of young college teachers in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area is influenced by both internal and external factors. From an external perspective, key factors include education level, teaching experience, professional title, and school ranking. Internal factors mainly consist of gender, age, and personality traits.
Currently, young teachers in universities and colleges within the Greater Bay Area face several challenges: (1) They lack sufficient time and energy to enhance their academic qualifications and quality due to numerous teaching responsibilities; additionally, they have limited platforms and opportunities for growth. (2) Promotion prospects are highly competitive and challenging. (3) Heavy scientific research tasks significantly restrict personal space leading to inadequate physical and mental health; consequently resulting in decreased life satisfaction. (4) Female teachers encounter difficulties such as workplace discrimination. (5) Insufficient ability to manage life effectively combined with high life pressure among young teachers leads to inadequate subjective well-being that requires urgent improvement.
Based on the research findings, this study proposes suggestions for enhancing learning abilities: (1) At present, it is urgent to deeply study and discuss the protection of the rights and interests of female teachers in colleges and universities from multiple aspects such as system and culture, in order to create a more just, equal and conducive to career development environment for them, and truly "give preferential treatment" to women；(2) Young teachers in colleges and universities can combine their own characteristics to develop the positive part of their personality traits, enhance their openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness and extroversion, and reduce the neuroticism level, so as to increase the positive and beneficial components of personality traits, so as to achieve the purpose of enhancing their subjective well-being.
2024
中文
190
致 謝 I
摘 要 V
ABSTRACT VIII
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.1.1 現實背景 1
1.1.2 學術背景 8
1.2 名詞解釋 11
1.2.1 人格特質 11
1.2.2 主觀幸福感 12
1.2.3 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師 12
1.3 研究動機、研究目的與研究問題 12
1.3.1 研究動機 12
1.3.2 研究目的 14
1.3.3 研究問題 14
1.4 研究意義 14
1.4.1 理論意義 14
1.4.2 實踐意義 15
1.5 研究對象、研究方法與論文框架 15
1.5.1 研究對象 15
1.5.2 研究方法 16
1.5.3 論文框架 16
1.6 創新與限制 18
1.6.1 研究創新 18
1.6.2 研究限制 22
第二章 文獻綜述 24
2.1 人格特質 24
2.2 主觀幸福感 26
2.2.1 主觀幸福感 26
2.2.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感 29
2.3 人格特質與主觀幸福感的關係 32
2.4 總結與述評 33
第三章 研究設計 35
3.1 研究方法論 35
3.2 研究框架 35
3.2.1 模型理論依據 35
3.2.2 模型變量與緯度的操作性定義 36
3.2.3 研究模型建構與說明 39
3.2.4 研究路徑說明 39
3.3 研究假設 40
3.4 研究對象 43
3.4.1 研究母群和抽樣方法 43
3.4.2 研究樣本 46
3.5 研究工具——問卷調查法 46
3.6 預調研 51
3.6.1 項目分析 52
3.6.2 信度檢測 56
3.6.3 效度分析 60
3.7 正式調研 65
第四章 量化資料分析 70
4.1量表的信效度檢驗 70
4.1.1 信度分析 70
4.1.2 效度分析 74
4.1.3 小結 80
4.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感現狀分析 81
4.2.1 樣本的特徵分析 81
4.2.2 樣本人格特質、主觀幸福感現狀描述分析 82
4.2.3 小結 87
4.3 不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感差異分析 88
4.3.1 人格特質的差異分析 88
4.3.2 主觀幸福感的差異分析 103
4.3.3 小結 117
4.4 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感的相關分析 118
4.4.1 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感的相關分析 120
4.4.2 小結 120
4.5 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感的影響分析 121
4.6 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質與主觀幸福感的結構方程模型分析 123
4.6.1 不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的人格特質與其主觀幸福感的結構方程 123
4.6.2 整體分析 127
4.7 本章小結 131
第五章 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師主觀幸福感的討論與思索 134
5.1 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師群體的主觀幸福感至關重要 134
5.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師群體的主觀幸福感急需更多關注 135
5.3 持續開發提升粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師群體主觀幸福感的舉措 137
5.4 展望 138
5.5 本章小結 140
第六章 研究結論和建議 142
6.1主要研究結論 142
6.1.1 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質與主觀幸福感現狀 142
6.1.2不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師在人格特質與主觀幸福感方面的差異情形 143
6.1.2粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的人格特質與其主觀幸福感的相關情形 145
6.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感的影響因素 145
6.3 建議 147
6.3.1 加強女性高校青年教師的權益保障 147
6.3.2 關注自身人格特質，最大程度發揮其優勢 148
參考文獻 150
附 錄 175
附錄一：初始問卷 175
附錄二：正式問卷 179
附錄三：粵港澳大灣區普通高等院校清單 183
摘 要 V
ABSTRACT VIII
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.1.1 現實背景 1
1.1.2 學術背景 8
1.2 名詞解釋 11
1.2.1 人格特質 11
1.2.2 主觀幸福感 12
1.2.3 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師 12
1.3 研究動機、研究目的與研究問題 12
1.3.1 研究動機 12
1.3.2 研究目的 14
1.3.3 研究問題 14
1.4 研究意義 14
1.4.1 理論意義 14
1.4.2 實踐意義 15
1.5 研究對象、研究方法與論文框架 15
1.5.1 研究對象 15
1.5.2 研究方法 16
1.5.3 論文框架 16
1.6 創新與限制 18
1.6.1 研究創新 18
1.6.2 研究限制 22
第二章 文獻綜述 24
2.1 人格特質 24
2.2 主觀幸福感 26
2.2.1 主觀幸福感 26
2.2.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感 29
2.3 人格特質與主觀幸福感的關係 32
2.4 總結與述評 33
第三章 研究設計 35
3.1 研究方法論 35
3.2 研究框架 35
3.2.1 模型理論依據 35
3.2.2 模型變量與緯度的操作性定義 36
3.2.3 研究模型建構與說明 39
3.2.4 研究路徑說明 39
3.3 研究假設 40
3.4 研究對象 43
3.4.1 研究母群和抽樣方法 43
3.4.2 研究樣本 46
3.5 研究工具——問卷調查法 46
3.6 預調研 51
3.6.1 項目分析 52
3.6.2 信度檢測 56
3.6.3 效度分析 60
3.7 正式調研 65
第四章 量化資料分析 70
4.1量表的信效度檢驗 70
4.1.1 信度分析 70
4.1.2 效度分析 74
4.1.3 小結 80
4.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感現狀分析 81
4.2.1 樣本的特徵分析 81
4.2.2 樣本人格特質、主觀幸福感現狀描述分析 82
4.2.3 小結 87
4.3 不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感差異分析 88
4.3.1 人格特質的差異分析 88
4.3.2 主觀幸福感的差異分析 103
4.3.3 小結 117
4.4 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感的相關分析 118
4.4.1 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感的相關分析 120
4.4.2 小結 120
4.5 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質、主觀幸福感的影響分析 121
4.6 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質與主觀幸福感的結構方程模型分析 123
4.6.1 不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的人格特質與其主觀幸福感的結構方程 123
4.6.2 整體分析 127
4.7 本章小結 131
第五章 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師主觀幸福感的討論與思索 134
5.1 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師群體的主觀幸福感至關重要 134
5.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師群體的主觀幸福感急需更多關注 135
5.3 持續開發提升粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師群體主觀幸福感的舉措 137
5.4 展望 138
5.5 本章小結 140
第六章 研究結論和建議 142
6.1主要研究結論 142
6.1.1 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師人格特質與主觀幸福感現狀 142
6.1.2不同背景變項的粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師在人格特質與主觀幸福感方面的差異情形 143
6.1.2粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的人格特質與其主觀幸福感的相關情形 145
6.2 粵港澳大灣區高校青年教師的主觀幸福感的影響因素 145
6.3 建議 147
6.3.1 加強女性高校青年教師的權益保障 147
6.3.2 關注自身人格特質，最大程度發揮其優勢 148
參考文獻 150
附 錄 175
附錄一：初始問卷 175
附錄二：正式問卷 179
附錄三：粵港澳大灣區普通高等院校清單 183
1.曹俊軍. (2006). 論教師幸福的追尋. 教師教育研究(05), 35-39. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeANxCLB1kx517XAsnmFOo_HOZE_DWF5fC57BHqMdE9PBHQVE6wpuA7r_-Ck4tNB9fSOCr9xpTbDoZzgkpL1MFTIHtZW0jj920IF7zHsUQ3AtVclZbG0FIbv_7eOt1qZb5A=&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
2.董阜平. (2014). 女性主義理論視閾下高校女教師權益的維護. 長春工業大學學報(高教研究版), 35(04), 84-87. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeCgDYwWoW51-0n2Q18OmWP9Hiyje6md0EAqxR-aAqRrDaE6lV3JLQRjuqp9VgUzfH3fGVf3H3jk8szaWB1SRuP0ch3iTTM1c6jqkWOdzbHzqOTWT_N9J_lwlLjJA5pl_hIuJgEBEkXTyw==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
3.杜苗, 宋莉娟, & 李瑾. (2021). 高校教師主觀幸福感影響因素及其提升策略研究綜述. 科教文匯(上旬刊)(04), 162-164. https://doi.org/10.16871/j.cnki.kjwha.2021.02.073
4.段晶鑫. (2010). 基於教育機會均等分析模式的重慶市留守兒童社會創造性的研究 [碩士, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFlTE2K5OOlvplEEY3lrxH4okWZlwjgphQ56NmkWUiL7HkLgl_90Mi4K-R_kRqjrTWf_L5ypF7Xv9KG_ptJmyiHxBM2ncxBBwn_mCc7ZzTKpVGaNJvEHSyH57RdgKosOqKO4AwJ8PLkPdg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
5.付麗麗. (2011). 內蒙古自治區高校教師幸福感研究 [碩士, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeD4l_BSBGjLyNiJrGzuR54e6zF29HPAtHDoB4y1P3yLHgb9qbD4-ML-x_DmbQ_FeYvB7m2HvlwPH-lOtKXxFmY7NVgcpBuMLABEZFBR9QUb1PRwDFBAybfWdQFz6NkL2AKd-BQLIOJEZg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
6.國務院, 中. (2018). 中共中央 國務院關於全面深化新時代教師隊伍建設改革的意見. Retrieved 9-9 from http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xxgk/moe_1777/moe_1778/201801/t20180131_326144.html
7.胡高喜, 佟哲, & 陳少英. (2016). 薪酬福利滿意度對高校教師主觀幸福感的影響——組織承諾的仲介和自我實現取向的調節效應. 廣州大學學報(社會科學版), 15(02), 64-70. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFnQ5LD3a1a56cHma58k0rGaMB0iXK8PEoEMo5BW_NQlufzv0KCQjqdSgGZXk2ddhit7Z2NITkNkQnhXUkr5veVQMuxYamE_xJkiCG6RJ1wd4bZ8cbpHqwdpvgv_9mtmPjj9kfoWrfJWCg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
8.胡海建. (2017). 教育管理學的新階段——福本管理.pdf. https://doi.org/10
10.3969/j
9.胡海建, & 羅珅. (2017). 教育管理學的新階段——福本管理. 中國管理資訊化, 20(17), 250-254. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFlG68g7OUsdHmGgWMTm_ENEr2B1_YqRCPRi0EMz9nGKjts6gTjIaSJUUvQzEwlNl0OzoCuT6e7hc5vifrYKqgYWbg87DP8RAMMX9w07vYUmuAeWc-RwGtEzC4kQA0k6QTORYbtNTtqasg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
10.胡潘, 陳貴琳, 劉瑩, & 亓洪勝. (2019). 普通高校教師職業認同感和工作收入對主觀幸福感的影響研究. 文化創新比較研究, 3(20), 190-192. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFmPqLp2T7f-AVOBCpeSZmEEVpWOT74hNLR5kHapvFUeIjTLCaiBEnwDAY3gqzcpCDWapwtZofDohJvY8wQ_J1OCKFDWGFM8IiYXXu7ZLcu_JHmUDYXsRguNme8-Lcw7yKgZpRYl9J89_Q==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
11.李冰月. (2015). 大學生主觀幸福感研究綜述. 決策論壇——基於公共管理學視角的決策研討會, 中國北京.
12.李廣, & 蓋闊. (2022). 中小學教師職業幸福感調查. 教育研究, 43(02), 13-28. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=5UWSsHjGZiHU4Fn6fTI0yUeTZa_G5K-3aFZNeft_f8_gPqsi2G7fKx50I1ovcF6sJnZviJEc8KJgAJGIfCKHsD8PUV_f7o_vVQmdHVB4OG_2Hkl70LI2SDJdjmkzIy_qto26f3LS0nbDHU1k32qShw==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
13.李思玲, & 胡海建. (2023). 高職學生學習力發展的區域差異與影響因素研究——以廣東省為例. 南方職業教育學刊, 13(04), 77-85. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFl21IAGE8Y6RATHTDh4p1bFq3AzDiy0qRoSVRVZvRPyfEWCzKtUcjMPQ13DKx-4eXqNh0qjE8T7qKH56hW_sr-GnPYSuXpJBwzaTYnotud5XVzSfAXqiNm5ilG3urZqmdadz4rry40arA==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
14.劉亮軍, & 郭鳳霞. (2020). 高校教師主觀幸福感與教學品質的關係——基於中部省域地方本科高校教師的實證研究. 高教探索(08), 94-100. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFm63Tf-l4zHi6olQrG59cf4d7_P_z4I4XnckDPmabY2x4-e-QiVO7yVc6WfIDYl4km7e9Jjp_c6f0auKRJVfBVxI7Jv8exG9nFu_0oUUKNXQKVOdSOrSfpkdh0MoZtOiXAplREd857bQQ==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
15.陸洛. (1998). 中國人幸福感之內涵、測量及相關因素探討. 國家科學委員會研究彙刊. 人文及社會科學, 115-137. https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A98005774
16.陸洛, & 施建彬. (1995). 職業壓力指標之探討--以臺灣國營企業員工為例. 勞工安全衛生研究季刊, 47-72. https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A95014252
17.羅小蘭, & 王靜. (2016). 近十年我國教師主觀幸福感研究綜述. 教育學術月刊(12), 72-77. https://doi.org/10.16477/j.cnki.issn1674-2311.2016.12.010
18.孟婷婷, 吳芳, 陳瑪莉, & 樓曆月. (2017). 關於高校青年教師主觀幸福感現狀的調查——以浙江省25所高校為例. 教育現代化, 4(25), 218-219. https://doi.org/10.16541/j.cnki.2095-8420.2017.25.105
19.潘麗平. (2008). 企業知識型員工主觀幸福感、組織承諾對離職意向的影響研究 [碩士, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeDGX3BONwWgbmyPl8KxPZ7stbWQtpKF68OC5HirAbo05kYLu2D_nu-qqK51w03_MPzJDA8Vrl3iYj6HfJde0vMAC_Hq5krO-Le1JhiRJnjz5HTcchPwPfH5Tb9pUJtYjF9oCO_5DfBDoQ==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
20.謝偉. (2024). 讓幼兒擁有自我肯定的力量. 山西教育(幼教)(02), 73-74. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFm_qtaFU1TWjSM6qiIUVr0R-iE5fcYZLy4_XpOXyj5bUCvquv7d_3V25L-gaNb-MOXaUulIOyLA8B8oEIKtAJwK4pBeyP9T3hMqLnqmzAJ6-ly3P7luaMPSkTFukYXSQhM=&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
21.辛素飛, 梁鑫, 盛靚, & 趙智睿. (2021). 我國內地教師主觀幸福感的變遷(2002～2019)：橫斷歷史研究的視角. 心理學報, 53(08), 875-889. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.1911.b.20210624.1139.014
22.楊琇琇. (2012). 試論中國社會仲介組織監管存在的問題及對策. 經濟研究導刊(18), 211-212. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeAKokwnThdHFbHbKH5C0TLJq0hbIocZpTQnP2cytvTfUidzk6YDZiAyzC9wJG1qtCWBWgoM6MXvbjMJ20dZvBjVV3fw563Zs-VgMNKtD-t43QZ9mQssMASB6kHkRdjG37k=&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
23.袁殷紅. (2018). 高校教師工作壓力與主觀幸福感的關係研究——心理資本的仲介作用. 高教學刊(18), 152-154. https://doi.org/10.19980/j.cn23-1593/g4.2018.18.052
24.張同廟, & 劉維群. (2012). 大學社團學生幸福感之研究. 僑光學報, 61-75. https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A13011479
25.趙靜, & 王璐. (2011). 團體箱庭對大學生人際關係干預的研究綜述. 吉林省教育學院學報, 27(11), 38-40. https://doi.org/10.16083/j.cnki.1671-1580.2011.11.052
26.鄒佩耘. (2023). 高校青年教師職業倦怠的歸因與引導——基於“混合四因素模型”的分析. 中國青年研究(01), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.19633/j.cnki.11-2579/d.2023.0011
27.Angelini, G. (2023). Big five model personality traits and job burnout: a systematic literature review. BMC Psychology, 11(1), 49-49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01056-y
28.Bernaus, M. (2009). Teachers’ motivation, classroom strategy use, students’ motivation and second language achievement. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras. https://doi.org/10.30827/digibug.31869
29.Bhagat, K. K., Wu, L. Y., & Chang, C.-Y. (2019). The Impact of Personality on Students' Perceptions towards Online Learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 98. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4162
30.Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2005). Happiness and the Human Development Index: The Paradox of Australia. Australian economic review, 38(3), 307-318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8462.2005.00377.x
31.Briner, R., & Dewberry, C. (2007). In Staff well-being is key to school success: A research study into the links between staff wellbeing and school performance. Work life support.
32.Brulé, G., & Suter, C. (2019). Wealth(s) and Subjective Well-Being (1 ed., Vol. 76). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05535-6
33.Burger, J. M. (2015). Personality (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
34.Burger, J. M., & 陳會昌. (2014). 人格心理學 = Introduction to personality. 中國輕工業出版社.
35.Caspi, A., & Roberts, B. W. (2001). Personality Development Across the Life Course:The Argument for Change and Continuity. Psychological inquiry, 12(2), 49-66. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1202_01
36.CESE. (2014). School improvement frameworks:The evidence base. Retrieved 5 August from https://www.cese.nsw.gov.au//images/stories/PDF/
School_improvement_frameworks_The_evidence_base.pdf
37.Chaudhuri, A. (2018). Survey sampling. CRC Press.
38.Chodkiewicz, A. R., & Boyle, C. (2017). Positive psychology school-based interventions: A reflection on current success and future directions. Review of Education, 5(1), 60-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3080
39.Clayson, D. E., & Sheffet, M. J. (2006). Personality and the Student Evaluation of Teaching. Journal of marketing education, 28(2), 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475306288402
40.Costa, & McCrae. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism n subjective well-being.Happy and unhappy people. . Journal of personality and social psychology, 38, 668–678.
41.Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of personality and social psychology, 38(4), 668-678. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.668
42.Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1990). Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. Personality Disorders, 4, 362-371. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1990.4.4.362
43.Costa, P. T., McCrae, R., and Kay, G. (1995). Person, places, and personality: Career assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory. Career Assess, 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/106907279500300202
44.Curhan, K. B., Sims, T., Markus, H. R., Kitayama, S., Karasawa, M., Kawakami, N., Love, G. D., Coe, C. L., Miyamoto, Y., & Ryff, C. D. (2014). Just How Bad Negative Affect Is for Your Health Depends on Culture. Psychological science, 25(12), 2277-2280. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614543802
45.David, P. A., & Reder, M. W. (2014). Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz. Academic Press.
46.Davies, J. B., Lluberas, R., & Shorrocks, A. F. (2017). Estimating the Level and Distribution of Global Wealth, 2000-2014. Review of Income and Wealth, 63(4), 731-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12318
47.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: an introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-006-9018-1
48.Denisova, E. G., Ermakov, P. N., Abakumova, I., & Sylka, N. V. (2024). Subjective Well-being of Teachers in Contemporary Situation: Emotional, Personal and Metacognitive Predictors. Psihologičeskaâ nauka i obrazovanie, 29(1), 16-30. https://doi.org/10.17759/pse.2024290102
49.Diener, Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Oishi, S. (2017). Findings All Psychologists Should Know From the New Science on Subjective Well-Being. Canadian psychology = Psychologie canadienne, 58(2), 87-104. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000063
50.Diener, Oishi, & Tay. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nat Hum Behav, 2(4), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
51.Diener, Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature human behaviour, 2(4), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
52.Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.55.1.34
53.Diener, E., Christie Napa Scollon, Richard E Lucas. (2003). The evolving concept of subjective well-being: the multifaceted nature of happiness. Advances in Cell Aging and Gerontology, 15, 187-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1566-3124(03)15007-9
54.Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors Predicting the Subjective Well-Being of Nations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69(5), 851-864. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.851
55.Diener, E., Fujita, F., Tay, L., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2012). Purpose, Mood, and Pleasure in Predicting Satisfaction Judgments. Social Indicators Research, 105(3), 333-341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9787-8
56.Diener, E., Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Oishi, S. (2017). Findings all psychologists should know from the new science on subjective well-being. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 58(2), 87-104. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000063
57.Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2018). Advances and Open Questions in the Science of Subjective Well-Being. Collabra Psychol, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.115
58.Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual review of psychology, 54(1), 403-425. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145056
59.Diener, E., Pressman, S. D., Hunter, J., & Delgadillo-Chase, D. (2017). If, Why, and When Subjective Well-Being Influences Health, and Future Needed Research. Appl Psychol Health Well Being, 9(2), 133-167. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12090
60.Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Tree decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276-302.
61.Diener, E., Tay, L., & Oishi, S. (2013). Rising income and the subjective well-being of nations. J Pers Soc Psychol, 104(2), 267-276. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030487
62.Diener., Lucas, & Oishi. (2018). Advances and Open Questions in the Science of Subjective Well-Being. Collabra Psychol, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.115
63.Diener., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nat Hum Behav, 2(4), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
64.Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Economic Psychology, 94-122.
65.Easterlin, R. A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot?: some empirical evidence. 89-125.
66.Emmons, R. A., & Diener, E. (1985). Personality Correlates of Subjective Well-Being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11(1), 89-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167285111008
67.Eysenck, H. J. (1990). Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Individual Differences: The Three Major Dimensions of Personality. Journal of Personality, 58(1), 245-261. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00915.x
68.Forgeard, M. J. C., Jayawickreme, E., Kern, M. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Doing the Right Thing: Measuring Well-Being for Public Policy. International journal of wellbeing, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v1i1.15
69.Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: Exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 705-716. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014695
70.Fu, W., Wang, L., He, X., Chen, H., & He, J. (2022). Subjective Well-being of Special Education Teachers in China: The Relation of Social Support and Self-Efficacy. Front Psychol, 13, 802811. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.802811
71.Grant, S., Langan-Fox, J., & Anglim, J. (2009). Big five traits as predictors of subjective and psychological well-being. Psychological Reports, 105, 201-231.
72.Grant, S., Langan-Fox, J., & Anglim, J. (2009). Big five traits as predictors of subjective and psychological well-being. Psychological Reports, 105, 201-231.
73.Gray, C., Wilcox, G., & Nordstokke, D. (2017). Teacher Mental Health, School Climate, Inclusive Education and Student Learning: A Review. Canadian psychology = Psychologie canadienne, 58(3), 203-210. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000117
74.Hascher, T., & Waber, J. (2021). Teacher well-being: A systematic review of the research literature from the year 2000-2019. Educational Research Review, 34, Article 100411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100411
75.Jani, D. (2014). Relating travel personality to big five factors of personality. Tourism (Zagreb, Croatia), 62(4), 347-360.
76.John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (2008). Handbook of personality : theory and research (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
77.Kok, R., & Meyer, L. (2018). Towards an optimal person-environment fit: A baseline study of student teachers’ personality traits. South African Journal of Education, 38(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n3a1409
78.Kotov, R., Gamez, W., Schmidt, F., & Watson, D. (2010). Linking “big” personality traits to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 768-821. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020327
79.Kroll, C., & Delhey, J. (2013). A Happy Nation? Opportunities and Challenges of Using Subjective Indicators in Policymaking. Social Indicators Research, 114(1), 13-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0380-1
80.Kunter, M., & Holzberger, D. (2014). “Loving teaching: research on teachers’ intrinsic orientations,” in Teacher Motivation. .
81.Larsen, E. E. (2016). The State of Positive Education. https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/b0a04b08-80c7-424e-9b26-ae033826c12c
82.Luechinger, S. (2009). Valuing Air Quality Using the Life Satisfaction Approach. The Economic journal (London), 119(536), 482-515. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02241.x
83.MacKerron, G., & Mourato, S. (2013). Happiness is greater in natural environments. Global environmental change, 23(5), 992-1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.03.010
84.Mammadov, S., & Ward, T. J. (2023). Exploring the Relations Between Personality, Implicit Theories, and Subjective Well-Being Among High-Ability Undergraduate Students. The Gifted child quarterly, 67(1), 28-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862221107862
85.McAdams, D. P., Shiner, R. L., & Tackett, J. L. (2019). Handbook of personality development. Guilford Press.
86.McCallum, F., Price, D., Graham, A., & Morrison, A. (2017). Teacher wellbeing: A review of the literature https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2017/10/aponid201816-1133141.pdf
87.McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An Introduction to the Five-Factor Model and Its Applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175-215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x
88.McLean, L., Abry, T., Taylor, M., & Connor, C. M. (2018). Associations among teachers' depressive symptoms and students' classroom instructional experiences in third grade. Journal of school psychology, 69, 154-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.05.002
89.McLean, L., & Connor, C. M. (2015). Depressive Symptoms in Third-Grade Teachers: Relations to Classroom Quality and Student Achievement. Child Development, 86(3), 945-954. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12344
90.Michelsen, K., & Brand, H. (2012). "Health 2020" - The New European Framework Strategy of WHO. Gesundheitswesen, 74(12), 771-777. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1331195
91.Moè, A., Pazzaglia, F., & Ronconi, L. (2010). When being able is not enough. The combined value of positive affect and self-efficacy for job satisfaction in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(5), 1145-1153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.02.010
92.Moum, T. Å., & Wiese, R. V. (2011). Subjektiv velvære som velferdsindikator og velferdsmål.
93.Myrskylä, M., & Margolis, R. (2013). Parental benefits improve parental well-being: evidence from a 2007 policy change in Germany. In. Rostock: Max-Planck-Institut für demografische Forschung.
94.Norrish, J. M. (2015). Positive Education : The Geelong Grammar School Journey. Oxford University Press, Incorporated.
95.OECD. (2013). OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being. https://doi.org/doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264191655-en
96.OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 Results (Volume III). https://doi.org/doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273856-en
97.Oishi, S., & Gilbert, E. A. (2016). Current and future directions in culture and happiness research. Curr Opin Psychol, 8, 54-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.10.005
98.Parks, A., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2013). “Positive interventions: past, present and future,” in Mindfulness, Acceptance, and Positive Psychology: The Seven Foundations of Well-Being. 1-38.
99.Pavot, W., Fujita, F., & Diener, E. . (1995). The relation between self-aspect congruence, personality and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 183-191.
100.Pichler, F., & Wallace, C. (2009). What are the reasons for differences in job satisfaction across Europe?: Individual, compositional, and institutional explanations. European sociological review, 25(5), 535-549. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcn070
101.Pluess. (2015). Genetics of Psychological Well-Being: The role of heritability and genetics in positive psychology. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199686674.001.0001
102.Pyhältö, K., Soini, T., & Pietarinen, J. (2010). Pupils' pedagogical well-being in comprehensive school—significant positive and negative school experiences of Finnish ninth graders. European journal of psychology of education, 25(2), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-010-0013-x
103.Rahm, T., & Heise, E. (2019). Teaching Happiness to Teachers - Development and Evaluation of a Training in Subjective Well-Being [Original Research]. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02703
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5
104.Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice friendly meta-analysis. . Journal of Clinical Psychology, 467-487. https://doi.org/10.1002/clp
105.Statistics., A. B. o. (2020). Australian Department of Education: The Australian Bureau of Statistics Labour Force Figures for June. Targeted News Service.
106.Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. . (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well- being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138-161.
107.Sutton, R. E., & Wheatley, K. F. (2003). Teachers' Emotions and Teaching: A Review of the Literature and Directions for Future Research. Educational Psychology Review, 15(4), 327-358. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026131715856
108.Tabachnick, B. G., Ullman, J. B., & Fidell, L. S. (2018). Using multivariate statistics (Sixth edition. ed.). Pearson.
109.Talasbek, A., Serek, A., Zhaparov, M., Moo-Yoo, S., Kim, Y. K., & Jeong, G. H. (2020). Personality Classification Experiment by Applying k-Means Clustering. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(16), 162-177. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i16.15049
110.Tay, L., & Kuykendall, L. (2013). Promoting happiness: The malleability of individual and societal subjective wellbeing. International Journal of Psychology, 48(3), 159-176. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2013.779379
111.Teles, R., Valle, A., Rodríguez, S., Piñeiro, I., & Regueiro, B. (2020). Perceived Stress and Indicators of Burnout in Teachers at Portuguese Higher Education Institutions (HEI). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(9), Article 3248. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093248
112.Tsai, J. L., Knutson, B., & Fung, H. H. (2006). Cultural Variation in Affect Valuation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(2), 288-307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.288
113.Tsai, J. L., Louie, J. Y., Chen, E. E., & Uchida, Y. (2007). Learning What Feelings to Desire: Socialization of Ideal Affect Through Children's Storybooks. Personality & social psychology bulletin, 33(1), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206292749
114.United Nations Development, P. (2019). Human Development Report 2019: Beyond Income, Beyond Averages, Beyond Today - Inequalities in Human Development in the 21st Century (1 ed.). United Nations.
115.Veenhoven, R. (1984). Conditions of Happiness, Reidel. Springer.
116.Viac, C., & Fraser, P. (2020). Teachers’ well-being: A framework for data collection and analysis. In (pp. 0_1-81). Paris: OECD Publishing.
117.Vik, M. H., & Carlquist, E. (2018). Measuring subjective well-being for policy purposes: The example of well-being indicators in the WHO “Health 2020” framework. Scandinavian journal of public health, 46(2), 279-286. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494817724952
118.Weiss, A., Bates, T. C., & Luciano, M. (2008). Happiness Is a Personal(ity) Thing: The Genetics of Personality and Well-Being in a Representative Sample. Psychological science, 19(3), 205-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02068.x
119.Wessels, E., & Wood, L. (2019). Fostering teachers’ experiences of well-being: A participatory action learning and action research approach. South African Journal of Education, 39(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v39n1a1619
120.Yeh, C. S.-H., & Barrington, R. (2023). Sustainable positive psychology interventions enhance primary teachers’ wellbeing and beyond – A qualitative case study in England. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104072
121.Zhao, Z., Sheng, L., Liang, X., & Xin, S. (2021). Changes of teachers' subjective well-being in mainland China (2002~2019): The perspective of cross-temporal meta-analysis. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(8). https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.J.1041.2021.00875
2.董阜平. (2014). 女性主義理論視閾下高校女教師權益的維護. 長春工業大學學報(高教研究版), 35(04), 84-87. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeCgDYwWoW51-0n2Q18OmWP9Hiyje6md0EAqxR-aAqRrDaE6lV3JLQRjuqp9VgUzfH3fGVf3H3jk8szaWB1SRuP0ch3iTTM1c6jqkWOdzbHzqOTWT_N9J_lwlLjJA5pl_hIuJgEBEkXTyw==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
3.杜苗, 宋莉娟, & 李瑾. (2021). 高校教師主觀幸福感影響因素及其提升策略研究綜述. 科教文匯(上旬刊)(04), 162-164. https://doi.org/10.16871/j.cnki.kjwha.2021.02.073
4.段晶鑫. (2010). 基於教育機會均等分析模式的重慶市留守兒童社會創造性的研究 [碩士, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFlTE2K5OOlvplEEY3lrxH4okWZlwjgphQ56NmkWUiL7HkLgl_90Mi4K-R_kRqjrTWf_L5ypF7Xv9KG_ptJmyiHxBM2ncxBBwn_mCc7ZzTKpVGaNJvEHSyH57RdgKosOqKO4AwJ8PLkPdg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
5.付麗麗. (2011). 內蒙古自治區高校教師幸福感研究 [碩士, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeD4l_BSBGjLyNiJrGzuR54e6zF29HPAtHDoB4y1P3yLHgb9qbD4-ML-x_DmbQ_FeYvB7m2HvlwPH-lOtKXxFmY7NVgcpBuMLABEZFBR9QUb1PRwDFBAybfWdQFz6NkL2AKd-BQLIOJEZg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
6.國務院, 中. (2018). 中共中央 國務院關於全面深化新時代教師隊伍建設改革的意見. Retrieved 9-9 from http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xxgk/moe_1777/moe_1778/201801/t20180131_326144.html
7.胡高喜, 佟哲, & 陳少英. (2016). 薪酬福利滿意度對高校教師主觀幸福感的影響——組織承諾的仲介和自我實現取向的調節效應. 廣州大學學報(社會科學版), 15(02), 64-70. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFnQ5LD3a1a56cHma58k0rGaMB0iXK8PEoEMo5BW_NQlufzv0KCQjqdSgGZXk2ddhit7Z2NITkNkQnhXUkr5veVQMuxYamE_xJkiCG6RJ1wd4bZ8cbpHqwdpvgv_9mtmPjj9kfoWrfJWCg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
8.胡海建. (2017). 教育管理學的新階段——福本管理.pdf. https://doi.org/10
10.3969/j
9.胡海建, & 羅珅. (2017). 教育管理學的新階段——福本管理. 中國管理資訊化, 20(17), 250-254. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFlG68g7OUsdHmGgWMTm_ENEr2B1_YqRCPRi0EMz9nGKjts6gTjIaSJUUvQzEwlNl0OzoCuT6e7hc5vifrYKqgYWbg87DP8RAMMX9w07vYUmuAeWc-RwGtEzC4kQA0k6QTORYbtNTtqasg==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
10.胡潘, 陳貴琳, 劉瑩, & 亓洪勝. (2019). 普通高校教師職業認同感和工作收入對主觀幸福感的影響研究. 文化創新比較研究, 3(20), 190-192. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFmPqLp2T7f-AVOBCpeSZmEEVpWOT74hNLR5kHapvFUeIjTLCaiBEnwDAY3gqzcpCDWapwtZofDohJvY8wQ_J1OCKFDWGFM8IiYXXu7ZLcu_JHmUDYXsRguNme8-Lcw7yKgZpRYl9J89_Q==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
11.李冰月. (2015). 大學生主觀幸福感研究綜述. 決策論壇——基於公共管理學視角的決策研討會, 中國北京.
12.李廣, & 蓋闊. (2022). 中小學教師職業幸福感調查. 教育研究, 43(02), 13-28. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=5UWSsHjGZiHU4Fn6fTI0yUeTZa_G5K-3aFZNeft_f8_gPqsi2G7fKx50I1ovcF6sJnZviJEc8KJgAJGIfCKHsD8PUV_f7o_vVQmdHVB4OG_2Hkl70LI2SDJdjmkzIy_qto26f3LS0nbDHU1k32qShw==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
13.李思玲, & 胡海建. (2023). 高職學生學習力發展的區域差異與影響因素研究——以廣東省為例. 南方職業教育學刊, 13(04), 77-85. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFl21IAGE8Y6RATHTDh4p1bFq3AzDiy0qRoSVRVZvRPyfEWCzKtUcjMPQ13DKx-4eXqNh0qjE8T7qKH56hW_sr-GnPYSuXpJBwzaTYnotud5XVzSfAXqiNm5ilG3urZqmdadz4rry40arA==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
14.劉亮軍, & 郭鳳霞. (2020). 高校教師主觀幸福感與教學品質的關係——基於中部省域地方本科高校教師的實證研究. 高教探索(08), 94-100. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFm63Tf-l4zHi6olQrG59cf4d7_P_z4I4XnckDPmabY2x4-e-QiVO7yVc6WfIDYl4km7e9Jjp_c6f0auKRJVfBVxI7Jv8exG9nFu_0oUUKNXQKVOdSOrSfpkdh0MoZtOiXAplREd857bQQ==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
15.陸洛. (1998). 中國人幸福感之內涵、測量及相關因素探討. 國家科學委員會研究彙刊. 人文及社會科學, 115-137. https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A98005774
16.陸洛, & 施建彬. (1995). 職業壓力指標之探討--以臺灣國營企業員工為例. 勞工安全衛生研究季刊, 47-72. https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A95014252
17.羅小蘭, & 王靜. (2016). 近十年我國教師主觀幸福感研究綜述. 教育學術月刊(12), 72-77. https://doi.org/10.16477/j.cnki.issn1674-2311.2016.12.010
18.孟婷婷, 吳芳, 陳瑪莉, & 樓曆月. (2017). 關於高校青年教師主觀幸福感現狀的調查——以浙江省25所高校為例. 教育現代化, 4(25), 218-219. https://doi.org/10.16541/j.cnki.2095-8420.2017.25.105
19.潘麗平. (2008). 企業知識型員工主觀幸福感、組織承諾對離職意向的影響研究 [碩士, https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeDGX3BONwWgbmyPl8KxPZ7stbWQtpKF68OC5HirAbo05kYLu2D_nu-qqK51w03_MPzJDA8Vrl3iYj6HfJde0vMAC_Hq5krO-Le1JhiRJnjz5HTcchPwPfH5Tb9pUJtYjF9oCO_5DfBDoQ==&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
20.謝偉. (2024). 讓幼兒擁有自我肯定的力量. 山西教育(幼教)(02), 73-74. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=Xhw-7KfLOFm_qtaFU1TWjSM6qiIUVr0R-iE5fcYZLy4_XpOXyj5bUCvquv7d_3V25L-gaNb-MOXaUulIOyLA8B8oEIKtAJwK4pBeyP9T3hMqLnqmzAJ6-ly3P7luaMPSkTFukYXSQhM=&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
21.辛素飛, 梁鑫, 盛靚, & 趙智睿. (2021). 我國內地教師主觀幸福感的變遷(2002～2019)：橫斷歷史研究的視角. 心理學報, 53(08), 875-889. https://link.cnki.net/urlid/11.1911.b.20210624.1139.014
22.楊琇琇. (2012). 試論中國社會仲介組織監管存在的問題及對策. 經濟研究導刊(18), 211-212. https://kns.cnki.net/kcms2/article/abstract?v=QuBpG80dbeAKokwnThdHFbHbKH5C0TLJq0hbIocZpTQnP2cytvTfUidzk6YDZiAyzC9wJG1qtCWBWgoM6MXvbjMJ20dZvBjVV3fw563Zs-VgMNKtD-t43QZ9mQssMASB6kHkRdjG37k=&uniplatform=NZKPT&language=CHS
23.袁殷紅. (2018). 高校教師工作壓力與主觀幸福感的關係研究——心理資本的仲介作用. 高教學刊(18), 152-154. https://doi.org/10.19980/j.cn23-1593/g4.2018.18.052
24.張同廟, & 劉維群. (2012). 大學社團學生幸福感之研究. 僑光學報, 61-75. https://tpl.ncl.edu.tw/NclService/JournalContentDetail?SysId=A13011479
25.趙靜, & 王璐. (2011). 團體箱庭對大學生人際關係干預的研究綜述. 吉林省教育學院學報, 27(11), 38-40. https://doi.org/10.16083/j.cnki.1671-1580.2011.11.052
26.鄒佩耘. (2023). 高校青年教師職業倦怠的歸因與引導——基於“混合四因素模型”的分析. 中國青年研究(01), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.19633/j.cnki.11-2579/d.2023.0011
27.Angelini, G. (2023). Big five model personality traits and job burnout: a systematic literature review. BMC Psychology, 11(1), 49-49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01056-y
28.Bernaus, M. (2009). Teachers’ motivation, classroom strategy use, students’ motivation and second language achievement. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras. https://doi.org/10.30827/digibug.31869
29.Bhagat, K. K., Wu, L. Y., & Chang, C.-Y. (2019). The Impact of Personality on Students' Perceptions towards Online Learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 98. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4162
30.Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (2005). Happiness and the Human Development Index: The Paradox of Australia. Australian economic review, 38(3), 307-318. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8462.2005.00377.x
31.Briner, R., & Dewberry, C. (2007). In Staff well-being is key to school success: A research study into the links between staff wellbeing and school performance. Work life support.
32.Brulé, G., & Suter, C. (2019). Wealth(s) and Subjective Well-Being (1 ed., Vol. 76). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05535-6
33.Burger, J. M. (2015). Personality (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
34.Burger, J. M., & 陳會昌. (2014). 人格心理學 = Introduction to personality. 中國輕工業出版社.
35.Caspi, A., & Roberts, B. W. (2001). Personality Development Across the Life Course:The Argument for Change and Continuity. Psychological inquiry, 12(2), 49-66. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1202_01
36.CESE. (2014). School improvement frameworks:The evidence base. Retrieved 5 August from https://www.cese.nsw.gov.au//images/stories/PDF/
School_improvement_frameworks_The_evidence_base.pdf
37.Chaudhuri, A. (2018). Survey sampling. CRC Press.
38.Chodkiewicz, A. R., & Boyle, C. (2017). Positive psychology school-based interventions: A reflection on current success and future directions. Review of Education, 5(1), 60-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3080
39.Clayson, D. E., & Sheffet, M. J. (2006). Personality and the Student Evaluation of Teaching. Journal of marketing education, 28(2), 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475306288402
40.Costa, & McCrae. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism n subjective well-being.Happy and unhappy people. . Journal of personality and social psychology, 38, 668–678.
41.Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of personality and social psychology, 38(4), 668-678. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.4.668
42.Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1990). Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality. Personality Disorders, 4, 362-371. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.1990.4.4.362
43.Costa, P. T., McCrae, R., and Kay, G. (1995). Person, places, and personality: Career assessment using the revised NEO personality inventory. Career Assess, 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/106907279500300202
44.Curhan, K. B., Sims, T., Markus, H. R., Kitayama, S., Karasawa, M., Kawakami, N., Love, G. D., Coe, C. L., Miyamoto, Y., & Ryff, C. D. (2014). Just How Bad Negative Affect Is for Your Health Depends on Culture. Psychological science, 25(12), 2277-2280. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614543802
45.David, P. A., & Reder, M. W. (2014). Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz. Academic Press.
46.Davies, J. B., Lluberas, R., & Shorrocks, A. F. (2017). Estimating the Level and Distribution of Global Wealth, 2000-2014. Review of Income and Wealth, 63(4), 731-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12318
47.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: an introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-006-9018-1
48.Denisova, E. G., Ermakov, P. N., Abakumova, I., & Sylka, N. V. (2024). Subjective Well-being of Teachers in Contemporary Situation: Emotional, Personal and Metacognitive Predictors. Psihologičeskaâ nauka i obrazovanie, 29(1), 16-30. https://doi.org/10.17759/pse.2024290102
49.Diener, Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Oishi, S. (2017). Findings All Psychologists Should Know From the New Science on Subjective Well-Being. Canadian psychology = Psychologie canadienne, 58(2), 87-104. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000063
50.Diener, Oishi, & Tay. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nat Hum Behav, 2(4), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
51.Diener, Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature human behaviour, 2(4), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
52.Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.55.1.34
53.Diener, E., Christie Napa Scollon, Richard E Lucas. (2003). The evolving concept of subjective well-being: the multifaceted nature of happiness. Advances in Cell Aging and Gerontology, 15, 187-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1566-3124(03)15007-9
54.Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors Predicting the Subjective Well-Being of Nations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 69(5), 851-864. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.851
55.Diener, E., Fujita, F., Tay, L., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2012). Purpose, Mood, and Pleasure in Predicting Satisfaction Judgments. Social Indicators Research, 105(3), 333-341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9787-8
56.Diener, E., Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Oishi, S. (2017). Findings all psychologists should know from the new science on subjective well-being. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 58(2), 87-104. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000063
57.Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2018). Advances and Open Questions in the Science of Subjective Well-Being. Collabra Psychol, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.115
58.Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2003). Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life. Annual review of psychology, 54(1), 403-425. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145056
59.Diener, E., Pressman, S. D., Hunter, J., & Delgadillo-Chase, D. (2017). If, Why, and When Subjective Well-Being Influences Health, and Future Needed Research. Appl Psychol Health Well Being, 9(2), 133-167. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12090
60.Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Tree decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276-302.
61.Diener, E., Tay, L., & Oishi, S. (2013). Rising income and the subjective well-being of nations. J Pers Soc Psychol, 104(2), 267-276. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030487
62.Diener., Lucas, & Oishi. (2018). Advances and Open Questions in the Science of Subjective Well-Being. Collabra Psychol, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.115
63.Diener., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nat Hum Behav, 2(4), 253-260. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0307-6
64.Dolan, P., Peasgood, T., & White, M. (2008). Do we really know what makes us happy? A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being. Economic Psychology, 94-122.
65.Easterlin, R. A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot?: some empirical evidence. 89-125.
66.Emmons, R. A., & Diener, E. (1985). Personality Correlates of Subjective Well-Being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11(1), 89-97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167285111008
67.Eysenck, H. J. (1990). Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Individual Differences: The Three Major Dimensions of Personality. Journal of Personality, 58(1), 245-261. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1990.tb00915.x
68.Forgeard, M. J. C., Jayawickreme, E., Kern, M. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Doing the Right Thing: Measuring Well-Being for Public Policy. International journal of wellbeing, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v1i1.15
69.Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., Lüdtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional transmission in the classroom: Exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 705-716. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014695
70.Fu, W., Wang, L., He, X., Chen, H., & He, J. (2022). Subjective Well-being of Special Education Teachers in China: The Relation of Social Support and Self-Efficacy. Front Psychol, 13, 802811. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.802811
71.Grant, S., Langan-Fox, J., & Anglim, J. (2009). Big five traits as predictors of subjective and psychological well-being. Psychological Reports, 105, 201-231.
72.Grant, S., Langan-Fox, J., & Anglim, J. (2009). Big five traits as predictors of subjective and psychological well-being. Psychological Reports, 105, 201-231.
73.Gray, C., Wilcox, G., & Nordstokke, D. (2017). Teacher Mental Health, School Climate, Inclusive Education and Student Learning: A Review. Canadian psychology = Psychologie canadienne, 58(3), 203-210. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000117
74.Hascher, T., & Waber, J. (2021). Teacher well-being: A systematic review of the research literature from the year 2000-2019. Educational Research Review, 34, Article 100411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100411
75.Jani, D. (2014). Relating travel personality to big five factors of personality. Tourism (Zagreb, Croatia), 62(4), 347-360.
76.John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (2008). Handbook of personality : theory and research (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
77.Kok, R., & Meyer, L. (2018). Towards an optimal person-environment fit: A baseline study of student teachers’ personality traits. South African Journal of Education, 38(3), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n3a1409
78.Kotov, R., Gamez, W., Schmidt, F., & Watson, D. (2010). Linking “big” personality traits to anxiety, depressive, and substance use disorders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 768-821. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020327
79.Kroll, C., & Delhey, J. (2013). A Happy Nation? Opportunities and Challenges of Using Subjective Indicators in Policymaking. Social Indicators Research, 114(1), 13-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0380-1
80.Kunter, M., & Holzberger, D. (2014). “Loving teaching: research on teachers’ intrinsic orientations,” in Teacher Motivation. .
81.Larsen, E. E. (2016). The State of Positive Education. https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/b0a04b08-80c7-424e-9b26-ae033826c12c
82.Luechinger, S. (2009). Valuing Air Quality Using the Life Satisfaction Approach. The Economic journal (London), 119(536), 482-515. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02241.x
83.MacKerron, G., & Mourato, S. (2013). Happiness is greater in natural environments. Global environmental change, 23(5), 992-1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.03.010
84.Mammadov, S., & Ward, T. J. (2023). Exploring the Relations Between Personality, Implicit Theories, and Subjective Well-Being Among High-Ability Undergraduate Students. The Gifted child quarterly, 67(1), 28-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/00169862221107862
85.McAdams, D. P., Shiner, R. L., & Tackett, J. L. (2019). Handbook of personality development. Guilford Press.
86.McCallum, F., Price, D., Graham, A., & Morrison, A. (2017). Teacher wellbeing: A review of the literature https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2017/10/aponid201816-1133141.pdf
87.McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An Introduction to the Five-Factor Model and Its Applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175-215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x
88.McLean, L., Abry, T., Taylor, M., & Connor, C. M. (2018). Associations among teachers' depressive symptoms and students' classroom instructional experiences in third grade. Journal of school psychology, 69, 154-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.05.002
89.McLean, L., & Connor, C. M. (2015). Depressive Symptoms in Third-Grade Teachers: Relations to Classroom Quality and Student Achievement. Child Development, 86(3), 945-954. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12344
90.Michelsen, K., & Brand, H. (2012). "Health 2020" - The New European Framework Strategy of WHO. Gesundheitswesen, 74(12), 771-777. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1331195
91.Moè, A., Pazzaglia, F., & Ronconi, L. (2010). When being able is not enough. The combined value of positive affect and self-efficacy for job satisfaction in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(5), 1145-1153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.02.010
92.Moum, T. Å., & Wiese, R. V. (2011). Subjektiv velvære som velferdsindikator og velferdsmål.
93.Myrskylä, M., & Margolis, R. (2013). Parental benefits improve parental well-being: evidence from a 2007 policy change in Germany. In. Rostock: Max-Planck-Institut für demografische Forschung.
94.Norrish, J. M. (2015). Positive Education : The Geelong Grammar School Journey. Oxford University Press, Incorporated.
95.OECD. (2013). OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being. https://doi.org/doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264191655-en
96.OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 Results (Volume III). https://doi.org/doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273856-en
97.Oishi, S., & Gilbert, E. A. (2016). Current and future directions in culture and happiness research. Curr Opin Psychol, 8, 54-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.10.005
98.Parks, A., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2013). “Positive interventions: past, present and future,” in Mindfulness, Acceptance, and Positive Psychology: The Seven Foundations of Well-Being. 1-38.
99.Pavot, W., Fujita, F., & Diener, E. . (1995). The relation between self-aspect congruence, personality and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 183-191.
100.Pichler, F., & Wallace, C. (2009). What are the reasons for differences in job satisfaction across Europe?: Individual, compositional, and institutional explanations. European sociological review, 25(5), 535-549. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcn070
101.Pluess. (2015). Genetics of Psychological Well-Being: The role of heritability and genetics in positive psychology. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199686674.001.0001
102.Pyhältö, K., Soini, T., & Pietarinen, J. (2010). Pupils' pedagogical well-being in comprehensive school—significant positive and negative school experiences of Finnish ninth graders. European journal of psychology of education, 25(2), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-010-0013-x
103.Rahm, T., & Heise, E. (2019). Teaching Happiness to Teachers - Development and Evaluation of a Training in Subjective Well-Being [Original Research]. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02703
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5
104.Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice friendly meta-analysis. . Journal of Clinical Psychology, 467-487. https://doi.org/10.1002/clp
105.Statistics., A. B. o. (2020). Australian Department of Education: The Australian Bureau of Statistics Labour Force Figures for June. Targeted News Service.
106.Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. . (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well- being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138-161.
107.Sutton, R. E., & Wheatley, K. F. (2003). Teachers' Emotions and Teaching: A Review of the Literature and Directions for Future Research. Educational Psychology Review, 15(4), 327-358. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026131715856
108.Tabachnick, B. G., Ullman, J. B., & Fidell, L. S. (2018). Using multivariate statistics (Sixth edition. ed.). Pearson.
109.Talasbek, A., Serek, A., Zhaparov, M., Moo-Yoo, S., Kim, Y. K., & Jeong, G. H. (2020). Personality Classification Experiment by Applying k-Means Clustering. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(16), 162-177. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i16.15049
110.Tay, L., & Kuykendall, L. (2013). Promoting happiness: The malleability of individual and societal subjective wellbeing. International Journal of Psychology, 48(3), 159-176. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2013.779379
111.Teles, R., Valle, A., Rodríguez, S., Piñeiro, I., & Regueiro, B. (2020). Perceived Stress and Indicators of Burnout in Teachers at Portuguese Higher Education Institutions (HEI). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(9), Article 3248. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17093248
112.Tsai, J. L., Knutson, B., & Fung, H. H. (2006). Cultural Variation in Affect Valuation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 90(2), 288-307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.288
113.Tsai, J. L., Louie, J. Y., Chen, E. E., & Uchida, Y. (2007). Learning What Feelings to Desire: Socialization of Ideal Affect Through Children's Storybooks. Personality & social psychology bulletin, 33(1), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206292749
114.United Nations Development, P. (2019). Human Development Report 2019: Beyond Income, Beyond Averages, Beyond Today - Inequalities in Human Development in the 21st Century (1 ed.). United Nations.
115.Veenhoven, R. (1984). Conditions of Happiness, Reidel. Springer.
116.Viac, C., & Fraser, P. (2020). Teachers’ well-being: A framework for data collection and analysis. In (pp. 0_1-81). Paris: OECD Publishing.
117.Vik, M. H., & Carlquist, E. (2018). Measuring subjective well-being for policy purposes: The example of well-being indicators in the WHO “Health 2020” framework. Scandinavian journal of public health, 46(2), 279-286. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494817724952
118.Weiss, A., Bates, T. C., & Luciano, M. (2008). Happiness Is a Personal(ity) Thing: The Genetics of Personality and Well-Being in a Representative Sample. Psychological science, 19(3), 205-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02068.x
119.Wessels, E., & Wood, L. (2019). Fostering teachers’ experiences of well-being: A participatory action learning and action research approach. South African Journal of Education, 39(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v39n1a1619
120.Yeh, C. S.-H., & Barrington, R. (2023). Sustainable positive psychology interventions enhance primary teachers’ wellbeing and beyond – A qualitative case study in England. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104072
121.Zhao, Z., Sheng, L., Liang, X., & Xin, S. (2021). Changes of teachers' subjective well-being in mainland China (2002~2019): The perspective of cross-temporal meta-analysis. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(8). https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.J.1041.2021.00875
