Factorial analysis of the Pemberton happiness index: general well-being, positive and negative experiences

Abstract Accurate measurement of well-being is critical for advancing both psychological research and public policy aimed at improving individual and societal flourishing. The Pemberton Happiness Index (PHI), developed by Hervás and Vázquez in 2013, is a cross-culturally validated instrument available in nine languages that assesses multiple dimensions of well-being. Despite its robust foundation on reliability and validity, there has been considerable variability in how the PHI is scored. We reviewed 35 studies and found the PHI scored as general well-being, eudaimonic well-being, and hedonic well-being, as well as positive and negative experiences. To address this conceptual and scoring ambiguity, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses using data from three distinct samples: Turkish-speaking adults ( n = 244), undergraduate students ( n = 206), and high school students ( n = 141). Findings indicate that a three-factor model best fits the data, with the Remembered subscale forming one factor and the Positive and Negative Experienced subscales separating into two correlated factors, demonstrating adequate discriminant validity. Notably, the Remembered Well-being subscale functioned as a unified construct without clear differentiation among hedonic, eudaimonic, or social components. These findings offer conceptual clarity regarding the PHI’s structure and support the use of a three-factor scoring approach, which may enhance consistency and interpretability in future research.