Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463
DOI 10.1007/s12144-017-9698-1
The Mediating Role of Self-Esteem in the Relationship
Between Optimism and Subjective Well-Being
Baki Duy 1 & Mehmet Ali Yıldız 2
Published online: 30 September 2017
# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017
Abstract The relationship between self-esteem and well-
being has been documented well. Nevertheless, the relation-
ships between self-esteem, optimism, and well-being were
reported in a limited number of studies. In the current research,
thus, the mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship be-
tween optimism and subjective well-being is investigated in
high school and college students. Three hundred and eighty-
four students 229 (55.2%) of whom were high school students
and 155 (44.8%) were college students participated in the
study. Two hundred and fifty-two of them were female
(65.6%) and 132 (34.6%) of them were male with an average
age of 18.57, and SD = 3.51. The statistical significance of
mediating effect of the tested model was examined through an
approach based on Ordinary Least Squares Regression and
Bootstrap method. The findings of the study yielded that
self-esteem significantly mediated the relationship between
optimism and subjective well-being.
Keywords Subjective well-being . Optimism . Self-esteem .
Adolescents . Mediation
Short summary of the manuscript was verbally presented at the 12th
National Congress of Counseling & Guidance in October 2015, Mersin,
Turkey.
* Baki Duy
bakiduy@anadolu.edu.tr; bakiduy@gmail.com
Mehmet Ali Yıldız
maliyildiz@adiyaman.edu.tr
1
Department of Psychological Counseling & Guidance, Anadolu
University, 26470 Yunusemre Kampusü, Eskişehir, Turkey
2
Department of Psychological Counseling & Guidance, Adıyaman
University, 02040 Adıyaman, Turkey
Since the ancient Greek times and even earlier, people won-
dered about the nature of a good life. What makes life attrac-
tive? What defines a higher quality of life? A response to these
questions contains one’s feelings and thoughts about the type
of life one desires, disregarding how one is perceived by
others. This is a subjective description of life that allows one
the right to decide whether one’s life is valuable. To describe a
good life, happiness term in subjective well-being and collo-
quial language are used (Diener 1984; Diener 2000).
Literature relevant to subjective well-being is associated with
why and how people positively live their lives including both
their cognitive judgments and emotional reactions. Thus,
these studies cover all used terms such as happiness, satisfac-
tion, morality, and positive feeling (Diener 2009). Positive
well-being is described as the cognitive and emotional evalu-
ation of one’s life. Subjective well-being is a comprehensive
concept that includes high satisfaction with life, abundance of
desirable feelings, and low levels of negative feelings. As
positive experiences, concretized in high subjective well-be-
ing, make life worth living, they are considered within a basic
concept of positive psychology (Diener 2000; Diener et al.
2002).
According to Diener (2000), people experience high levels
of subjective well-being when they have more pleasant and
less painful experiences, when they are satisfied with life, deal
with activities that are interesting to them, and have less un-
pleasant and more pleasant feelings, and live longer (Diener
and Chan 2011). Wilson (1967; as cited in Diener 1984), in his
study to determine individuals’ subjective well-being defined
several characteristics that a happy person has: Ba happy per-
son, male or female, is a young, healthy, well-educated, with a
good income, outgoing, optimistic, worriless, religious, mar-
ried person, with high self-esteem and a high professional
ethics, with humble expectations and a good intelligent^
(p.542). Diener et al. (1999) agreed that happy people
Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463
exhibited characteristics such as optimism and extraversion,
as Wilson stated.
For sure, there are some controllable and uncontrollable
factors that may influence life satisfaction. An individual’s
demographic characteristics, life events, culture involved, per-
sonal orientations, and personal characteristics are among
these factors. Particularly an individual’s personal orientations
and characteristics influence the sustainability of satisfaction
with life (Diener 2000). Personal characteristics also affect an
individual’s adjustment to changing life events. These factors
explain the differences in satisfaction levels as well.
Particularly individuals’ perception of world, differences in
reaching positive and negative information and their accuracy
and competency levels in processing positive and negative
information influence life satisfaction (Diener et al. 1999). In
this respect, optimism level, as a characteristic that influence
individuals’ perspective towards current or future possible
events, may affect perceived life satisfaction and sustainability
of this satisfaction. Hence, the finding (Chen and Page 2016)
that one’s life satisfaction gained in time and sustained over a
long period of life supports this notion.
Optimism is described as a fixed personality characteristic
associated with positive expectations about future events.
Optimistic people expect positive consequences to happen
for them as the pessimistic people expect negative conse-
quences to happen for them (Carver et al. 2010; Scheier and
Carver 1985). Optimism has also a cognitive element associ-
ated with motivation: optimistic individuals show effort as the
pessimistic people avoid shoving effort. Studies about opti-
mism began within the context of health in general in which
positive relationships between optimism and the indicators of
psychological and physical health were found. Effects of
physical health probably work through differences in physio-
logical processes that accompany health-improving behaviors
and coping (Carver and Scheier 2014). Carver et al. (2010)
stated that optimistic individuals can cope with the problems
better and optimism is a source to support a better mental
health. They also emphasized that there was a linear correla-
tion between increase in optimism and increase in individual’s
subjective well-being.
Another concept closely associated with the subjective
well-being is self-esteem. Self-esteem is defined as individ-
ual’s positive or negative attitudes towards himself or herself.
High self-esteem is about individual’s feeling well enough
about herself or himself. An individual with high self-esteem
just respects himself or herself and feels that she or he is
someone valuable. Such a person does not feel obliged to be
superior to others. High self-esteem is also regarded as one of
the strongest indicators of subjective well-being (Diener
1984). Thus, a positive relationship was reported between
high self-esteem, life satisfaction and subjective well-being
in numerous studies (Çevik 2010; Doğan and Eryılmaz
2013; Kocayörük and Şimşek 2009; Pu et al. 2017; Rey
1457
et al. 2011; Türkmen 2012; Yıldız 2010; Yıldız and
Baytemir 2016).
Thus, several studies were carried out to examine rela-
tionships between subjective well-being, optimism and
self-esteem. In a study by Eryılmaz and Atak (2011), pos-
itive relationships were found between optimism, self-
esteem, and subjective well-being. It was also reported that
adolescents with a positive expectation of future were
found to have higher levels of subjective well-being
(Eryılmaz 2011). Furthermore, Gaspar et al. (2014) found
that self-esteem and optimism were significant predictors of
subjective well-being. Nevin et al. (2005) reported that
optimistic adolescents with high levels of self-esteem had
higher levels of subjective well-being. It was also reported a
moderate level of correlation between self-esteem and
optimism (Puskar et al. 2010). Moreover, a positive sig-
nificant relationship between optimism and self-esteem
and a negative significant relationship between optimism
and depression was reported earlier (Lemola et al.
2013). Lyubomirsky et al. (2006) in a study that inves-
tigated predicting effects of self-esteem and happiness
found that happy people were outgoing and optimistic
with high self-esteem, and satisfied with their social
relationships and lives in general. Additionally, they de-
fined optimism among one of the significant predictors
of self-esteem.
Researchers within positive psychology field have investi-
gated and wanted to understand the processes and variables
that influence individuals’ subjective well-beings. Diener and
Diener McGavran (2008) emphasized that understanding the
processes that affect subjective well-being was important in
terms of putting together proper interventions. Caprara et al.
(2009) stated that certain personal characteristics such as self-
esteem, optimism, and life satisfaction were basic components
of positive mental health and well-being. Although numerous
studies investigated the relationships between optimism, self-
esteem, and subjective well-being, no research up to date was
found that examines mediating relationships between these
variables. Thus, the current study mainly aims to investigate
mediation role of self-esteem in the relationship between op-
timism and well-being in high school and university students.
Method
Research Design
The current research has a correlational research design.
Correlational designs are used for investigating relationships
between two or more variables (Heppner et al. 2013). Causal
relationships among optimism (predicting variable), self-
esteem (mediating variable), and subjective well-being (crite-
rion variable) were examined with simple mediation method.
1458
Participants
The participants of the research consisted of 384 students in-
cluding 155 (44.8%) university students from a midsized state
university in Turkey, and 229 (55.2%) high school students.
The participants, 252 were females (65.6%) and 132 were
males (34.6%) with a mean age of 18.57 (SD = 3.51).
Convenience sampling method was used to participate to the
study. Convenience sampling method is about selecting con-
veniently accessible individuals to respond to the instruments
in a research (Cohen et al. 2007).
Measures
Self-Esteem Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) is one of
the widely used scale to assess self-esteem of individuals.
RSES was developed by Rosenberg (1965) for measuring
self-esteem level. RSES actually has ten subscales. The first
subscale is used to measure the self-esteem. High scores indi-
cate high level of self-esteem one has. The adaptation studies
of RSES into Turkish language were conducted by
Çuhadaroğlu (1986). Cronbach alpha was estimated as .71,
and test-retest reliability was computed .75. Internal consis-
tency coefficient of the scale in the current study was found as
.85. Confirmatory factor analysis of the scale yielded good fit
values (Yıldız and Baytemir 2016).
Optimism Optimism levels of the participants were assessed
by the Life Orientation Test developed by Scheier and Carver
(1987) to measure dispositional optimism and pessimism. The
scale consists of 12 items four of which are scored positively,
and other four are scored negatively. The rest is filler items.
The lowest score is 0 and the highest score is 32. An increase
of scores means an increase in individuals’ optimism or their
positive orientation towards life. The test-retest reliability of
the scale examined with 97 university students was found as
.77. Criterion reliability of the LOT was tested with Beck
Depression Inventory in two separate groups, and correlation
coefficients were found as r = −.56 and r = −.45, respectively.
The adaptation study of the scale into Turkish language was
conducted by Aydın and Tezer (1991). The internal consisten-
cy coefficient of the scale in the current research was found as
.77. It is advised to use it only for research, not for clinical
assessment due to varying alpha levels in clinical sample
(Herzberg et al. 2006).
Subjective Well-Being Subjective well-being is measured by
two measures in the literature: Positive and Negative Affect
Scale and Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS). Positive and
Negative Affect Scale for Adolescents (PANAS-A) was de-
veloped by Laurent et al. (1999). PANAS-A consists of 14
items including 7 positive items and 7 negative items. The
adaptation study into Turkish language for PANAS-A was
Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463
conducted by Yıldız (2014). The cross-validity (measurement
equivalency) of the scale for genders was provided in the
adaptation study. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) yielded
good fit indices for the scale. Internal consistency coefficients
were computed for two groups and found as .89 and .91 for
positive affect and .79 for negative affect respectively.
Composite reliability (CR) values for positive affect were
found as .89 and .91 and for negative affect as .79; and average
variance extracted (AVE) values for positive affect were found
as .71 and .76 and for negative affect as .46. Test-retest reli-
ability were found as .70 (p < .01) for positive affect dimen-
sion and .63 (p < .01) for negative affect dimension. For the
convergent validity, significant relationships were found be-
tween PANAS-A and satisfaction with life and depressive
symptoms for both dimensions. In the current research, the
internal consistency coefficient for positive affect was com-
puted as .91, and .82 for negative affect.
The Satisfaction with Life Scale, developed by Diener et al.
(1985) to measure satisfaction that individuals feel in their
lives is a unidimensional scale with 5 items. Köker (1991)
adapted the scale into Turkish language. Test-retest reliability
was found .85, and item-test correlations varied between .71
and .80. The internal consistency coefficient for the scale in
the current research was computed as .82. Confirmatory factor
analysis of the SWLS yielded good fit values (Yıldız and
Baytemir 2016).
Demographics A Personal Information Sheet was also devel-
oped by the researchers in order to gather about the partici-
pants’ gender, grade level and age.
Procedure
At the onset of the study, legal permission was obtained from
local Board of National Education for the adolescent group,
and the ethic committee of the university for the college
group. Parental informed consent form was obtained for the
high school group. Verbal consent was received from high
school participants with parental consent. Data were gathered
only from those high school students with individual and pa-
rental consent. Data instruments were distributed in groups by
the second author and answering them took about 25 min.
Data Analyses
Subjective well-being level of the participants was determined
through adding the scores obtained from PANAS-A to the
scores obtained from the SWLS. Statistical significance of
mediating effect of the model was examined through the or-
dinary least squares regression, and bootstrapping method by
using the software developed by Hayes (2012, 2013). Gender,
grade level, and age variables that were considered to poten-
tially influence relationships in the examined model during
Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463
mediation analysis were set as covariates. Descriptive statis-
tics and correlation coefficients are also provided.
Significance level was set as .05. IBM SPSS 22.0 software
was used in data analysis.
Results
Pearson correlation analysis was used to examine the relation-
ships among the study variables. Correlations and descriptive
statistics are presented in Table 1. The values in Table 1 dis-
play positive significant relationships between optimism and
self-esteem, optimism and subjective well-being, and self-
esteem and subjective well-being. Kurtosis and skewness
values regarding the variables evidence that data were normal-
ly distributed.
To examine the mediating effect of self-esteem on the re-
lationship between optimism and subjective well-being, the
least ordinary squares method was employed and the findings
are given in Fig. 1.
As seen in Fig. 1, total effect of optimism on subjective
well-being is (c = .86, SE = .07, t = 12.43, p < .001) significant
(step 1). In addition, the direct effect of optimism on self-
esteem as a mediating variable is also (B = .35, SE = .03,
t = 10.84, p < .001) significant (step 2). The direct effect of
self-esteem as the mediating variable on subjective well-being
is (B = .61, SE = .10, t = 5.78, p < .001) significant (step 3).
When optimism and self-esteem as mediating variables were
simultaneously entered into the model (step 4), the relation-
ship between optimism and subjective well-being decreased.
However, it did not change the significance level (c’ = .65,
SE = .08, t = 8.50, p < .001). These findings evidenced the
mediating effect of self-esteem on the relationship between
optimism and subjective well-being. Additionally, the model
was significant (F(5–378) = 43.34, p < .001), and explained
31% of the total variance in subjective well-being. Values
concerning the effects among the variables in the model are
given in Table 2.
Statistical significance of the indirect effect of the model
was examined on 5000 bootstrap samples. Estimates were
considered in 95% confidence interval and bias-corrected
and accelerated results are provided in Table 2. The indirect
effect (the difference between total and direct effects/c-c’) of
optimism through self-esteem on subjective well-being was
Table 1 Descriptive statistics
Variables M SD
1. Optimism 39.26
2. Self-esteem 29.90
3. Subjective well-being 46.19
N = 384, **p < .01.
1459
statistically significant (point estimate = .2151, and 95%
BCa CI [.1276, −.3254]).
Discussion
The current study mainly aimed to investigate the mediating
role of self-esteem in the relationship between optimism and
life satisfaction. The findings demonstrated that there are pos-
itive significant relationships between optimism, self-esteem,
and subjective well-being, and self-esteem mediated the rela-
tionship between optimism and life satisfaction at a significant
level. Findings of the study are supported by numerous studies
in the literature. Positive significant relationship between op-
timism and subjective well-being was reported earlier (Cha
2003; Chang and Sanna 2001; Krok 2015). In a study, Şar
and Işıklar (2012) found significant relationships between op-
timism and subjective well-being. It was also reported that
self-esteem and optimism were significant predictors of sub-
jective well-being (Cha 2003). Aspinwall and Taylor (1992)
also found a positive relationship between optimism, self-es-
teem, and positive emotions. Monzani et al. (2014) found
positive significant relationships among optimism, self-es-
teem, positive emotions, and life satisfaction. It was also pre-
viously reported that individuals with high level of optimism
had high level of subjective well-being (Karademas 2006;
Kaya et al. 2014). In another study (Hutz et al. 2014), positive
significant relationships were found between hopefulness, op-
timism, and self-esteem and subjective well-being. It was also
shown that optimism explained 59% of the variance in happi-
ness and 60% of the variance in life satisfaction (Sapmaz and
Doğan 2012). Yıldız and Karadaş (2015) previously reported
that self-esteem had a positive significant effect on satisfaction
with life. Finally, it was early documented that hopefulness,
self-esteem, and optimism significantly predicted subjective
well-being (Vacek et al. 2010).
Optimism is characterized as a positive life orientation in
individuals (Scheier and Carver 1985). Considering this
claim, it can be assumed that individuals with such orientation
may be expected to have high level of self-esteem as an eval-
uation of their attitudes about themselves and to be happy with
their lives. That is because, according to Carver et al. (2010),
optimistic and pessimistic perspectives have influence on how
people feel when they face a problem. Probably, being opti-
mistic will lead to feeling well that will eventually make them
Kurtosis Skewness 1 2 3
7.29 −.29 −.32 –
5.31 .23 −.54 .50** –
11.70 −.46 −.42 .54** .47** –
1460 Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463

Fig. 1 Mediation of self-esteem

between optimism and subjective Self-esteem
well-being and non-standardized
beta values. *p < .05, **p < .01,
***p < .001 Ba1 = .35*** Bb1 = .61***

c = .86*** R2
Optimism Subjective
well-being
c'= .65***

perceive high self-esteem and high subjective well-being.
Furthermore, in a study by Caprara et al. (2009) on maternal
and fraternal twins, it was proven that self-esteem, optimism,
and life satisfaction were significantly interrelated indicating
that these relationships had a genetic factor. It was also previ-
ously reported that university students with high levels of
optimism were more satisfied with life (Yalçın 2011).
Supporting these findings, Di Fabio and Bucci (2015) asserted
that individuals’ self-esteem, optimism, and satisfaction with
life were inter-related. They also found that self-esteem, opti-
mism, life satisfaction, and psychological well-being levels of
individuals with positive affect were high. In another study,
Mellor et al. (2008) presented that self-esteem and optimism
significantly predicted subjective well-beings.
Optimistic people experience low level of depression, an
important indicator of negative mental health (Carver et al.
2010; Lemola et al. 2013), and they trust themselves more
and show more persistence against various life difficulties
(Carver et al. 2010). Based on this, such people are also ex-
pected to be less fragile and, therefore, their self-esteem and
subjective well-beings are considered to be high. In this re-
spect, Carver et al. (2010) emphasized that pessimistic indi-
viduals felt unsafe and uneasy against life difficulties. Brown
and Marshall (2006), on the other hand, stated that high levels
of self-esteem prevented individuals from feeling bad.
Guindon (2010) also stated that individuals with high levels
of self-esteem were happier and optimistic about future and
that individuals with low self-esteem were unhappy with pes-
simistic and negative affect. Thus, it is suggested that
optimism positively influences self-esteem and affectivity
and, therefore, increases subjective well-being people
experience.
According to Diener (2000), subjective well-being refers to
an individual’s both cognitive and emotional self-evaluation
of life. Hence, considering that optimistic individuals have
positive perspective of events and situations and evaluate their
lives positively, it is assumed that it will be highly possible for
such people to preserve and sustain their subjective well-
being.
Self-esteem is regarded as an individual’s feeling well
enough (Rosenberg 1979). Optimistic people are considered
to have higher levels of self-esteem. Bastianello et al. (2014)
showed that increase in optimism led to increase in individ-
uals’ self-esteem levels. Individuals with higher self-esteem
may be expected to have more positive and less negative affect
and to be more satisfied with life. That is because individuals
with high self-esteem may receive more positive feedback
from their social environment escalating their subjective
well-being. In this respect, Rosenberg (1979) stated that feed-
back from others, particularly from those significant for the
individual was a key factor for the self-esteem development.
Brown and Marshall (2006), on the other hand, stated that
individuals with low self-esteem had negative evaluations
about themselves and their self-esteem decreased even more
after receiving negative feedback in their social environment.
Individuals with high self-esteem, on the contrary, preserved
their own high self-esteem and quickly regained their self-
esteem after receiving negative feedback. It is assumed that

Table 2 The indirect effects of

optimism on subjective well- Product of Coefficients Bootstrapping
being through self-esteem
95% BCa Confidence Interval

Effects Point Estimate SE z p Lower Upper

Indirect Effect .2151 .0507 5.0863 .000*** .1276 .3254

Total Effect .8651 .0696 .7283 1.0020
Direct Effect .6500 .0765 .4997 .8004

N = 384, k = 5000, Covariates: Gender, grade level, age

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
BCa Bias corrected and accelerated, 5000 bootstrap sample.
Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463
an individual would experience positive feelings and, there-
fore, increased subjective well-being upon having positive
feedback. On the other hand, individuals with increased sub-
jective well-being are expected to have a positive orientation
towards and optimistic perspective of life. In other words,
optimism and subjective well-being positively keep cyclically
increasing each other through self-esteem.
Limitations
The current research has some limitations. The first one is
about the data collection method. Self-evaluation tools were
used to collect data in the current study and this risks the
internal consistency. Using multiple data collection methods
would remedy this shortfall. Another limitation is about the
participants. Participants of the current research were chosen
through convenience sampling method, and consisted of stu-
dents attending two high schools and a university in a small-
size city. Participants from different schools and programs to
represent various socio-economic backgrounds would have
increased the generalizability of the research findings. The
current study was conducted with 9th, 10th, and 11th grade
high school students and university students. Thus the whole
adolescence period was covered; however, different findings
might have been found if high school and university groups
had been included separately in the study. In addition to these
limitations, a cross-sectional design was used in the current
study. In order to overcome this limitation, further studies may
use a longitudinal research design. Finally, in the current re-
search, the mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship
between optimism and subjective well-being was examined.
In future studies, besides self-esteem, mediating role of other
variables such as coping, self-efficacy, emotion regulation in
this relationship may be investigated through multiple media-
tion method.
Implications
The findings of current research made a significant contribu-
tion to gain a better understanding about the relationships
between optimism, self-esteem and subjective well-being in
adolescents. Analysis yielded a significant mediation effect of
self-esteem on the relationship between optimism and subjec-
tive well-being. Optimism is considered as a personal dispo-
sition and self-esteem is defined as rather stable evaluation
about self. Thus, the relationships between these variables
and personal traits merit further investigation. Considering
high correlation between optimism and subjective well-being,
organizing in-class and after-school activities (psycho-educa-
tion groups, group counseling, in-class experiences, etc.) that
will enable students to develop optimistic thinking, starting
1461
from preschool is thought to be important. Additionally, re-
search on how teachers can improve optimism in students may
yield important findings. Hence, rather than experiences that
an individual go through, his/her perception of these experi-
ences are more influential in life satisfaction (Diener 2000).
Another important finding in the current research is that the
mediating role of self-esteem in the relationship between op-
timism and subjective well-being was significant. Thus, inter-
ventions to escalate self-esteem and optimism in students at
any grade level would have been valuable.
Source of Funding The study did not get any financial support.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest Author A declares that he/she has no conflict of
interest. Author B declares that he/she has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval All procedures performed in studies involving hu-
man participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the
institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964
Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical
standards.
Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all partici-
pants. Parental consent was also obtained for all high school participants.
References
Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylor, S. E. (1992). Modeling cognitive adaptation:
A longitudinal investigation of the impact of individual differences
and coping on college adjustment and performance. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 63(6), 989–1003.
Aydın, G., & Tezer, E. (1991). The relationship between optimism, health
problems and academic success [İyimserlik, sağlık sorunları ve
akademik başarı ilişkisi]. Psikoloji Dergisi, 7, 2–9.
Bastianello, M. R., Pacico, J. C., & Hutz, C. S. (2014). Optimism, self-
esteem and personality: Adaptation and validation of the Brazilian
version of the revised life orientation test (LOT-R). Psico-USF,
19(3), 523–531.
Brown, J. D., & Marshall, M. A. (2006). The three faces of self-esteem. In
M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Self-esteem Issues and answers: A sourcebook
of current perspectives (pp. 4–9). New York: Psychology Press.
Caprara, G. V., Fagnani, C., Alessandri, G., Steca, P., Gigantesco, A.,
Sforza, L. L. C., & Stazi, M. A. (2009). Human optimal functioning:
The genetics of positive orientation towards self, life, and the future.
Behavior Genetics, 39(3), 277–284.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2014). Dispositional optimism. Trends in
Cognitive Sciences, 18(6), 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.
2014.02.003.
Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Segerstrom, S. C. (2010). Optimism.
Clinical Psychology Review, 30(7), 879–889.
Çevik, N. (2010). Some variables that predict subjective well-being of
high school students [Lise öğrencilerinin öznel iyi oluşlarını
yordayan bazı değişkenler]. (Unpublished master thesis), Gazi
Üniversitesi, Ankara, Turkey.
Cha, K. H. (2003). Subjective well-being among college students. In D.
C. Shin, C. P. Rutkowski, & C. M. Park (Eds.), The Quality of Life in
Korea: Comparative and dynamic perspectives (pp. 455–477).
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
1462
Chang, E. C., & Sanna, L. J. (2001). Optimism, pessimism, and positive
and negative affectivity in middle-aged adults: a test of a cogni-
tive—affective model of psychological adjustment. Psychology
and Aging, 16, 524–531.
Chen, X., & Page, A. (2016). Stability and instability of subjective well-
being in the transition from adolescence to young adulthood: longi-
tudinal evidence from 20991 Young Australians. PLoS One, 11(5),
e0156399. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156399.
Cohen, L. M., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in
education (6th ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Çuhadaroğlu, F. (1986). Self-esteem in adolescents [Adolesanlarda benlik
saygısı]. (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Hacettepe Üniversitesi Tıp
Fakültesi, Ankara, Turkey.
Di Fabio, A., & Bucci, O. (2015). Affective profiles in Italian high school
students: life satisfaction, psychological well-being, self-esteem, and
optimism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2015.01310.
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3),
542–575. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and a
proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34.
Diener, E. (2009). Subjective well-being. In E. Diener (Ed.), The Science
of Well-Being: The Collected Works of Ed Diener, Social Indicators
Research Series (pp. 11–48). New York: Springer.
Diener, E., & Chan, M. Y. (2011). Happy people live longer: Subjective
well-being contributes to health and longevity. Applied Psychology.
Health and Well-Being, 3, 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-
0854.2010.01045.x.
Diener, M. L., & Diener McGavran, M. B. (2008). What makes people
happy?: A developmental approach to the literature on family rela-
tionships and well-being. In M. Eid & R. J. Larsen (Eds.), The
science of subjective well-being (pp. 347–375). New York: The
Guilford Press.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The
satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,
49(1), 71–75.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective
well-being: three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin,
125(2), 276–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276.
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Subjective well-being: the
science of happiness and life satisfaction. In C. R. Snyder & S. J.
Lopez (Eds.), The handbook of positive psychology (pp. 63–73).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Doğan, T., & Eryılmaz, A. (2013). An examination of the relationships
between two-dimensional self-esteem and subjective well-being [İki
boyutlu benlik saygısı ve öznel iyi oluş arasındaki ilişkilerin
incelenmesi]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,
33(1), 107–117.
Eryılmaz, A. (2011). Investigation of the relationship between subjective
well-being and positive expectation for future [Ergen öznel iyi oluşu
ile olumlu gelecek beklentisi arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi].
Düşünen Adam: Journal of Psychiatry & Neurological Sciences,
24(3), 209–215. https://doi.org/10.5350/DAJPN2011240306.
Eryılmaz, A., & Atak, H. (2011). The relationship between adolescents’
subjective well-being and positive expectations towards future
[Ergen öznel iyi oluşunun özsaygı ve iyimserlik eğilimi ile
ilişkisinin incelenmesi]. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(37),
170–181.
Gaspar, T., Rebelo, A., Mendonça, I., Albergaria, F., & Gaspar-Matos, M.
(2014). Subjective wellbeing and school failure in children and ad-
olescents: influence of psychosocial factors. International Journal
of Development Research, 4(11), 2194–2199.
Guindon, M. (2010). Self-esteem, across the lifespan. New York: Taylor
& Francis.
Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for ob-
served variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process
modeling. Retrieved on February 24, 2014, from http://www.
afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and condi-
tional process analysis: a regression-based approach. New York:
Guilford Press.
Heppner, P. P., Wampold, B. E., & Kivlighan, D. M., Jr. (2013). Research
desing in counseling [Psikolojik danışmada araştırma yöntemleri]
(Trans. D. M. Siyez). Ankara: Mentis Yayıncılık.
Herzberg, P. Y., Glaesmer, H., & Hoyer, J. (2006). Separating optimism
and pessimism: a robust psychometric analysis of the revised life
orientation test (LOT–R). Psychological Assessment, 18(4), 433–
438. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.18.4.433.
Hutz, C. S., Midgett, A., Pacico, J. C., Bastianello, M. R., & Zanon, C.
(2014). The relationship of hope, optimism, self-esteem, subjective
well-being, and personality in Brazilians and Americans.
Psychology, 5(6), 514–522.
Karademas, E. C. (2006). Self-efficacy, social support and well-being: the
mediating role of optimism. Personality and Individual Differences,
40(6), 1281–1290.
Kaya, H., Bodur, G., & Yalnız, N. (2014). The relationship between high
school students’ attitudes toward future and subjective well-being.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3869–3873.
Kocayörük, E., & Şimşek, F. Ö. (2009). The mediating effect of self-
esteem on the relationship between attachment to parents and sub-
jective well-being [Ergenlerde anne-baba bağlanması ile iyi oluş
ilişkisinde benlik saygısının aracılık etkisi[, I. Uluslararası Eğitim
Araştırmaları Birliği Kongresi, (1–3 Mayıs), Çanakkale, Turkey.
Köker, S. (1991). Comparison of life satisfaction of adolescents with a
behavioural problem and without it [Normal ve sorunlu ergenlerin
yaşam doyumu düzeylerinin karşılaştırılması]. (Unpublished master
thesis), Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara, Turkey.
Krok, D. (2015). The mediating role of optimism in the relations between
sense of coherence, subjective and psychological well-being among
late adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 134–
139.
Laurent, J., Catanzaro, S. J., Joiner Jr., T. E., Rudolph, K. D., Potter, K. I.,
Lambert, S., et al. (1999). A measure of positive and negative affect
for children: scale development and preliminary validation.
Psychological Assessment, 11(3), 326–338.
Lemola, S., Räikkönen, K., Gomez, V., & Allemand, M. (2013).
Optimism and self-esteem are related to sleep. Results from a large
community-based sample. International Journal of Behavioral
Medicine, 20(4), 567–571.
Lyubomirsky, S., Tkach, C., & DiMatteo, M. R. (2006). What are the
differences between happiness and self-esteem. Social Indicators
Research, 78(3), 363–404.
Mellor, D., Hayashi, Y., Firth, L., Stokes, M., Chambers, S., & Cummins,
R. (2008). Volunteering and well-being: Do self-esteem, optimism,
and perceived control mediate the relationship? Journal of Social
Service Research, 34(4), 61–70.
Monzani, D., Steca, P., & Greco, A. (2014). Brief report: assessing dis-
positional optimism in adolescence–factor structure and concurrent
validity of the life orientation test–revised. Journal of Adolescence,
37(2), 97–101.
Nevin, S., Carr, A., Shevlin, M., Dooley, B., & Breaden, C. (2005).
Factors related to well-being in Irish adolescents. Irish Journal of
Psychotherapy, 26(3–4), 123–136.
Pu, J., Hou, H., & Ma, R. (2017). The mediating effects of self-esteem
and trait anxiety mediate on the impact of locus of control on sub-
jective well-being. Current Psychology, 36(1), 167–173. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s12144-015-9397-8.
Puskar, K. R., Bernardo, L. M., Ren, D., Haley, T. M., Tark, K. H.,
Switala, J., & Siemon, L. (2010). Self-esteem and optimism in rural
youth: gender differences. Contemporary Nurse, 34(2), 90–198.
Curr Psychol (2019) 38:1456–1463
Rey, L., Extremera, N., & Pena, M. (2011). Perceived emotional intelli-
gence, self-esteem and life satisfaction in adolescents. Psychosocial
Intervention, 20(2), 227–234.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books.
Sapmaz, F., & Doğan, T. (2012). Examination of the Effect of Optimism
on Happiness and Life Satisfaction [Mutluluk ve Yaşam
Doyumunun Yordayıcısı Olarak İyimserlik]. Mersin Üniversitesi
Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(3), 63–69.
Şar, A. H., & Işıklar, A. (2012). Examination of locus of control, subjec-
tive well-being and optimism as the predictors of sport confidance.
Nigde University Journal of Physical Education and Sport Sciences,
6(1), 76–84.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health:
assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies.
Health Psychology, 4, 219–247.
Scheier, M. E., & Carver, C. S. (1987). Dispositional optimism and phys-
ical well-being: the influence of generalized outcome expectancies
on health. Journal of Personality, 55(2), 169–210.
Türkmen, M. (2012). The Structure of Subjective Well-Being and Its
Relationship with Parenting Style, Self Esteem and Social
Support: A Model Test [Öznel iyi oluşun yapısı ve ana-baba
tutumları, özsaygı ve sosyal destekle ilişkisi: Bir model sınaması].
Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(1), 41–73.
Vacek, K. R., Coyle, L. D., & Vera, E. M. (2010). Stress, self-esteem,
hope, optimism, and well-being in urban, ethnic minority adoles-
cents. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 38(2),
99–111.
1463
Yalçın, İ. (2011). Social support and optimism as predictors of life satis-
faction of college students. International Journal for the
Advancement of Counseling, 33(2), 79–87.
Yıldız, M. A. (2010). Investigation self-esteem, life-satisfaction and de-
pression levels of middle school students who work on the street and
those do not (A Case of Diyarbakır) [Sokakta çalışan ve çalışmayan
ilköğretim ikinci kademe öğrencilerinin benlik saygısı, yaşam
doyumu ve depresyon düzeylerinin incelenmesi (Diyarbakır ili
örneği). (Unpublished master thesis), İnönü Üniversitesi, Malatya,
Turkey.
Yıldız, M. A. (2014). The multiple mediating role of emotion regulation
and coping strategies on the relationship between parent attachment
and subjective well-being in adolescents [Ergenlerde anne-babaya
bağlanma ile öznel iyi oluş arasındaki ilişkide duygu düzenleme ve
baş etme yöntemlerinin çoklu aracılık rolü]. (Unpublished doctoral
thesis), Mersin Üniversitesi, Mersin, Turkey.
Yıldız, M. A., & Karadaş, C. (2015). Multiple mediation of perceived
social support and self-esteem in the relationship between loneliness
and life-satisfaction [Yalnızlık ile yaşam doyumu arasındaki ilişkide
algılanan sosyal destek ile benlik saygısının seri çoklu aracılığı] (s.
488–489). 24. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, 16–19 Nisan 2015,
Niğde Üniversitesi, Niğde, Turkey.
Yıldız, M. A., & Baytemir, K. (2016). A mediation role of self-esteem in
the relationship between marital satisfaction and life satisfaction in
married ındividuals [Evli bireylerde evlilik doyumu ile yaşam
doyumu arasındaki ilişkide benlik saygısının aracılık etkisi]. İnönü
Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 67–80.
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction
prohibited without permission.