MANUAL FOR THE

Wellness
Evaluation of
Lifestyle

Jane E. Myers

With contributions by

Thomas J. Sweeney and J. Melvin Witmer

Published by Mind Garden, Inc.

www.mindgarden.com

© 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.

All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
 Well ness Eval uatio n of Lifes tyle
Samp ler Set
Manua l, Instru ment (Form S), and Scorin g G .
'-' 1de

Jane E. Myers

With contributions by

Thom as J. Swee ney and J. Melvin Witme r

Published by Mind Garden, Inc.

info@mindgarden.com
www.mindgarden.com

Copyr ight© 2001, 200~ Jane E. Myers, Thoma s J. Sween 7y, & J. Melvin w·
All rights reserve d. This manua l may not be reprod uced m any form w·th itrner.
written permis sion of the publish er, Mind Garden , Inc. www.mindgard~n out
Mind Garden is a tradem ark of Mind Garden , Inc. .corn.

© 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.

All Rights Reserved . Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
 PART I.
•·········································
INTRO
.......................... DUCT ION
...........................
.................. ............

Most health care systems in developing as well as developed nations focus on treatment
of disease with little attention to prevention. Moreover, within the mental health
professions, much attention has been focused on the identification and treatment of
dysfunction with little attention paid to prevention or optimization of behavior. Notable
exceptions include early research by Adler, Maslow, and Jung. Adler (1954, 1956), in
writing about Individual Psychology, noted that the final purpose of the psychic life is "to
guarantee the continued existence on this earth for the human organism, and to enable
him (sic) to securely accomplish his (sic) development" (p. 28). Maslow (1970), in his
study of the characteristics of healthy persons, noted that growth, self-actualization, and
the pursuit of health must now be accepted as a widespread and perhaps universal
human tendency. Jung (1958) also observed that the human psyche seeks integration,
and that there is an instinctual drive toward wholeness and health.

Sweeney and Witmer (1991), Witmer and Sweeney (1991;1992), and Myers, Sweeney
and Witmer (2000, http://www.counseling.org/publications/jcd/jcd_summerOO.pdf)
presented a holistic model for wellness and prevention across the lifespan which is
based in psychological theory and empirical research on characteristics of healthy
persons. Specifically, the authors incorporated cross-disciplinary research and
theoretical concepts from a variety of disciplines that supported certain human
characteristics as related to health, longevity, and quality of life. In organizing this
literature, the authors defined wellness as "a way of life oriented toward optimal health
and well-being in which the body, ·mind, and spirit are integrated by the individual to live
more fully within the human and natural community" (Myers et al., 2000, p. 252).
Eighteen characteristics were identified and presented in a circular model, the Wheel of
Wellness (see Figure 1), to symbolize a pattern of relationships among these
characteristics.

The Wellness Evaluation of Lifestyle or WEL Inventory was developed to measure each
of the components .of wellness depicted in the Wheel. It is based on the major life tasks
and subtasks that enable healthy persons to interact effectively with environment and
ecological life forces. In the WEL, one score is provided for each of the life tasks and
sub-tasks, as well as a composite score for '1otal wellness." Scores are presented in a
profile that allows for interpretation based on individual scores as well as patterns. The
WEL can be used as an adjunct to counseling to help people develop and maintain
healthy lifestyles that promote well being over the lifespan, quality of life, and longevity.

WELL Sampler, © 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney,_& J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mmdgarden.com
-1-
 /

P R ........LJ.. . .~: . .
.........A............T
.. WELLNE
T
......!J....E..........W
.........H......E......E....···L············O······F ..................... .........S
··C A L M O...D
1111111111111 ■
....... S .
A. T H E O R E ...T......I...... EL
••• ••• • I

·························•"''''''················ ······················································ ······

·...
The Wheel of Wel . hi
lness, depicted grab cally in Figure 1, is base? ~n Adle
psychology (Swee ) and incorporates r's ind
ney, 1998a, 1998 a holistic perspe ividu
counselors and othe . m
r hel~ing profes sio 1 ay find useful (Myers, et al., 2000
ctive th!~
Wheel includes fiv na Shieh empirical ) Th

r
e ma1or hfe task data support as
characteristics of he s w nt ral to healthy func im p~ rta~
althy persons a~d tioning (See Myers
2000, for a review ;~ese life tasks in et al
of recent studies j clude spirituality,
leisure, friendship,
love, and self-~egu
r Th e life task of self-
regulation (viewed
W or k and
functioning much lik a ~n - to give strength as
~ _the spokes m a I to the wheel as a
includes twelve ad ~ ~e sense of worth Whole)
s. ( ~
ditional component , (2) sense of co
ntro
reali~tic beliefs, (~)_
emotional awarenes .
9
(5) in te llectual stimulation, l, (3)
solving and creat1v1 s an problem
ty, (6), sense of hum (7)co~t:i~al fitness, (8) nutrition, (9)
(10) stress manag ?r, . P yd ( 2) cu se lf-care,
em ltural identity. The
ecological, in that ent, (11) g~ nder identity, ~n 1with model is
family, community, the life tasks m~eract dynam,caII several life forces
including
religion, education, Y d" nd business/indust
life forces and life go vern m en t, me ry Th
tasks in turn intera ta
(e.g., floods, famin ct with and are affe , a · e
e) a~d human (e.g 1
cted by globa! ev
person, all life tasks ., wars), positive as ents, natural
are interconnected well as ~egat,ve.
individual. and interact for the l_n a healthy
well-being or detri
ment of the
Changes in one ar
ea of wellness affe
directions. Several ct other areas, in
recent studies prov bo
various component ide empirical suppor th po~itive a~d negative
s of the Wheel of W t for the 1nteract1on
ellness (Seaward, 19 be
different component
s of wellness are 95), as well as evid tween
lifespan (Ryff & more or less salie ence that
Heidrich, 1997). He nt at different po
continuum, and heal althy functioning oc ints in the
thy behaviors at an curs on a develo
and functioning as y on pmental
well. Gender differe e point in life affect subsequent deve
(Myers & Bechtel, nces in many of th lopment
in press; Shurts & e components of
(Dew, ·Myers, & W Myers, in press) as wellness
ightman, 2003; Mye well as cultural di
ider:itified. Thus, al rs, Mobley, & Boot fferences
though the life task
holism and developm s are presented he h, 2003) also have been
re as discrete, a
in understanding he ent across the lifespan suggests concern for
althy behavior. that they be consid
ered together
Research support fo
. .caI t d' r the compone
empm s u ,es prov,·cte su rt ntf s of the Wheel have been described
http://www.uncg.ed ppo or ea h and n
u/~jemyers/wellnes c component as a factor of wel umerous
be ~ted for some s). Although contra l
of dictory research f
wellness was mad the components, the choice to inclu ~-ess (see
e when the prepon de each as a in
corriponent as a fa derance of availa ings ma~
ctor ble studies com
over the lifespan. Fo contributing to quality of life, longev po nent 0
r reviews of relevant ity, and posi5 tpporte
reader is referred research on the co d t~at
to mponents of 1~e W
Sweeney, in press; Myers & Sweeney, in press; Myers ell-being
and Lightsey, 1996 et al., 2000; H a t/
. r: d e l the
te, yers, &

WELL Sampler ©
2001, 2004 Jane E.
All Rights ,Reserve Myers, Thomas J. Sw
d. Publi.shed by Mm
. eeney, & J. Melvin
d Garden, Inc., ww . w·trn
-2- w.mm dgarden.comi er•
figure 1eel of Wellness
fbeWb

-
/ \
I.
"
I U
I sr.,Ss ~ ,, - ~
"~~ / .....
~ I '
I \
I SPIRITUALITY \
\\ '
I
''
---- ..., /

Co~yright © J.M. Witmer, T.J. Sweeney, and J.E. Myers, 1996. Reprinted with
permission . All rights reserved.

WELL Sampler,© 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved . Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-3-
 I .t,J....~OF ~. . b... ~... ........
....W...J~. .LI Es
AR_T..,........ ti

, ___"_
P ..... T ... 1 _0 N ...............................F~I; S····~ .......
~
..--U A .,......................... .. S O F ···················"t
A L _.. I T I ...... O N ................................ S C A ··· -' L
'••···
E FI ............... .........
N...... .......... ········ ········....... ~ ·l\~
·•·l···· s.,
D
U_~
::;----
'• •
••.... '
I

suring the characteristics of health '\

es 20 scales ~e~lude 17 discrete scales for the co Y Pers 0
nie WEL i~euness- The~e ,n and a brief perceived wellne ss sca~~o ne 01 ~s UeQ
:o
the Wheel composite sea es,
wenness,
e. or '~

Spirituality . (composite score of scales 3-1 4)

1. Self-Regu 1at1on
2. se of Worth
3. sen e of control
4. sens r fs
5. Reali~t~af ::areness and Coping .
6. Ernot10 I Stimulation, Problem Solving & Creauv·t
lntellectua ,y
7.
sense of Humor
8.
9. Nutrition
10. Exercise
11. Self-care
Stress Management
12.
r Identity
13. Gende
14, Culture Identity
15. Work
· 16. Leisure
17. Friendship
Love . ·
18. posite score, sum of all discrete scales)
Total Wellness (com
19.
20. Perceived Wellness

The scales of the WEL are defined as follows:

as part of~
1. SPIRITUALITY: personal beliefs and behaviors that are practiced
ial aspec ts of mind and ooa,.
recognition that we are more than the mater
optimi sm, worship ,prayer,
Dimensions include belief in a higher power; hope and
); moral
and/or meditation; purpose in life, love (compassion for others
values;

and transcendence, or a sense of oneness with the universe.

3throl)JI
2. :·OVERALL SELF-REGULATION: a summary of all scores on scales
14; an overall representation of self-regulation. .

J. MelvinWitmer.
WELL 88 f:1Pler, ©2001 , 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, &
indgarden.com
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden , Inc., www.m
-4-
 SELF-REGULATION - Sense of Worth: accepting who and What one .,s, one,s
3. .. . rties
1 along with • i
pos1t!ve qua . ?ne s mperfecUons; includes basic acceptance of
phys1_cal appearance, affi~•~g the value of one's existence; a sense of
genuineness and realness within oneself and in relation lo others.

4. SELF-REGULATION • S~nse. of ~ontrol: beliefs about your competence,

confidence, and mastery (i.e., I ~n ); belief that you can usually achieve the
goal~ yo~ set out for yourself; ~emg ~ble to exercise individual choice through
imagination,_ kno~ledge, a~d skill; havmg a sense of being planfull in life; being
able to be direct m expressing one's needs (assertive).

5. SELF-REGULATIO~ - ~ealistic Beliefs: ability to process information

accurately, to perceive reality accurately, not as one might want or desire it to be;
separating that which is logical and rational from that which is distorted irrational
or wishful thinking; controlling the •shoulds: "oughts: "dos,• and "d~n't" which
tend to rule one's life; avoiding unrealistic expectations or wishful thinking.

SELF-REGULATION - Emotional Awareness and Coping: being aware of or in

6.
touch with one's feelings; being able to express one's feelings appropriately;
being able to enjoy positive emotions as well as being able to cope with negative
emotions; having a sense of energy; avoiding chronic negative emotional states .

SELF-REGULATION • Intellectual Stimulation, Problem Solving and

7.
Creativity: being mentally active, open-minded; having the ability to be creative
and experimental; having a sense of curiosity, a need to know and to learn; the
ability for both divergent and convergent thinking when problem solving; the
capacity to change one's thinking in order to manage stress; the ability to apply
problem solving strategies in resolving social conflicts.

SELF-REGULATION - Sense of Humor: being able to laugh at one's own

8.
mistakes and the unexpected things that happen; the ability to laugh
appropriately at others; having the capacity to see the _contradictions and
predicaments of life in an objective manner such that one can gain new
· perspectives; enjoying the idiosyncrasies and inconsistencies of life; the ability to
· use humor to accomplish even serious tasks.

SELF-REGULATION - Nutrition: eating a nutritionally balanced diet, three

9.
meals a day including breakfast, consuming fats, cholesterol, sweets, and salt
sparingly; maintaining a normal weight (i.e., within 15% of the ideal) and avoiding
overeating.

SELF-REGULATI ON - Exercise: engaging in sufficient physical activity through

10.
'.· exercise or on one's job to keep in good physical condition; maintaining flexibility
in the major muscles and joints of the body through . wor~, recre_ation, or
stretching exercises; regular · exercise and not overdoing ,t are important
guidelines. ·

WELL Sampler,© 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney,_& J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mmdgarden.com
-5-
11. SELF-REGULATION· 5 :t ·
If care· taking responsibility for one's Welln
that ·are preventive in nature; such ha~~s thr011
self-care and safety. ha I s e wearing a seat belt; limiting the use of its inc1 9h
11
obtaining timely_ ~edic~~ c~s~ of illegal drugs; avoiding the use rrescrib~e
0
drugs_ ~nd avoiding t moderately using alcohol; getting ade u tobac ~
abstaining from orf vleryff cts of pollution in your environment. q ate Sle~p:
minimizing the harm u e e ,
ION • Stress Management: general perception of on ,
12. SELF-REGULAT
self-management or
rather than as a ,
~~:~at
0
re ulation· seeing change as an opportunit f es OW!)
g to on~'s security; on-going self-mon~to~r Qrowth
in resources; the ability to organize and ing and
assessment of ont~ s cepnerggy setting limits, and need for structure. rnanage
resources such as ,me, '
EGULATION _ Gender Identity: satisfaction with one's gender· f
13. SELF-rtR d . one's gender transcendence of gender identity (i.e., abilityeteling
suppo e m ' o be
androgynous).
SELF-REGU.LATION • Cultural Identity: satisfaction with one's cultural ide .
14.
feeling supported in o~e:s ~ultural identity; transcendence of one's cui~~:~i
identity (i.e., cultural ass1m1lation) .

15.. .WORK: being satisfied with one's ~ork or ti_me spent in r~creati?n and leisure·
having adequate financial security; feeling that ones skills are us ,
appropriately; feeling that one can manage one's workload; feeli~g a sense of .e~
Secu rity·' feeling appreciated in the· work one does; having satisfactJo
. sa t·is fiied with
relationships with others on the job or in Ieisure;
. bemg · activitiesory•
work and play which one chooses to perform; ~aving a ~l?yful attit~de toward Ii~~
tasks; having a balance between work a~d leisure act1v1t1es; valuing both Work
and leisure; the ability to cope with stress mthe workplace.

16.. LEISURE: activities done in one's free time: satisfaction with one's leisure
activities, importance of leisure, positive feelings ass?ciated with leisure, having
at least one activity in which "I lose myself and time stands still", ability to
approach tasks from a playful point of view, ability to put work aside for leisure
without feeling guilty

17. FRIENDSHIP: social relationships that involve a connection with others

individually or in community, but which do not have a marital; sexual, or familial
·commitment; having friends in whom one can trust and who can provide
_ emotional, material, or informational support when needed; not being lonely;
being comfortable in social situations; having a capacity to trust others; having
empathy for others; feeling understood by others; having relationships in which
non-judgmental caring is experienced; being comfortable with one's social skills
for interacting with others; being involved in one or more community groups.

WELL Sa'!1pler, © 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer. ·
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-6-
 LOVE: havin~ .faith tha~ ~ne's well-b.eing will be respected in relationships with
18, others; the ab1_hty to be intimate, trusting, and self-disclosing with another person;
the ability to give ~s well as e~~ress affection with significant others; the ability to
accept others ~ithout cond1t1ons, to convey non-possessive caring which
respects th~ uniqueness ?f anoth~r; having at least one relationship that is
secure, lasting, and for which there rs a mutual commitment; having concern for
the nurturance and growth of others; experiencing physical and emotional
:satisfaction with one's sexu~I life; having a family or family-like support system
characterized by shared spiritual values, the ability to solve conflict in a mutually
respectful way, the ability to solve problems together, commitment to one
another, healthy communication styles, shared time together, the ability to cope
with stress, and mutual appreciation.

TOTAL WELLNESS: one's general level of well being; a global asses~'"!lent_of

19,
wellness; a summary of one's total wellness in the five life tasks of sprntuahty,
self-regulation, work, friendship, and love.

PERCEIVED WELLNESS: one's perceptions of overall happiness, health, and

20,·
life satisfaction.

WELL Sampler, e 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney,_& J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mmdgarden.com
-7-
 p A R T ....LY.. . ~ . .
............................ EVELOp
NT 0 ..................................... ..........
Mt'.'~ ._,
I N S T R..............
UME ...................................
................ ............ ... ,_, ....
••••
..,,,,,.,,
_I

- . Lifest le (WEL, Myers, Sweeney, & Witrne

The Wellness Evaluation off th fi~e life tasks and subtasks in the Whe ~• 1993)
developed to assess ~~ch O ~h~ components in the Wheel forrned e Of 'Neu Yi~a
(Figure 1). The defirntio~s of_ n in the WEL. Items were generated as sth e basi:es,
development of i_tems fo~ mclusi~ . ure activities", "I consider. myself to e~f-statelll 1or
(e.g., ·1. am sa!1sfied with m~nt:ould reply using a five-point Likert sc e an a~~ts
person. ) to which ~ r~spond utral disagree, strongly disagree). An initial ale (stron1ve
agree, agr~e, undec1de or, need a'nd after many initial trials and debat:001 Of rn~ly
than 500 items was deve op d the basis of the attributes defined ab among 18
authors, the final pool was forme on °ve. 1he
. . nducted over a ten-year period to field test and i
A series of ~tud1es w~re co WEL A final study assessed th .~Prove t~
psychometnc properties of the · . . f e Validity of •1e
instrument In addition to statistical analyses, qualitative eedback Was solicited the
f: d' 'd I who completed the WEL at workshops and conferences frorr,
gbrotuhps o thin iv1 Tuha sWEL also was used in a number of university classes andcofnducted
y e au ors. e . th d' of 1 , d' 'd ' eedb
from students contributed to refinements in e w?r mg ~ ivi ual iterns. The ack
versions of the WEL which evolved through the series of studies were called the o:o~r
G, and S. ,

Study One: WEL-O

The first form the WEL-0 (0 for original form), consisted of 114 items and
administered t~ convenience samples of 723 persons. These included und~rgr dWas
students in career and life planning courses and graduate students in counserina uate
large Mid-Western university and a m1'd -size . d univers1
. 'tY.m th e Sou theast, older pe9 at a
attending Elderhostel programs, a small sample of mental health clinic outpatient;sons
professional counselors in a variety of settings accessed through meeting' and
professional associations. The resulting samp!e ranged in a~e from 18 to 91. Ove~ h;;
(59%) were female, and 18% were Caucasians, 14% African Americans, 2% As'
Americans and 3% other minority groups. Nine of the 16 scales had estimatesia~
reliability (alpha) grea_ter than .65, ~n~ .tour were bet~een .61 and .64. For the remaini~g
. three scales, the estimates of rehab1hty were considered too low to yield dependable
scores. An inspection of the contribution each item made to the total score (corrected
item-total correlations) within each of these scales indicated that each item contributed
positively to the total scale score, and deleting items would not improve the overaU
estimate of reliability. Thus, adding more items was likely to be the most effective
method to improve the scales.

WELL Sa~pler, © 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-8-
Study 2: WEL-R

A revised version o~ the WEL (the WEL-R) included 131 items, the original 114 plus 17
additional items which_were included to provide data for possible revisions of several of
the weaker scales to increase the estimates of reliability of the subscales. The WEL-R
was administered to 1,394 persons, again using convenience samples of undergraduate
and graduate students, as well as a national sample of corporate mid-level managers
and professional counselors attending training conferences and continuing education
workshops. Although 12 of the scales had reliabilities exceeding .65, several scales still
had estimates that were considered to be too low (i.e., sense of control, .60, sense of
humor, .48, self-care, .57, and realistic beliefs, .61). A concern arose from qualitative
discussions about the reading level of these latter scales. A preliminary factor analysis
also indicated that the Work and Leisure scale could be improved by splitting Work from
Leisure. As a consequence, additional items were developed to measure the redefined
leisure scale, as well as the four scales with low reliability.

Study 3: WEL-G

The aim when developing the WEL-G (G for "general" form) was to lower the reading
level of the WEL-R (which, using formulas for calculating reading levels, was determined
th th reading level
to be appropriate at the 12 grade reading level) to an average 7 grade
for ·a11 items as well as the instructions. The resulting WEL-G included 97 items to
measure 16 scales. The WEL-G was administered to 122 high school students in rural
North Carolina, 20% of which were Native American . The reliabilities for 14 of the scales
exceeded .65; however the estimates of reliability for the self-care, realistic beliefs, and
leisure scales remained unacceptably low. A complete revision of these scales was
completed for the fourth study.

Study ~: WEL-S

Based on item analyses for the first three versions of the WEL and a series of factor
analyses, the fourth version of the WEL to be examined, the WEL-S, was developed.
The WEL-S included one new scale, leisure, as a result of the factor analysis of the work
and leisure scale that clearly showed that two factors comprised this dimension of the
model. A major concern when administering the previous versions of the WEL was the
time required, and thus a major effort was made to reduce the length of each scale to
between 4-6 items, wherever possible. The reduced version of the WEL (WEL-si
included 105 items.

The WEL-S was administered to convenience samples of 1,082 persons with similar
demographic characteristics of earlier samples (described in detail in Part IX. Norms).
The reliabilities for 16 of the 17 scales exceeded .65. The one exception was the newly
created leisure scale that had an alpha coefficient of .61.

WELL Sampler, © 2001 , 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-9-
 p A R T .....':/.....,....
··········•"•A
•"····B
·••" 1.......
L .......
I T .......Y..... .
I
e L ···················
R
···················•·
week test-retest reliabililY for the WEL co
Table 1_presents data on e tf.:';ncluded 99 undergr
th aduate students who :iileted Us·
th• ng1nal version- Th• saf1lP terval. TM
average age of.these students mplete/ 53"i
wEL-0 twice at• twO-week •~sians and 30% II
0 were Afncan-American. ;as 21, the
were female, 67% wer e C•~h rnost ~bove .80, 8
indicating stability in the s lest.,acr
et ¾
coefficients exceeded ·68, wi
cores 11
occasions .
~s

Two-We
Table 1 ek Test-Retest Reliability for Original Scales, N=99

N of Items Test-Retest
in Scale Coeffic·
Scale ient
18 .8f- -
Spirituality 57 .88
Self-Regulation 4 .72
Sense of Worth 5 .79
Sense of control 5 .81
Realistic Beliefs 6
Emotional Awareness & Coping .81
Intellectual Stimulation, Problem Solving &
Crea~~ 6 .75
' 5
Sense of Humor .79
Nutrition 3 .88
Exercise 3 .80
Self care 8 .94
Stress Management 5 .78
Gender identification 4 .75
Cultural identification 3 .68
WL~rk & Leisure, Combined Scale 12 .82
e1sure n/a n/a
Friendship 11 .86
Love 13
Total Wellness
.82
114 .77

WELLS ampler,©
. 2001
All Rights Re serve ' 2004 Jane E M
d. Published b. YMy~rs,
md G Thom J· Sween
as, Inc.,
-10
•
arden wwwey '. & J . Melvin Witmer.
.mmdgarden.com
Alpha coefficients for each version of the instrument ar . .
the number of items per scale for each version. e presented in Table 2, along with

Table 2
Number of Items & Estimates of Reliability for each Scale for WEL 0, R, G, and S

WEL-O, WEL-R, WEL-G, WEL-S,

N=723 N=1,394 N=122 N=1,082
Scale # of alpha # of alpha # of alpha # of alpha
items items items items

Spirituality 18 .83 28 .85 11 .89 10 .76

Self-Regulation 57 .80
Sense of Worth 4 .79 4 .75 4 .72 6 .79
Sense of Control 5 .61 5 .60 4 .66 8 .72
Realistic Beliefs . 5 .65 5 .61 5 .63 5 .81
Emotional 6 .76 6 .69 5 .66 6 .80
Awareness
Intellectual 6 .73 6 .72 4 .65 5 .79
Stimulation
Sense of humor 5 .63 5 .48 5 .68 5 .80
Nutrition 3 .57 3 .79 4 .82 5 .66
Exercise 3 .69 3 .78 4 .78 5 .74
Self care 8 .63 8 .57 4 .60 6 .85
Stress 5 .64 5 .65 6 .71 5 .83
Management
Gender Identity 4 .45 4 .67 4 .71 4 .79
Cultural Identity 3 .34 3 .68 5 .69 4 .75
Work 12 .74 12 .75 10 .82 8 .73
Leisure na na na na 4 .60 6 .61
Friendship 11 .82 11 .80 10 .81 7 .87
Love 13 .87 13 .85 11 .84 8 .89
Total Wellness 114 131 97 105 .84
Perceived Wellness 3 .70

WELL Sampler,© 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer. ,
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-11-
 r.. . ~. . B...I........Y....J....~....
V A L ID IT Y
····· ····· ··•"' ''''''' ''''''' ''''''' ''''''' '''''

To determine correlations between the WE

L and related assessrn
variety of instruments were selected
that purport to me ent rn
characteristics similar to thOse included in the
229 graduate students in counseling courses
scales of the WEL. Ps~:s,"-
who took the WEL a d san,p1 ho1aq' i
~~~•
ov~r atour-year period as part of courses in lifes 1
pan development a~d Other ine n~,:~
Wellnes st"llllle~q

~~
The WEL was administered in concert with Tes
twell (National Welln s.
a widely-used assessment instrument base
d on Hettler's (1984) e;s Institute
wellness. Hettler's model includes six com
ponents of wellness: hex~9on ~ 19a3
~
occupational, social, spiritual, and intellectual.
It was hypothesize! t~s,ca1, en,Clt1e1
betwee~ the WEL and Testwell would correlate
shown in Table 3. highly, which proved t0at 5iniilar<>tiailil
be the case sca18s'
'as
Table 3
Comparison of the WEL and Testwell Sca
les

WEL Scale
Corresponding Testwell Scale
Essence Co rre
Spirituality ionl~
Se~se of Worth .6 0• ~
Emotional Awareness
Sense of Control .50**
Emotional Control
Realistic Beliefs .38**
Emotional Control
Emotional Responsiveness .45**
Emotional Awareness
Emotional Control
.67**
Intellectual Stimulation
Intellectual .60**
Exercise
Physical Fitness .47**
Nutrition
Nutrition .61**
Humor Self-care .74**
Self-care Emotional Control .62**
Stress management Self-care .41**
Work Self-care .48**
Total Wellness Occupation .31*
** p< .01 p<.05 Composites
I ,.
core

·, WELL Sampler,© 2001

All Rights Reserv d2004 Jane E. Mye
e . Published by M· rs, Thomas J S
ind Garde . Weene
·12- n, Inc., WWw Y, & J. M I .
. -rnindgarde v1n Witmer
en.com .
 arisons between the WEL scales
several instruments were administered to provide comp
r to those for the WEL scales. These
and existing instruments with scale definitions simila
Hammer, 1988), the Measures of
included the Coping Resources Inventory (CRI,
the Inventory of Self-Actualizing
Psychosocial Development (MPD, Hawley, 1988),
Control Scale (LOC, Rotter, 1954),
Characteristics (!SACS, Banet, 1976), the Locus of
. Table 4 summarizes the scale
and th!3 Death Concern Scale (DCS, Dickstein, 1972)
correlations for these instruments.
with similar scale definitions. It is
The WEL compares favorably to most instruments
the WEL stress management score
intriguing to see that the CRI total coping score and
is limited in scope and definition to
do not correlate - perhaps because the WEL scale
cognitive coping strategies.
correlates of wellness for specific
Additional studies using the WEL have identified
), in a study of undergraduates ,
populations. For example, Hermon and Hazier (1999
with happiness . Dew, Myers, and
found that the five major life tasks correlated positively
en internalize·d homophobia and
Wightman (2003) found a negative relationship betwe
related wellness measures may be
wellness. A summary of studies using the WEL and
found at http://www.uncg .edu/~jemyers.

J. Sweeney,_ & J. Melvin Witmer.

WELL Samp ler, © 2001 , 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas
mdgarden.com
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.m
-13-
 1es an d sca les of Related lnstrurn8 1'1"•~
d Wf:L sea
select• ColteJau
4 etw••" other
scales
~
. Spi
Tabl•1auons B . . ReligioU5S Totrital -6h
corre ·Ile,
copin9•Resour~e
,31 •
cop1n9 erativ1ty
,SQ,
MPD Gtf:raction
-6~,
Life sa nitive .37-
cop1·ngcce. cog
tp other/self .s,'
1sAC a grity
Sense of worth MPD 1nte f control
' Locus o
Rotter s t
D rrus
Sense of Control MP utonomY
MPD A . faction
·te sat1s le· Fear
LI
conce rn sea · •,06
oeath nxiety -.so
Rea1l·stic BeI.ie fs oeat~ ~e coping
tt

Cogn1t1V ,44•
te
T concre ,37 ••
DC
·ng. Em otional ,59 tt
. aI Respons1·veness
Emot1on
cop1 rmacy ,53 **
MPD In I ·t·ve
Cog ni I .15
lntellectua I Stimulation Coping • blem centere d
ISAC Pro .39 **
MPD initiative .28 *
Cop.ing. physical .61 '*
Exercise
Nutrition Coping Phys1·cal .72 **
Humor ISAC Sense of Humor .33 *
Self-care Coping total .66 **
Stress mana gement Coping total .17
Gender Identity MPD Identity
.34 **
Cultural Identity MPD Identity
.29 *
Work Coping Cognitive
Friendship
.42 **
Coping Social
ISAC Interpersonal .48 **
MPD Intimacy · .41 **
Love .44 *
Coping Social
ISAC Interpersonal .40 **
• p < .05; •• p < .01 MPD lntimac .49 **
.44 *

WELL sampler, © 2001, 2004 J_

ane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melv
All R~hts Reserved. Publohed by Mind Gard in Witmer.
en, Inc., WWw.mindgarden.com
·14-
 e. . ~. . B....T.........Y...J. J....~....
~ .. J?... .. !Y.I. ...L.~....L S T R A T I O N
····················································

The WEL is self-administering and may be administered individually or in groups. Mo st

adults require approximately 15-20 minutes for completion. For machine scoring,
number two lead pencils should be used. Web administration with profile ls available
from ht.tp://www.mindgarden.com/Assessments/wel.htm

For• group administrations, the instructions which are printed at the beginning of the
instrument may be read aloud. Persons with visual disabilities may benefit from verbal
administration or use of a large-type version of the instrument.

WELL Sampler,© 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-15-
 R T .......... V I....L. L. :. .
P A.....................
......... I NG A N D
R .............................
S C 0.......................... ATION
·········
·······
N T .s. .R
I·····••"''"'''' . . . p. . . .R. . . E............
T .. .............................

X f this Manual. Each item of the W

L ·s provided in Part w~rs according to a five-point likertEL is ~
scoring for the ~E ~h respondent ans 'bes the respondent: strongly agree sca1
statement to which t !hich the item desc~I ch response is converted to a nu agree8
reflecting !he exten!n~ strongly disagree.tro~gly disagree) and the responses s:ericai
neutral, disagree, 1 agree) to one (s sitively except for those on the Rlll~ed
score from five (sltro~ii ~terns are worded pod to achieve consistency in reportineahsuc
for each subsca e. . are reverse score g With
Beliefs scale. These items
the other scales. b d' · •
rted to a percentage score Y 1V1d1ng the
Raw scores for the subscales are conve. I oints for each scale. Th us, scores for the 'Nsum
EL
of item responses by the total possib e p
represent a percent of total wellness.
b cale scores, two composite scores, total Self
Scores are provided for each of 17 su sceived wellness. These scores are Platte·
nd
regulation and total wellne~S, a pe~. nship of all 19 scores. In addition, a Qro d
th
gra~hically in a profile showin~ e ~laa~~tive data (local norms) for specific subgrouup
profile may be prepared to provide c0 .P t For interpretive purposes a sco Ps
of individuals that may complete the instrumen · . . . ' re of
100% would be interpreted as high level wellness. Wellness IS situational, and the Qoa1
in each area is one of moving toward greater wellness. Vv_e recomme~d that s~ores not
be interpreted in relation to norms, based ·on recent studies suggesting that high level
wellness is not "the norm" in the United States (see Healthy People 2010). Thus, scores
of 80 or better are interpreted as being moderately well, with some room for
improvement to reach high level wellness. Scores below 80 reflect areas of importance
for enhancing one's wellness. For those areas, the development of a personal wellness
plan, using a resource such as The WEL Workbook (Myers, Witmer, & Sweeney, 2003)
may be useful. ,

WELL Sampler, © 2001 2004 Jane E My Th

All Rights Reserved. Published by M~~~• G odmas J. Sweeney, & J .
ar en, Inc IAA,... · Melvin W'
-16- ·, .... vv.minctgarct 1tmer.
en.corn
 P.....~..Jt.J.·········IX
.
N ···············"
.......9....~ M S
···················

In Table 5, demographic characteristics of th 1 082

group for the WEL are shown. e , persons who comprise the norm

Table 5
nd
Number a Percentage of Subjects by Various Demographic Variables for WEL-S

Demographic Variable

N %
Gender
Males 344 32
Females 709 66
Missing 29 2
Age
Traditional University, 18-25 593 55
Young adults, 26-35 150 14
Middle age, 36-55 182 17
Older ages, 56+ 57 5
Missing 100 9
Culture
African American 66 6.1
White 851 78.7
Other (e.g., Hispanic, Asian) 139 12.8
Missing 26 2.4
Edvcational Level
Less than High School 13 1.2
High School Diploma 517 47.8
Technical, Trade, A.A.Degree 83 7.7
Bachelor's 258 23.8
Master's 74 6.8
Doctoral and Professional 59 5.5
Missing 78 7.1
Live Alone
~ive Alone 179 16.5
Do not live alone 884 81.7
Community Size
Rural 78 7.2
Small Town 159 14.7
Midsize town 291 26.9
Large town/city 138 12.8
Metropolitan area 293 27.1

WELL Sampler,© 2001 , 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-17-
Means and standard deviations for males and females are
· d th . ' ·t· shown in T b
standard deviations for Caucasians an e me mmo n ies are shown inaTable
le 6
· Means q
7. n~

Table 6
Means and Standard Deviations for Males and Females

Males
N=344 ~Ne rna ies
==709
--:M:--:-e_a_n--S-□--
WEL Scale

Spirituality 71.20 13.58 72.58

Self-Regulation 72.74 6.74 73.62 13,82
Sense of Worth 84.95 10.10 83.68 7,93
Sense of Control 77.16 10.26 78.19 11,44
Realistic Beliefs 56.51 11.36 10,45
58.49
Emotional Awareness 77.26 10.95 78.37 12.75
Intellectual Stirn., Prob. Solving, & Creativity 77.01 10.96 10.63
77.61 11,40
Sense of Humor 80.77 11.52 78.93
Nutrition 62.89 18.24 12.11
65.73 19.65
Exercise 75.69 15.07 75.37
Self-Care 71.82 15.67 17,32
80.77 13.52
Stress Management 73.65 11.04 70.69
Gender Identity 11.91
77.63 11.64 79.21
Cultural Identity 10.80
75.70 13.33 76.47 13.03
Work 69.42 10.20
Leisure
69.93 10.82
80.60 11.66 77.46 12.47
Friendship 82.15 9.37. 85.27 8.21
Love 80.70 13.96 85.62 12.52
Tot.al Wellness 72.64
Perceived Wellness
6.42 73.75 7.22
81.02 14.06 80.35 13.93

WELL Sampler, © 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thoma

s J. Sweeney & J M .
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc.,
www.m'indg~rdelvin Witmer.
-18- en.com
fable 7

---
,Aeans and Sta nda rd Deviations for Caucasians and Ethnic Minorities

Caucasians Ethnic Minorities

N=851 N=205
Mean SD
~ ale Mean SD

13.77 75.76 13.28

Spirituality 71 .23
7.57 73.21 7.39
self-Regulation 73.57
10.86 83.28 11 .60
sense of Worth 84.37
sense of Control 77.97 10.18 78.47 11 .07
58.19 11.78 58.68 12.31
Realistic Beliefs
Emotional Awareness 10.67 77.87 11 .05
78.06
Intellectual Stirn., Prob. Solving, & Creativity 77.41 11 .1 3 78.15 11.73
11 .71 78.16 11.94
sense of Humor 80.16
65.61 19.33 62.96 19.1
Nutrition
76.14 16.66 74.40 15.56
Exercise
77.40 15.13 79.80 13.69
Self-Care
71.69 11.71 71 .58 11.97
stress Management
79.24 10.84 76.56 11 .96
Gender Identity
76.02 12.44 78.76 14.13
cultural Identity
70.09 10.42 67.73 11.03
Work
79.01 12.11 76.16 12.85
Leisure
84.88 8.62 82.52 8.62
Friendship
84.77 13.25 81 .67 13.12
Love
73.60 7.04 73.08 6.83
Total Wellness
81 .88 12.42 79.64 14.45
Perceived Wellness

WELL Sampler, © 2001 , 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-19-
 I
I
T

X
...P......A......R......! ...............W .
i
.~....
j T I N E L
F ...... H I; .....................
U_.S E_... _.0.......... ................
_. ....... C O u N s L I N G........................ ..
I E .....................
·············· ···········•···
.~ I ················

Myers et al. (2000)

presented a four-pha model for using the Wheel of W
t

Counselin g: se enn
( 888
t
iri
el
(1) Introduction of
the Whee 1Of Wellness mod • including a lifespan focus
t based on the mod
(2) formal and/or inf ,
(3) intentional intervormal assessmen wellness in sele el,
entions to enhance cted areas of the W
and h
(4) evaluation, follo . ee1,
w-up, and continuat . n of steps two through four.
io
In applying these ph d it useful to provid
ases or steps, we ha
of The WEL Wor
kbook (Myers et al, ve fou: h provides specifice clients with a co
~heel of Wellnes 20 0.3) w IC. ed to he information on t~Y
s Model and infor lp clients reflect on a e
in_terpret their scor matio~ design be us
chents both underses. The following suggestions may t eful in using the W
EL to h;d
tand their scores an en
d create plans 0 hance their wellness. Ip
Phase 1: Introduc
tion of the Wheel
of Wellness Model
It is helpful to clie
nts both to define
personal meaning wellness and to allo th
of wellness. Then w em time to re
importance of a w , th flect on the
ellness lifestyle disc e Wheel model. can be presented
model can be desc ussed. The interact and the
rib ion of th e compon~
create changes in ed by explaining how change in any nts of the
other areas and th one
need t~ realize th ese changes can be area can contribute ~o or
at wellness i~ a ch for better or worse
empowers them to oice, and that each . Clients
ward greater happ ch oice made toward
iness and life satisfa wellness
ction.
The Wheel repres
ents a cross sectio
of the lifespan, th n of behaviors that
us attention to ea have an effect over
time. For those w ch component has the course
ho make wellness consequences that m
improved quality choices, the cumul ul tiply over
of life and longevity ative effect over th
. e lifespan is
Phase 2: Assessm
ent o f the Components of th
e Wheel of Wellnes
The purpose of as s
sessment is to pr
plan. Scores on ovide a basis for
the WEL provide developing a pers
specific areas of in formation about cu onal wellness
wellness. It is up rrent levels of func
which areas, if any, to clients to exam tioning in
they would like to ine their scores an
change. d determine

WELL Sampler, © 20
01, 20
All Rights Reserved 04 Jane E. My~rs, Thomas J. Sweeney,_
. Published by Mind &
Garden, Inc., www.mm J. Melvin Witmer.
-20- dgarden.com
 d be encouragedIIto ('
reflect on
h
their scores' detenn·me how representat,ve..
stl0 uI f their total we ness 1.e., ow well the scores renect th . .
(ilient~res are,~ess), then reflect on t~e pattern of their high and 10:r :O'::.ti~,n°!
tfle.s~otal w~\he balance between vanous aspects of wellness and the desirability of
eir ·011 o I
tf1 tJSSI • t1ef pfU .
i,au:1nce is
d,sc clients to select one or more of their low scores as areas for which they
ura9e ersonal wellness plan. Alternately, they may choose an . h' h
en C0 ap t · h' h th area m w ,c
1/JB de"el0P a high score_, y~ one m w ic . ey would like to enhance their personal
c3n eceived cases, it 1s important to build on assets found within the profile by
II
tJiBY ~sS· 111 3 ttributes which can help to strengthen those found less satisfactory by the
..,elln ...,i 11g a
v, t,c:JSI"'
erflP
client. tional Interventions to Enhance Wellness - Developing a Personal
3· 1nten
• p1an
P,,ase . . has been assessed, either .
We//f1ess ss in each d1mens1on informally or formally, we
e wellne to choose one or more areas of wellness that they would like to change
on: ur client~nce the client identifies those dimensions, a personal wellness plan can
as d 0it11Proved The plan should be based on personal strengths and limitations related to
an develoP8 • ea targeted for change, and should emphasize behaviors that will result
bee wellness ar inclusion of specific objectives for change, methods to be used to effect
!h ; c:1nge. Th\ources that will be employed to help the client change can be noted. The
11
111 a ge, and reof a timeline for change, rewards or reinforcements, and a public
11
11
~evelopmentf om the client should be included to maximize the potential success of the
r,,itrnent r
corri
plan-
. Evaluation and Follow-Up
p/lase 4.
' . of evaluation procedures and timelines is an important part of the
A dis~ussio~ n The client should be encouraged to commit to an ongoing plan for
behavioral/ astematic evaluation, with identified markers that signify progress in making
regular aW sy ncourage clients to develop both short and long range plans to improve
change. e e The counseling process can be a time to introduce them to the model,
their wellnesf~chniques for self-assessment, planning, evaluation, and follow-up, and

.t
teach th em em to develop a view of wellness as a lifelong process in which many
encourage ccur. Many clients are able to develop and implement their own wellness
chang~s ~ 1 0 thers prefer a more focused, step-by-step process involving discussion
plans, whi e 0 .onal. some areas of wellness are popular in the media today, such as
with_~ prof~s~xercise, and little outside intervention may be required to help a client
nutnt1?n an ositive change in these dimensions. Other areas, such as emotional
experience P d coping and realistic beliefs, may benefit from traditional counseling
awareness an ..
interventions to facilitate change.

WELL Sampler, © 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney,_ & J. Melvi~itmer. :
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden. Inc., www.mtndgarden.
-21-
 E w E L.........E...Q..J.L.M........§.
S A M P L...................................
·······•-•···-•··········••A••····· N G
···········A N "
C O.···························
R I ...,, u
'••·······
S .............
······ '•

Wellness Evaluation of Lifestyle

Form 5

The Wellness Evaluation of Lifestyle (WEL) measures 19 dimension

wellness. It is based on the traits o~ healthy persons. The purpose of the
help you make healthy lifestyle choices. Your results can help you develop L1sto
~t .
live your life more fully. a Plan to
INSTRUCTIONS
The wellness items are statements that describe you. Answer each it .
way that is true for you most of the time. Think about how you most oftenern 1na
yourself, feel, or behave. Answer all the 134 items_on the WEL. Do not sp:ee
nd
much time on any one item. Your honest answers will make your scores mar too
e usetu1
The choices for each item are Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disa
Strongly Disagree. Circle the letter on the answer sheet that most closely ma{r~e, and
~ou see yourself. For example, suppose you "like meeting new people" most cf ~s how
time. You would circle "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" for this item as shown beloo he
W.
I like meeting new people.
Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree
A B C D E

Begin by filling in the following information:

Last Name:
--------------
First Name:
---------------
G~nde r:
Grade Level:
---------------
8irth Date:
Identification Number (if instructed):
----------

· WELL Sa~pler, © 2001, 2004 Jane E. Myers, Thomas J. Sweeney, & J. Melvin Witmer.
All Rights Reserved. Published by Mind Garden, Inc., www.mindgarden.com
-24-