**Abstract**

The study of the dynamics and features of students' personal resourcefulness in the conditions of war in Ukraine is an important task, since understanding the peculiarities of the resourcefulness functioning will allow carrying out the necessary measures for its maintenance, recovery and development. The authors proposed a model of personal resourcefulness as a metacognitive experience. In the study, an express questionnaire "Personal resources" (O. Savchenko, S. Sukach) was used for the diagnosis of resourcefulness level. The study was conducted on a sample of 69 students of KNEU. To solve different tasks, several methodologies were used: factorial experimental design, comparative study of the same group in different conditions, and clustering of empirical data to determine different types of students' resourcefulness. It was found that the overall level of personal resourcefulness is a significant factor in subjective, psychological, social and global well-being. Five types of personal resourcefulness were identified, namely "high resourcefulness," "high-stress resistance," "inefficient use of strategies," "passivity in the search for resources" and "high emotional exhaustion." Students with different types of resourcefulness have significant differences in well-being. The negative changes in students' personal resourcefulness were revealed in a condition of the war in Ukraine (decrease in the level of overall resourcefulness and increase in emotional exhaustion). It has been established that students do not actively use restoring resource strategies in a prolonged stressful situation.

**Keywords:** well-being, global well-being, subjective well-being, psychological well-being, social well-being, resource, resourcefulness, resource exhaustion

## **1. Introduction**

The issue of human well-being so fascinates modern scientists that F. Martela & K. Sheldon [1], in analyzing the differences between various views on well-being, separate at least 45 different ways of definition of this phenomenon and identify at least 63 different constructs. Such a state of this scientific field significantly complicates the study of well-being. Thus, in psychological research, one can find quite different terms used in relation to the category of "well-being." In particular, these are such concepts as happiness/pleasure, subjective well-being, psychological well-being,

life satisfaction, authentic happiness, positive development, developmental assets, flow and meaning [2].

Some modern researchers also draw attention to the fact that "existing definitions of happiness, subjective well-being, and quality of life suggest conceptual overlap between these constructs" [3], on the basis of which they can be used as alternatives. However, modern transcultural studies prove the non-invariance of constructs that represent different dimensions of well-being – happiness, life satisfaction and perceived social support. A number of focus groups with students conducted in different countries of the world and content analysis of the results of their work made it possible to identify "two dimensions of well-being: happiness and satisfaction with life as a measure of subjective well-being, and perceived social support as a measure of social well-being" [4]. We can also add that M. Thorburn, carrying out a critical analysis of well-being, noted that "often underpinning analysis are contrasting theories of well-being, e.g. subjective constructs that value highly reflections on personal experiences and individual fulfillment, and objective theories that emphasize more through specific criteria the societal benefits of well-being" [5]. O. Savchenko et al. [6], based on a study of organizational staff well-being, also proved that the levels of subjective and psychological well-being are not consistent, which confirms the non-equivalence of these constructs.

W. Wilson introduced the concept of subjective well-being in 1960 in his thesis [7]. The author clearly emphasized that this phenomenon refers only to an individual's subjective assessment of their life and internal experience, excluding external criteria. However, for more than 60 years, this concept still has not received a clear definition. Its content depends on the field of psychology in which it is used. In the early stages, researchers viewed it as a multifaceted concept that includes cognitive and emotional dimensions that can be defined as life satisfaction and happiness [8]. These dimensions are distinct but correlated [7, 9, 10].

One of the most famous theories of subjective well-being proposed by E. Diener and F. Fujita [9] includes pleasure, positive and negative emotions. These components form two dimensions: cognitive (intellectual satisfaction in different areas of life) and emotional (bad-good mood as an emotional background). At later stages, researchers suggested analyzing well-being at global and specific levels. The global level of analysis of subjective well-being involves direct assessment of one aspect, which is based on reflection and has high stability over time. A specific level of analysis suggests an indirect assessment using several aspects, which reveals greater sensitivity to causal variables and allows to isolate specific conditions and predictors [10]. Psychologists, based on the analysis of more than 100 scientific works, separated four groups of theories of subjective well-being: fulfillment and engagement; personal orientation; evaluative theories and emotional theories [11]. Summarizing the results of the theoretical analysis, it is possible to define subjective well-being as a complex experience based on a person's cognitive-emotional assessment of the quality of their own life, which reflects the degree of need satisfaction and compliance of their current state with personal standards of success, favourability and happiness.

The concept of "psychological well-being" was separated from the concept of "subjective well-being" in the 80s of the last century. C.D. Ryff [12, 13] defined it as a process of self-realization and self-determination based on the satisfaction of basic psychological needs. In contrast to subjective well-being, psychological one is "a person's potential to realize a meaningful life and to meet real life challenges" [14].

#### *Development of a Methodology for the Study of Resourcefulness as an Important Indicator… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112119*

Other researchers suggested that "well-being is seen as lying at the opposite end of a spectrum to the common mental disorders (depression, anxiety)" [15].

However, we note that sustainable well-being does not exclude experiencing painful or negative emotions (disappointment, failure and grief) from time to time. Such experiences are an important part of human life. The ability to manage these negative or painful emotions is essential to long-term well-being. Summing up, we state that the concept of psychological well-being means productive functioning of the personality, which includes the development of one's potential, controlling the events of one's life, awareness of the goal (for example, working to achieve valuable goals and self-realization), establishing positive relationships with others.

C.L.M. Keyes is considered one of the first to propose a theoretical model of social well-being that extended the psychological well-being model. The researcher defined social well-being as "the appraisal of one's circumstance and functioning in society" [16]. According to this model, an individual evaluates the quality of their relationships with other people, their neighbors and their communities. Social well-being is a phenomenon that reflects community relations of person that focus on the particular social challenges [17]. J.S. Larson [18] considered social adjustment and social support as components of social well-being.

Thus, we consider social well-being as a separate form of personal well-being, which reflects their ability to effectively interact with others, establish and maintain healthy interpersonal relationships, and adapt to the social environment with respect for social norms and rules. The constructs of subjective, psychological and social well-being reflect various aspects of personal well-being and close relationships. Based on the analysis of publications on well-being indicators, we propose an understanding of global well-being as a meta-form of well-being that integrates key objective and subjective indicators of subjective, psychological and social well-being in a balanced way.

In this way, in psychology, there are several approaches to the analysis of wellbeing and a large number of its forms, among which the most famous are subjective, psychological, social and global. Our experience in studying the personal well-being, acquired in the difficult conditions of total social isolation and a prolonged stressful situation caused by a full-scale war on the territory of Ukraine, shows the need to consider the level of psychological resources as an important indicator of the state of personal well-being. We suppose that the level of resourcefulness determines the different forms of personal well-being when a person is in complex, stressful situations.

As of today, the resource approach to the construct of well-being is represented mainly by studies of the links between different forms of well-being and various resources in their different understandings [9, 19, 20].

The purpose of our study is to investigate the level of resourcefulness as an important factor in the experience of various forms of personal well-being. To achieve the goal, we have formed the following tasks:


The author's model of "Personality Resourcefulness" was proposed as a direction for the study of personality resilience. According to our approach, resourcefulness is a complex experience that arises on the basis of a person's assessment of the level of their available resources, the possibility of their rapid mobilization and easy recovery in a post-stress situation. Undoubtedly, the experience of resourcefulness is a metacognitive experience, as it reflects a person's knowledge about his or her current capabilities, about the strategies available in the person's repertoire.

The main principles of this model are based on the statements of the COR theory1 [21–23], cognitive energetics theory [24], strategic-resource model [25, 26] and resource model of self-control [27].

Thus, we consider resourcefulness as an experience that arises on the basis of cognitive assessment of both the problem situation (task, external requirements) and the state of the individual, which regulates the processes of resource allocation, mobilization and recovery. This approach corresponds to the basic principle of COR theory that people are motivated to acquire, protect and foster the acquisition of their resources [23]. The process of accumulation and use of resources is regulated by the rational principle of personality functioning at the behavioral level: to maximize gains and limit losses, with a dominant attitude to reduce losses. Thus, the individual is unconsciously oriented towards resource conservation, and this explains the fact that resource allocation tends to be conservative "because mental effort is costly" [28]. The regulation of resources is carried out in accordance with the basic principle of cognitive energetics theory. An individual's behavior (purposeful cognitive activity) is the result of the ratio of a driving force and a restraining force [24]. In terms of strength, a driving force may be slightly stronger than a restraining force, which would correspond to a rational attitude towards saving personal resources. According to cognitive energetics theory, the intensity of a driving force depends on goal importance and the pool of available mental resources, while a restraining force is determined by "individual's inclination to conserve resources, current task demands, and competing goals" [24]. Focusing on the provisions of the strategic-resource model, we consider the state of resources as a subjective state that an individual can regulate by various means, strategies. At the same time, a number of these strategies can be used consciously, based on metacognitive knowledge about the peculiarities of their mental activity and others – impulsively, under the influence of an actual assessment of existing efforts. Some strategies are aimed at preventing the state of lack of resources and some are aimed at rapid mobilization of forces [25]. Researchers believe that the ratio of feelings of "energy" and "tension" regulate the level of resources of the individual. The ratio

<sup>1</sup> COR theory - Hobfoll's theory of conservation of resources.

*Development of a Methodology for the Study of Resourcefulness as an Important Indicator… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112119*

of these two experiences is the "tachometer," a mechanism that indicates whether to save or to spend effort [25, 26].

Now, we will briefly describe the main ideas that guide us in developing the concept of "resourcefulness."

First, resources are understood as certain means (objects, personal characteristics, conditions and energy (physical and mental)), the availability, sufficiency and accessibility of which contribute to the achievement of goals and the maintenance of well-being [21, 29]. When a person experiences the inability to mobilize resources, their deficit or complete absence, it significantly complicates the achievement of the goal and forms a negative emotional background. These negative subjective states, including stress, anxiety and fatigue [26], block the possibility of experiencing well-being and are indicators of a low level of resourcefulness of the individual. All psychological resources have both objective and subjective components, external or internal locus relative to the individual [23]. Thus, some aspects of resources can be observed by researchers, as they manifest in behavior, in physiological reactions; most aspects of resources are experienced internally by individuals, which is reflected only in self-descriptions, self-evaluations, etc.

Second, internal resources, such as energy, self-efficacy, are "key as they provide the energy and motivation to seek and maintain external resources" [23]. The shortage of internal resources makes access to other resources (facilities, conditions, social support) difficult or impossible, and it is much more difficult for a person to compensate for already real resource losses or even potential losses. "Lack of access creates vulnerability to further loss under stress" [23]. As S.E. Hobfoll, "those who lack resources are more likely to experience extreme consequences" [22]. Therefore, as a consequence, a person, being aware of his/her vulnerability and based on past experience, will try to control the level of resources, timely restore and enrich resources, invest some resources, less valuable, in more valuable ones (for example, time and energy are invested in status and power). The experience of stressful events and recovery after them forms a rational attitude of the individual to the use of available resources and prevention of resource shortage. At the same time, researchers do not exclude the possibility of the individual from time to time to disable rational control of resources, which can have both negative consequences for the individual – emotional exhaustion, burnout, ego devastation [27] and positive – broadening the view of the problem, considering different patterns of behavior. Reducing the level of control over resources and one's behavior allows for replenishing the lack of resources, including metabolic ones [30].

Third, there are different types of psychological resources. Thus, S.E. Hobfoll distinguishes objects, personal characteristics, conditions and energy. These resources have both instrumental value, as they allow to achieve the goal, and symbolic value, as they help people to understand themselves, their priorities and values [23, 29]. D. Leontiev proposed a classification of psychological resources that combines the following categories: instrumental, self-regulatory, motivational and resilience resources [29]. O. Savchenko [31] identified three levels of functioning of psychological resources of the individual: cognitive, metacognitive and personal. Thus, at the cognitive level of functioning, the resources are the available mental structures, formed intellectual operations and automated behavioral reactions that ensure the solution of the problem. The indicator of their presence is intellectual experiences and feelings. Metacognitive resources is a system of regulatory properties of the individual,

including metacognitive knowledge, formed metacognitive operations and strategies that ensure the organization of mental activity of the individual in problem situations, regulation of his intellectual functions. An indicator of the availability and sufficiency of resources are integrative experiences of self-efficacy, confidence, sense of knowledge, etc. Personal resources are a system of personal properties, including complex mental models, meaning-making and self-regulatory operations, complex behavioral programmes that provide rethinking of one's own experience, creation of new means of solving problems, application of various semantic contexts, etc. The indicator of availability and sufficiency of resources is hope, a sense of self-reliance and the ability to construct one's life.

Fourth, the classification of resources by S.E. Hobfoll includes the category "Energy," which combines time, money, knowledge and actual physical and mental energy. Their main value is that they provide the acquisition of other types of resources [21]. Psychologists have conceptualized mental energy as "the intensity of subjective feelings about one's ability to accomplish tasks in daily life" [32]. The structural components of mental energy are cognition (the set of abilities to execute cognitive tasks), the mood of energy (the feeling that one can complete physical and mental tasks) and motivation (the desire to execute tasks). Many factors determine the level of mental energy; the most important among them are health status, age, nutritional status and sleep [32].

In uncertain situations characterized by novelty, complexity and ambiguity of demands, mental energy levels provide an executive control mechanism that is "the ability to regulate automatic perceptual and motor processes in order to respond in an adaptive way to novel or changing task demands" [33]. To behave effectively, a person needs to constantly replenish the level of their mental energy. So, we assume that a person has the ability to control the level of mental energy. The baseline level of mental energy provides the ability of an individual to exercise energy control, as this baseline level supports consciousness and cognition. A person can also increase the level of mental energy if, according to a preliminary assessment, he expects difficulties on the way to achieving a goal or is too motivated by high rewards. Since a person is conservative in resource allocation, energy use exceeds previous energy allocation; a state of mental energy deficit is an expected state that needs to be changed through resource replenishment. "Replenishment is a necessary part of an effective mental energy management system" [28]. The level of mental energy works as an adaptive mechanism: if the energy is extremely low, the costs do not justify the results and then the person receives a signal to change the behavior or refuse to make further attempts. If a person feels a surplus of mental energy, it can be a signal to continue trying, to add more effort.

Fifth, psychological resources require constant replenishment [28]. The amount of resources required for recovery depends on two things: first, on the resource deficit experienced by the individual, and second, on the favourability of the cost-benefit trade-off experienced at the completion of the task. The actual cost-benefit trade-off can be favorable and unfavorable. Mental energy replenishment will occur if the actual cost–benefit trade-off is favorable, if the reward is sufficient given the actual amount of effort. In case of unfavorable cost-benefit trade-off, mental energy replenishment will not occur.

It is established that the more unexpected costs, the more an individual needs to replenish resources. Resource replenishment should take into account the favourability of the actual cost-benefit trade-off from the completed task, so researchers talk about strategic-resource replenishment [28]. In case of untimely replenishment

### *Development of a Methodology for the Study of Resourcefulness as an Important Indicator… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112119*

of resources, the individual's working condition may deteriorate, leading to emotional exhaustion and ego depletion. The concept of self-regulation based on resource allocation explains the state of exhaustion through the limited ability of the individual to self-control. The self-control mechanism also uses the body's resources, and this "resource is limited and runs out with use, like a sort of mental fuel that powers the will" [34]. The use of resources is time-dependent, their quantity decreases over time, and this also applies to the resources that ensure self-control. Thus, over time, a person loses both the resources necessary to perform work and the resources necessary to control this performance.

However, more recent studies indicate that ego depletion is rather a signal for the individual to cut back on exertion to conserve their remaining energy. The state of ego depletion does not indicate a complete absence of mental energy but rather signals a requirement for more rational use of psychological resources. There is also evidence that it is possible to improve the functioning of the self-control mechanism through regular exercises, self-control training [35]. Although the effect of self-control training, namely the ability to transfer improving self-control in one domain to another domain, has a small-to-medium effectiveness [36].

The conducted theoretical analysis gives us grounds for defining the construct "resourcefulness." Thus, resourcefulness is a metacognitive experience of available psychological resources, which includes a sense of the total number of resources that can be mobilized to successfully complete a task, awareness of one's ability to mobilize and restore resources based on previous experience, and knowledge of strategies for mobilizing and restoring resources.

Functioning as a metacognitive experience, resourcefulness promotes the activation of certain strategies. This functioning can also be presented at three levels: cognitive – activation of cognitive evaluation, allocation and resource mobilization strategies; metacognitive – activation of replenishment strategies in a situation of partial or complete deficit of resources; personal – organization of rest after a stressful or difficult situation, activation of strategies of resource recovery.

The previous theoretical model of resourcefulness included three components:


In accordance with the proposed model, an express questionnaire for diagnosing the level of resourcefulness "Personal Resources" was developed [37].

### **2. Methodological framework**

We made the following assumptions to test in our study:

• H1<sup>2</sup> : The overall level of personal resourcefulness is a factor of the level of subjective, psychological and social well-being.

<sup>2</sup> H – an empirical hypothesis.


The first assumption was tested using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA in the SPSS Statistics 26 package). One-way analysis allows for establishing relationships between independent (cause, factor) and dependent (effect) variables. The intention of a one-way analysis is "to determine whether there is an overall main effect of different levels of an independent variable on a dependent variable" [38]. In such a way, "the greater the variance (differences) between the groups of the experiment, the more likely the independent variable is to have had an effect, especially if the within-groups variance is low" [39].

We used a factorial experimental design (Factorial experiment), which allows simultaneous testing of the influence of several factors, each of which has several levels. Since we use indicators obtained in psychodiagnostic survey, all independent variables in our study were represented by three levels: low, medium and high. This is called a systematic change in the independent variable [39]. In the study, the main factor is the level of resourcefulness and also the level of expression of its components.

To determine the types of persons with different resourcefulness, we applied cluster analysis of data by the Tree clustering procedure, using the Complete Linkage strategy and the City-block (Manhattan) distances formula (STATISTICA 10.0 package). The second and third assumptions were checked using the non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis test, Median test and Mann–Whitney U-test.

To analyze the dynamic changes in the resourcefulness of Ukrainians, a comparative design was used, and measurements were carried out on one group after a time interval of 3 months. The first measurement was conducted in September 2022, and the second – in December 2022. To test the fourth assumption, Student's t-criterion for dependent measures was used.

The calculations were performed using SPSS Statistics 26 and STATISTICA 10.0 packages.

The subjects were selected for the study from a database that was created in the preliminary study (May–August 2022). This primary study was designed to create the "Personal resources" questionnaire (O. Savchenko, S. Sukach). The database was formed gradually, since the development of a new methodology requires that several procedures be carried out in sequence. As a result, 414 students of different specialities took part in the preliminary study. Faculties of Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman were chosen as clusters. The University has eight separate faculties that prepare students for 21 specialities. Four faculties were randomly selected (Personnel Management, Sociology and Psychology Department; Economics and Management Faculty; Faculty of International Economics and Management; Faculty of Finance). Three faculties have more than three specialities (in this case, two specialities were randomly selected), and one of them has only one (Faculty of Finance). As a result, seven specialities were selected in total. Four groups were randomly selected for each speciality in the second and fourth years of study. Thus, invitations to participate in the study were sent to students of 28 academic

*Development of a Methodology for the Study of Resourcefulness as an Important Indicator… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112119*

groups. It was important to ensure the most complete filling of each cluster, so the criterion for the completeness of the cluster was the participation of at least 85% of the composition. As a result, only students from 17 groups formed the final database. The average cluster size was 24.6 students. All participants in the preliminary study filled out the "Personal resources" questionnaire (O. Savchenko, S. Sukach).

In September 2022, we moved on to the main study. We needed to form a sample in such a way that individuals with a high, medium and high level of personal resourcefulness were equally represented in it. That allowed us to form three subgroups from a common database (414 subjects) with different levels of resourcefulness: low (151 subjects), medium (183 subjects) and high (80 subjects). For this selection, we used the procedure of randomization by levels of baseline characteristic (covariate). Randomly (tables of random values were used) 25 participants were selected from each subgroup. A Google Form with the research programme was sent to their email with asking to take part in a new study. In such way, we used several criteria for selecting subjects to form a sample for a factorial experiment:

1. an age (18+ years old);

2.university student status;

3.the level of resourcefulness, which was diagnosed in the preliminary study.

As a result, out of 69 participants who agreed to take part in this study, 23 (34.8%) students have had a low level of resourcefulness, 26 (39.1%) – a medium level, 20 (26.1%) - a high level.


**Table 1.** *The composition of the sample.*

The research programme included six methodologies (122 statements). We oriented students to voluntary participation, increasing their motivation through motivational appeals to them. Before starting the study, we received approval from the Research Ethics Committee of the Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman. We did not impose time limits, so the average study procedure lasted 45–50 minutes.

The composition of the sample is presented in **Table 1**.

#### **3. Methods**

In total, we used 25 indicators in the study. Four indicators reflect the characteristics of resourcefulness, and 21 indicators measure different aspects of well-being (see **Table 2**).

For the study of resourcefulness, we used the "Personal Resources" questionnaire (O. Savchenko, S. Sukach), which contains 13 statements combined into three scales: "Sufficiency of resources" "Restoring resources strategies" and "Emotional exhaustion." This questionnaire was normalized and validated on a sample of youth (N = 198). At the stage of statements creation, the methodology demonstrated a high level of differentiability (average value – 0.84). The three scales have a relatively high level of reliability-consistency of statements in a certain scale and high reliabilitystability over time. Thus, "Sufficiency of resources" has 0.81 according to Cronbach's alpha and 0.53 (p < 0.001) according to "test-retest"; "Restoring resources strategies" – 0.70 and 0.53 (р < 0.001); "Emotional exhaustion" – 0.66 and 0.50 (р < 0.001). The overall indicator of resourcefulness has a value of 0.81 according to Cronbach's alpha, which corresponds to a high level of reliability-consistency, and 0.53 (р < 0.001) according to the "test–retest" indicator, which corresponds to a high level of reliability-stability over time [37].

It should also be noted that the resulting structure of the questionnaire does not fully correspond to the author's theoretical model. In the empirical study, we could not obtain separate independent factors reflecting the ability to mobilize efforts and the ability to restore them. On a sample of youth, these two dimensions formed one general factor. At the same time, the scale "Emotional exhaustion," the content of which reflects the experience of resource scarcity, was discovered rather unexpectedly. It means that the factor "lack of resources" is a very important aspect of the analysis of personal resources, especially for the subjects who are in conditions of a long-term stressful state. We hypothesize that resources are valued along two independent dimensions: actual resources that can be mobilized and restored, and resources that are lacking and insufficient for effective personal functioning. The lack of resources is experienced by the individual as limitations that do not allow mobilizing all possibilities and slow down the process of recovery. And this is where the matter of the price of resource mobilization becomes relevant. Evaluating one's own resource state as sufficient for the implementation of a certain activity, an individual can evaluate their ability to mobilize resources in different ways: as high, in the case of high motivation and low task difficulty, and as low, in the case of low motivation and high complexity or uncertainty of the situation. In a state of emotional exhaustion, the mobilization price factor [29] begins to affect the assessment of the actual resources, and it distorts the assessment of sufficient resources. A person who is experiencing exhaustion feels that even with a simple task, resources will have to be added and then restored over a long period. As such, this can lead to re-evaluating resources, *Development of a Methodology for the Study of Resourcefulness as an Important Indicator… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112119*

"people may combat their sense of loss by re-evaluating the value of resources that are threatened or that have been lost" [21].

The price of mobilization is the ratio of the amount of effort (time, mental energy) spent on mobilizing resources to the amount of effort (time, mental energy) required to restore normal level of working capacity. The price of mobilization is predicted in advance; its value affects the subject's decision-making regarding involvement in the activity and determines the specifics of this involvement.

We should also note that even though the scale of strategies previously included statements about the mobilization and replenishment of resources, the final version of the express methodology included only statements describing the restoring resources after some activity. Of course, the work on the main version of the questionnaire will continue.

Indicators of various forms of well-being were determined according to standardized methodologies of psychological diagnosis in the Ukrainian-language adaptation. The main indicators by methodologies are given in **Table 2**.


**Table 2.**

*The main empirical indicators of various forms of well-being.*

Therefore, we used the Questionnaire on Positive and Negative Affects, based on the PANAS scales (Watson, Clark and Tellegen, adaptation of M. Klimanska, I. Haletska), to diagnose the ratio of positive and negative emotions. The Ukrainianlanguage adaptation of this methodology, which was carried out in 2020, has demonstrated high Cronbach's alpha values for the "during the past few weeks" instruction. The researchers obtained such results: 0.89 for positive affect (PA) and 0.88 for negative affect (NA). The "test-retest" reliability was 0.7 for PA and 0.48 for NA [43].

In accordance with E. Diner's approach, O. Kaliuk and O. Savchenko developed the methodology "Cognitive features of subjective well-being" (KOSB-3). It includes 20 statements forming three scales: "Satisfaction with personal life," "Dissatisfaction with oneself and frustration in life," and "Satisfaction with other people relationships." In addition, the General level of satisfaction indicator was introduced and standardized on a sample of 256 persons of young age (18–25 years old). Stanine score was used for standardization. The scales of the methodology have showed high reliability-consistency and high reliability-stability over time. Thus, the "Satisfaction with personal life" scale demonstrated 0.78 according to Cronbach's alpha index and 0.78 (p < 0.001) according to "test-retest"; "Dissatisfaction with oneself and frustration in life" – 0.74 and 0.61 (р < 0.001) respectively; "Satisfaction with other people relationships" – 0.77 and 0.70 (р < 0.001). The indicator of overall level of satisfaction has a value of 0.70 according to Cronbach's alpha index, which corresponds to a high level of reliability-consistency, and 0.79 (р < 0.001) according to the "testretest" index, which corresponds to a high level of reliability-stability over time [41].

"The mental health continuum-short form (MHC-SF-UA)" (C. Keyes, adapted by E. Nosenko, A. Chetveryk-Burchak) contains 15 traits, which are combined into three scales: "Hedonic well-being" (SWB), "Psychological well-being" and "Social well-being." However, in 2014, the authors validated and checked the reliability of only the general indicator. It was named "General indicator of health continuum." Adaptation was carried out on a sample of 163 people (18–35 years old). Cronbach's alpha index was 0.85, the "test–retest" index was 0.82 (p < 0.001) [40]. The general indicator integrates all three forms of well-being, so we suggest it partially reflects the level of global well-being.

The "Ryff Scales of psychological well-being" methodology is considered the leading technique of researching psychological well-being throughout the world. However, the Ukrainian-language version, which has passed all the stages of adaptation, validation and standardization, is missing. Hence, we were forced to look for others and indicators that reflected certain aspects of this form of well-being. We used the "Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ )" (R. Bayer, adaptation of V. Kuchyna, Ya. Kaplunenko). The ability to analyze and accept one's experience is related to the abilities of reducing stress, overcoming symptoms of anxiety, depression, burnout and other psychological difficulties [44]. Therefore, we consider indicators of inner experience awareness as important indicators of mental health and well-being. The Ukrainian version demonstrated high reliability and validity indices in all respects. Cronbach's alpha indices have such values: "Observation" - 0.94; "Description" - 0.93; "Conscious action" - 0.91; "Non-judgment of inner experience" - 0.84; "Non-reactivity to inner experience" - 0.91, integral index - 0.94. In our study, we used the data according to three scales that, in our opinion, most correspond to the indicators of psychological well-being, namely: "Conscious action," "Non-judgment of inner experience," "Non-reactivity to inner experience."

We used the "Social Well-Being Scale" (C. Keyes, adapted by A. Chetveryk-Burchak) to determine indicators of social well-being. The scales of the methodology correspond to the five structural factors of social well-being proposed by C. Keyes.

*Development of a Methodology for the Study of Resourcefulness as an Important Indicator… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.112119*

These are social acceptance, social actualization, social contribution, social coherence and social integration. The Ukrainian-language version of the methodology passed all stages of adaptation, demonstrated high values according to Cronbach's alpha (reliability-stability) and "test-retest" (reliability-stability) indices. So, the researchers who adapted the methodology received the following data: "Social acceptance" - 0.79 (Cronbach's alpha) and 0.59 ("test-retest"), "Social actualization" - 0.93 and 0.63 (respectively), "Social contribution" - 0.63 and 0.70, "Social coherence" - 0.90 and 0.67, "Social integration" - 0.69 and 0.56 [42]. The indicator of the general level of social well-being also has a high level of reliability-consistency and reliability-stability. These values are equal to 0.84 and 0.75 (p < 0.001), respectively. The questionnaire contains 15 statements, each subscale includes 3 of them.

Thus, the subjects at the first stage of the study filled out six questionnaires based on self-assessment of their experiences, abilities and skills.

#### **4. Personal resourcefulness as a factor of the high well-being of the personality**

Results of testing the first hypothesis (H1).

Now we are going to demonstrate that the "Personal Resources" questionnaire (O. Savchenko, S. Sukach) can be used to solve various research problems and to verify certain assumptions. Let us start with the hypothesis that the level of resourcefulness is an important factor in experiencing well-being, in its various forms.

We used a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure to test hypotheses regarding the relationships between the level of resourcefulness and the experience of various forms of well-being. We also applied the procedure of correlation analysis according to the Pearson's coefficient to identify the direction of relationship: positive (the two variables deviate in the same direction) or negative (in the opposite directions). The results are shown in **Table 3**.



*1 MS model - "average" sum of squares for the Factor.*

*2 MS residual- "average" sum of squares for the Error.*

*3 F-statistics – a result of F-test in one-way analysis ANOVA.*

*4 p – the significance level.*

*5 r - the Pearson's correlation coefficient.*

#### **Table 3.**

*The results of a one-way analysis variance on the indicator of resourcefulness.*
