Flourishing and PERMA: What They Mean for a Dissertation

Two students talking through a PERMA dissertation idea at a library table, generated using generative AI

Flourishing is a high level of wellbeing: feeling good and also functioning well, with purpose, supportive relationships and a sense of progress. PERMA is Martin Seligman’s model of what that looks like in practice. It has five elements: positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning and accomplishment.

For a dissertation, that gives you three options. You can use PERMA as your theoretical framework, as the structure for a questionnaire, or as a coding frame for interviews. Whichever you choose, your supervisor and markers will expect you to define flourishing carefully, justify your instrument and say where the model falls short. We cover each of those below, with UK higher education examples and sample research questions.

What flourishing means in psychology

In positive psychology, flourishing refers to a high level of wellbeing (Ploke, Batinic and Stieger, 2024). It is not a synonym for feeling happy. Happiness and life satisfaction sit on the hedonic side of wellbeing, which is about pleasure and positive feelings. Flourishing also draws on the eudaimonic side, which is about meaning, growth and functioning well.

Researchers still disagree about what flourishing must include. Keyes (2002) argued that a person needs both positive feelings and positive functioning to count as flourishing, while other scholars link flourishing mainly to eudaimonia (Ploke, Batinic and Stieger, 2024). Choose one definition early, cite it, and keep to it from the literature review to the discussion chapter.

The PERMA model and its five elements

Seligman set out PERMA in his 2011 book Flourish. Butler and Kern (2016) summarise the model as flourishing arising from five wellbeing pillars. Seligman (2018) later described them as building blocks of wellbeing rather than a separate kind of wellbeing, a distinction that matters when you write your theoretical framework.

Element	What it covers	A sample dissertation angle
P Positive emotion	Everyday positive feelings such as joy, contentment and gratitude	How often do final-year students report positive emotion during assessment periods?
E Engagement	Being absorbed in what you are doing, sometimes described as flow	How does engagement with a module relate to wellbeing?
R Relationships	Supportive connections with peers, family, supervisors and others	What role do peer relationships play for students living away from home?
M Meaning	Belonging to and building something bigger than yourself, according to Seligman (British Psychological Society, 2017)	How do students describe purpose in their degree?
A Accomplishment	Pursuing and reaching goals, including academic achievement	How do postgraduate taught students experience achievement against marking criteria?

The five elements are not independent. Seligman (2018) noted that people who have one element tend, roughly, to have the others to a similar degree. If you analyse each element separately, say so and discuss how they overlap.

Flourishing, wellbeing and happiness are not interchangeable

Term	What it usually means	What to watch in your write-up
Happiness	Positive feelings and satisfaction with life	Narrower than flourishing, so do not use it as a stand-in
Wellbeing	A broad, multidimensional umbrella term	Researchers define its dimensions differently, so state yours
Flourishing	A high level of wellbeing, often with positive functioning as well as good feelings	Defined and scored differently across instruments, which changes your results

Three ways to use PERMA in a dissertation

As your theoretical framework. Organise the literature review around the five elements, explain why PERMA suits your question better than another model, and engage with the criticism covered later. Our guide on how to write a literature review shows how to build that argument.
As your measurement model. Use a questionnaire such as the PERMA-Profiler to produce a score for each element, then test relationships between them or between PERMA and another variable.
As a coding frame for interviews. Code transcripts against the five elements, or code inductively and compare your themes with PERMA afterwards. The Flourish-HE evaluation included a PERMA-H codebook for its inductive analysis in a supplementary appendix, which gives you a model for documenting your own coding decisions.

If you are still weighing survey against interview, our guide to how to choose a research method for a wellbeing dissertation walks through the decision.

How to measure flourishing in a dissertation

Four instruments come up most often in flourishing research, and a 2024 comparison of the PERMA-Profiler, the Mental Health Continuum Short Form, the Flourishing Scale and the Wellbeing Conceptual Framework found that all four are useful but differ in how broad or narrow a view they take (Ploke, Batinic and Stieger, 2024). The three below are the ones most students will meet.

Instrument	Format	What you get	Often a good fit when
PERMA-Profiler (Butler and Kern, 2016)	23 items rated 0 to 10, with 15 core PERMA items plus items on negative emotion, loneliness, health and overall wellbeing	A score for each PERMA element, plus negative emotion and health, calculated as the average of the items for each factor	You are testing PERMA itself or want element-level results
Flourishing Scale (Diener et al., 2010)	8 items rated 1 to 7, total from 8 to 56	One overall flourishing score	You need a single outcome variable
Mental Health Continuum Short Form (Keyes, 2002)	14 items: 3 emotional, 5 social and 6 psychological wellbeing	Three subscales plus a flourishing, moderate or languishing classification	You want to classify participants or follow Keyes’ model

The Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health describes the PERMA-Profiler as a 23-item measure and notes that a 15-item short form exists but that the full measure is recommended. Butler and Kern developed it across three studies (N = 7,188) and tested it in eight further studies (N = 31,966), reporting acceptable model fit, reliability and validity evidence (Butler and Kern, 2016).

Your choice of measure changes your findings

The instruments are not exact substitutes. Hone et al. (2014) applied four different definitions of flourishing to the same survey of 10,009 adult New Zealanders and got prevalence figures of 24%, 39%, 41% and 47%, depending on the definition. You do not need to repeat that analysis, but you should explain why you chose your instrument and what it leaves out.

Practical checks before you use any scale

Read the permission terms for the scale and cite the original source. The Flourishing Scale authors allow use with proper credit, and the PERMA-Profiler asks users to read its guidance and register before use, so check the current terms for whichever scale you choose.
Report Cronbach’s alpha for your own sample, not only the figures from the original paper.
Plan for ethical approval. Questions about wellbeing can distress some participants, so your participant information sheet should signpost university wellbeing services.

What UK higher education research shows

In England, the Office for Students describes student mental health as a key strategic priority, which is one reason PERMA-based studies of university students are easy to justify. Two UK-focused studies show different ways to build a project around the model.

Flourish-HE at the University of Worcester

Morgan, Simmons and Ayles (2023) evaluated an eight-week online programme underpinned by PERMA-H, the version of the model that adds health as a sixth facet. They used matched pre- and post-programme surveys (N = 33) followed by qualitative interviews. They reported significant increases in positive emotion, positive relationships, meaning or purpose, overall mental wellbeing and sense of course community, alongside decreases in depressive symptoms. The authors also noted barriers to engagement, such as unfavourable preconceptions, and called for evidence on longer-term effects.

What you can borrow: an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design, where interviews help explain survey changes. What to watch: a small sample limits how far the results generalise, so say the same about your own study if your numbers are modest.

PERMA, hope and adaptability during the pandemic

Hoelterhoff and colleagues (2024) interviewed nine UK higher education students using semi-structured interviews and analysed the data thematically. They identified three core themes, hope, adaptability and wellbeing, and found that elements of wellbeing reflected in PERMA appeared to support hope and adaptability.

What you can borrow: a small, well-documented qualitative design that uses PERMA as a lens without needing a large sample. What to watch: nine participants cannot represent all students, so frame your claims around depth rather than prevalence.

Limits of the PERMA model to discuss critically

A strong dissertation does not just apply PERMA. It evaluates it. These are the main debates, each with a source you can follow up.

Overlap with subjective wellbeing. Goodman et al. (2018) compared PERMA with Diener’s subjective wellbeing model and concluded that PERMA did not capture a distinct type of wellbeing. Seligman (2018) replied that PERMA describes building blocks, not a new type, and that building wellbeing is not purely a psychometric question. Merritt et al. (2023) later argued that a network approach shows how the elements relate to one another.
No agreed definition of flourishing. As the Hone et al. (2014) prevalence figures show, the definition you pick shapes your results.
Reliance on self-report. Most PERMA research uses self-report questionnaires. One 2020 study in The Journal of Positive Psychology tested the building blocks using ratings from 220 co-worker pairs and found they predicted subjective wellbeing beyond self-report and single-method bias, which gives you an example of a stronger design.
Scope. Some researchers argue the five elements leave things out. PERMA-H adds health, and Donaldson and colleagues proposed four further building blocks: physical health, mindset, environment and economic security.

In your discussion chapter, pick the one or two criticisms that matter most for your design and say how they affect your conclusions. For a cross-sectional survey, for example, avoid causal wording.

Sample research questions and designs

These are starting points for you to narrow, not established findings. Add your institution, year group or module to make each one specific enough for an undergraduate or postgraduate taught dissertation.

Sample research question	Design	Instrument and analysis
How do the five PERMA elements relate to wellbeing among second-year undergraduates at one UK university?	Cross-sectional survey	PERMA-Profiler; correlation and multiple regression
What role does social connectedness play in flourishing among first-year students?	Survey	PERMA relationships items plus Flourishing Scale; correlation
How do final-year students describe meaning and purpose in their studies?	Semi-structured interviews	Thematic analysis coded against the meaning element
Does academic engagement predict flourishing in postgraduate taught students?	Survey	PERMA-Profiler engagement items; regression
How do PERMA scores change after a short positive psychology programme?	Pre- and post-intervention	PERMA-Profiler; paired comparison; needs careful ethical approval and feasibility checks
How do students balancing paid work and study experience accomplishment and relationships?	Interviews, possibly with a short survey	Thematic analysis; PERMA as a coding frame

For more worked examples, see our dissertation research question examples, and if you are still choosing a direction, browse our wellbeing dissertation topics and positive psychology dissertation topics.

Writing it up chapter by chapter

Literature review: define flourishing and wellbeing, trace the line from Seligman (2011) to Butler and Kern (2016), and set out the criticisms. Our literature review help can support you if the structure feels unclear.
Methodology chapter: justify your instrument, describe your sample and ethical approval, and report reliability. Our guide to the dissertation methodology chapter covers the structure.
Findings and discussion: interpret element-level results, compare them with the UK studies above, and be clear about what your design can and cannot show.
Referencing: cite the original instrument papers in Harvard style, not secondary summaries, and check your department’s guidance on referencing format.

If you are working out whether PERMA is the right framework for your question, we can help you test the fit before you commit to a chapter plan.

Frequently asked questions

What does PERMA stand for in psychology?

PERMA stands for positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning and accomplishment. Seligman proposed these as five elements of wellbeing in his 2011 book Flourish.

Is flourishing the same as wellbeing?

Not exactly. Flourishing is usually described as a high level of wellbeing, and researchers define its components differently, so state which definition you are using.

Which scale should I use to measure flourishing?

Match the scale to your question. The PERMA-Profiler gives element-level scores, the Flourishing Scale gives one overall score, and the Mental Health Continuum Short Form classifies people as flourishing, moderate or languishing. Justify the choice in your methodology chapter.

Can I use PERMA in a qualitative dissertation?

Yes. Researchers have used PERMA as a lens for interview studies, for example Hoelterhoff et al. (2024), who analysed interviews with nine UK higher education students thematically.

What is the difference between PERMA and PERMA-H?

PERMA-H adds health to the original five elements, giving six facets. Flourish-HE used this version for its university student programme.

References

British Psychological Society (2017) Making a PERMA change. Available at the BPS website.
Butler, J. and Kern, M.L. (2016) ‘The PERMA-Profiler: a brief multidimensional measure of flourishing’, International Journal of Wellbeing, 6(3), pp. 1-48. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v6i3.526
Diener, E. et al. (2010) ‘New well-being measures: short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings’, Social Indicators Research, 97(2), pp. 143-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y
Goodman, F.R., Disabato, D.J., Kashdan, T.B. and Kaufman, S.B. (2018) ‘Measuring well-being: a comparison of subjective well-being and PERMA’, The Journal of Positive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2017.1388434
Hoelterhoff, M. et al. (2024) ‘The experience of PERMA, hope and adaptability for UK higher education students during the COVID-19 pandemic’, International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-023-00143-0
Hone, L.C., Jarden, A., Schofield, G.M. and Duncan, S. (2014) ‘Measuring flourishing: the impact of operational definitions on the prevalence of high levels of wellbeing’, International Journal of Wellbeing, 4(1), pp. 62-90. Article page
Keyes, C.L.M. (2002) ‘The mental health continuum: from languishing to flourishing in life’, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43(2), pp. 207-222. PubMed record
Merritt, S.H., Heshmati, S., Oravecz, Z. and Donaldson, S. (2023) ‘Web of well-being: re-examining PERMA and subjective well-being through networks’, The Journal of Positive Psychology.
Morgan, B., Simmons, L. and Ayles, N. (2023) ‘Flourish-HE: an online positive education programme to promote university student wellbeing’, Frontiers in Education, 8, 1124983. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1124983
Office for Students (n.d.) Mental health matters: let’s talk evidence. Available at the Office for Students website.
Ploke, V., Batinic, B. and Stieger, S. (2024) ‘Evaluating flourishing: a comparative analysis of four measures using item pool visualization’, Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1458946. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1458946
Seligman, M.E.P. (2011) Flourish: a visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Free Press.
Seligman, M.E.P. (2018) ‘PERMA and the building blocks of well-being’, The Journal of Positive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2018.1437466