Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence

Objective: Dual-factor models of mental health propose that mental health includes two interrelated yet distinct dimensions – psychopathology and well-being. However, there is no systematization of the evidence following these models. This review aims to address the following research question: what...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Eunice Magalhães
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2024-02-01
Series:Psychosocial Intervention
Subjects:
Online Access: https://journals.copmadrid.org/pi/art/pi2024a6
_version_ 1797277003467980800
author Eunice Magalhães
author_facet Eunice Magalhães
author_sort Eunice Magalhães
collection DOAJ
description Objective: Dual-factor models of mental health propose that mental health includes two interrelated yet distinct dimensions – psychopathology and well-being. However, there is no systematization of the evidence following these models. This review aims to address the following research question: what evidence exists using dual-factor models? Method: The current systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines on the following databases: Web-of-science, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, ERIC, and MEDLINE. The screening process resulted in 85 manuscripts that tested the assumptions of dual-factor models. Results: Evidence revealed psychometric substantiation on the two-dimensionality of the dual-factor model, and 85% of the manuscripts provided evidence related to classifying participants into different mental health groups. Most studies showed that the Complete Mental Health or Positive Mental Health group is the most prevalent status group, and longitudinal evidence suggests that most participants (around 50%-64%) remain in the same group across time. Regarding the factors associated with mental health status groups, studies reviewed in this manuscript focus mainly on school-related outcomes, followed by supportive relationships, sociodemographic characteristics, psychological assets, individual attributes, physical health, and stressful events. Conclusions: This review highlights the importance of considering the two dimensions of mental health when conceptualizing, operationalizing, and measuring mental health. Fostering mental health must go beyond reducing symptoms, and practitioners would be able to include well-being-related interventions in their regular practice to improve individuals’ mental health outcomes.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T15:38:29Z
format Article
id doaj.art-3f4988117f65468fa1fac620bd89bb45
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1132-0559
2173-4712
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T15:38:29Z
publishDate 2024-02-01
publisher Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid
record_format Article
series Psychosocial Intervention
spelling doaj.art-3f4988117f65468fa1fac620bd89bb452024-03-05T09:14:58ZengColegio Oficial de Psicólogos de MadridPsychosocial Intervention1132-05592173-47122024-02-0100000010.5093/pi2024a611320559Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical EvidenceEunice Magalhães0Instituto Universitário de Lisboa, Lisboa , Portugal, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), CIS-IUL, Lisboa, PortugalObjective: Dual-factor models of mental health propose that mental health includes two interrelated yet distinct dimensions – psychopathology and well-being. However, there is no systematization of the evidence following these models. This review aims to address the following research question: what evidence exists using dual-factor models? Method: The current systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines on the following databases: Web-of-science, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, ERIC, and MEDLINE. The screening process resulted in 85 manuscripts that tested the assumptions of dual-factor models. Results: Evidence revealed psychometric substantiation on the two-dimensionality of the dual-factor model, and 85% of the manuscripts provided evidence related to classifying participants into different mental health groups. Most studies showed that the Complete Mental Health or Positive Mental Health group is the most prevalent status group, and longitudinal evidence suggests that most participants (around 50%-64%) remain in the same group across time. Regarding the factors associated with mental health status groups, studies reviewed in this manuscript focus mainly on school-related outcomes, followed by supportive relationships, sociodemographic characteristics, psychological assets, individual attributes, physical health, and stressful events. Conclusions: This review highlights the importance of considering the two dimensions of mental health when conceptualizing, operationalizing, and measuring mental health. Fostering mental health must go beyond reducing symptoms, and practitioners would be able to include well-being-related interventions in their regular practice to improve individuals’ mental health outcomes. https://journals.copmadrid.org/pi/art/pi2024a6 dual-factor modelsmental health groupssystematic review
spellingShingle Eunice Magalhães
Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence
Psychosocial Intervention
dual-factor models
mental health groups
systematic review
title Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence
title_full Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence
title_fullStr Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence
title_full_unstemmed Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence
title_short Dual-factor Models of Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence
title_sort dual factor models of mental health a systematic review of empirical evidence
topic dual-factor models
mental health groups
systematic review
url https://journals.copmadrid.org/pi/art/pi2024a6
work_keys_str_mv AT eunicemagalhaes dualfactormodelsofmentalhealthasystematicreviewofempiricalevidence