1. Introduction
Positive psychology [
1] focuses on human well-being, and studies how individuals can lead happy lives. It emphasizes that, rather than eliminating individuals’ negative emotions or personality weaknesses, generating positive emotions and highlighting strengths is more important for happiness [
2]. We become happy when we have positive feelings about the past, present, and future [
3]. Wilson [
4] defined happiness as Subjective Well-Being (SWB); SWB occurs when one experiences more positive affect than negative affect [
5]. In addition, researchers have found a high correlation between gratitude, a positive emotion, and life satisfaction [
6]; it is an important element in measuring SWB [
7].
Gratitude is a personality strength closely related to happiness, and people who experience gratitude show higher levels of positive emotions, life satisfaction, and optimism. In particular, gratitude has a larger effect in enhancing positive emotions than in reducing negative ones [
8]. When researchers examined gratitude’s etymology, they interpreted it as a state of being grateful to others or a mind to repay a favor [
9]. Expression of gratitude is the most basic positive activity in human society [
10], and major religions, such as Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity, have emphasized it as a core virtue for individuals [
11].
Meanwhile, during their college days, students often complain of psychological difficulties stemming from their newfound independence from parents, interpersonal relationships, and academic and career choices [
12]. In addition, college days correspond to early adulthood, and are one of the most lonely and challenging times in life. Many students receive little attention and help from surrounding people during college days, and use this period to begin solving important life tasks [
13]. Therefore, we became interested in how college students perceive gratitude, which can promote positive emotions. To that end, this study focused on how college students perceive individuals’ SWB and gratitude, which plays a culturally significant role.
We reviewed studies on the effect of gratitude in helping students to overcome difficulties in college. For instance, Lee and Shim [
14] found that gratitude has positive effects on students’ overall college life, such as improving academic achievement and attachment to the college. In addition, when college students write a gratitude diary, their ego resilience increases [
15,
16,
17] thus, the more gratitude a person has, the more they feel happy and optimistic [
10,
18,
19]. Regarding gratitude scales, Watkins et al. [
20] developed the Gratitude, Resentment and Appreciation Test (GRAT) to separately measure gratitude influenced by subjective elements primarily in three factors: awareness of affluence; gratitude in daily life; and gratitude to others. Furthermore, McCullough et al. [
8] selected six items to measure gratitude quantitatively. In addition, many researchers have conducted studies to understand the concept quantitatively by scaling gratitude [
21,
22,
23,
24,
25].
Although researchers explored the effects and scales of gratitude as described above, studies examining the subjective perception of gratitude are insufficient. Furthermore, since individuals’ subjective perceptions affect how they interpret the surrounding environment [
26], the perspective of gratitude perceived by individuals cannot be different. Therefore, this study explores the subjectivity of gratitude to fill the research gap.
Since gratitude is a product of the transformation of self-perspective to examine one’s self [
27], the degree to which norms and emotions affect gratitude varies from person to person [
28]. Q methodology enables the examination of individuals’ subjectivity for objects such as gratitude that one cannot define concretely, and which individuals perceive differently. Thus, this methodology is suitable for this study because it provides a foundation for investigating individuals’ opinions, views, attitudes, and beliefs about specific objects or contexts [
17]. Q methodology is a form of research that focuses on the subjective inner experiences of individuals, measuring their preferences, emotions, ideals, tastes, and other related factors. It is a study of human beings that seeks to understand their unique perspectives and experiences. The first researcher to present the Q methodology was William Stephenson, who outlined this methodology in a paper on nature in 1935 [
29]. It is a quantitative and qualitative mixed research methodology [
30] that aims to understand individuals’ subjective concepts about special phenomena [
31]. In this methodology, the study begins from the actor’s point of view instead of the researcher’s assumption; the statements used are self-referential opinion items [
29]. This approach is not intended to verify a specific hypothesis; rather, it serves as an abductory methodology for generating and exploring potential hypotheses [
32]. Q methodology uses factor and correlation analyses to statistically classify and analyze statements expressing humans’ subjective thoughts or feelings [
33].
Therefore, this study uses the Q methodology to explore how college students perceive gratitude. The study analyzes the types of gratitude college students perceive to help them have a grateful mind, and thus live a happier life. The study will answer the following questions:
Research question 1: What are the types of gratitude perceived by college students?;
Research question 2: What are the differences in the characteristics of these types?
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Based on this study’s results, we divided college students’ perceptions of gratitude into five types: Type 1 active gratitude through expression; Type 2 passive gratitude depending on conditions; Type 3 gratitude through relationships; Type 4 gratitude through internal satisfaction, and; Type 5 gratitude through materials.
Eighteen students among the P samples belonged to Type 1. They believed that gratitude should be felt and expressed every moment in everyday life, and that there were many things for which they should be grateful. In addition, they thought that luck and good relationships come to those who know how to be grateful. For them, gratitude was a moment of blessing, and a state of mind of joy and thanks [
35].
Thirteen students among the P samples belonged to Type 2. They were grateful for happy events, but found it difficult to be grateful in painful situations. Therefore, since they did not think they should be grateful for every moment, they considered gratitude as an emotion that occurs only under limited circumstances and conditions. Positive people do not easily fall into negative situations because they find positive aspects and interpret them beneficially, even when they encounter negative situations [
36]. Conversely, Type 2 students could not find a positive aspect and connect it to gratitude in a negative situation. Type 2 students showed the lowest correlation (0.214) with Type 1 students, indicating that the types are relatively different.
Ten students among the P samples belonged to Type 3. They had good relationships with their loving families, nice people, and helpful friends; they also had the characteristic of perceiving gratitude when helped. In addition, they had a strong tendency to recognize the contributions of others, and respond with gratitude to positive results or experiences [
8].
Three students among the P samples belonged to Type 4. They perceived gratitude through internal satisfaction and pleasure; they were grateful when they were satisfied with the current situation or when they felt joy. Since subjective well-being (SWB) and happiness positively affect their gratitude tendency [
37], Type 4 students connected such internal satisfaction with gratitude. Type 4 students had the highest correlation (0.402) with Type 1 students.
Finally, we identified two students among the P samples belonging to Type 5. They believed they should be more grateful for money and materials than for people, but they do not feel gratitude for nature, such as air, water, and sun, because they believe nature is free. Gratitude by mutual exchange, one of the forms of gratitude described by Buck [
38], is the gratitude the recipient and the giver feel thanks to the benefits of mutual exchange. Type 5 feels grateful for the benefits from mutual exchanges of material values, because this type attaches greater importance to material values.
We used GRAT (Gratitude, Resentment and Appreciation Test) to examine the characteristics of each type of perception of gratitude by gratitude factor (awareness of affluence, gratitude in daily life, and gratitude to others). We then calculated the sums of Z scores by type, classifying them as shown in
Table 13.
We used the above classifications to examine the extent of each gratitude factor’s positive or negative influence by type through statistical values. We can sum Z-scores by applying weights to each research unit [
39]. The sample size (
) for Z-score weight calculation in this study is 40, which is the number of Q samples. We obtained the total sample sizes (
) of the entire study by multiplying 40 × 9 (z-score × the number of statements for ‘awareness of affluence’), 40 × 13 (z-score × the number of statements for ‘gratitude in daily life’), and 40 × 18 (z-score × the number of statements for ‘gratitude to others’). Therefore, we can obtain the sum of the Z values by multiplying each Z value by
≒ 0.33,
≒ 0.28, and
≒ 0.24, which are weights by factor.
We referred to De Bakker et al.’s [
38] paper for calculating the sum of the Z scores. We reverse-coded negative statements Q4, Q7, Q8, Q9, and Q11, so that the Z value became positive when all statements expressed gratitude positively.
Concerning ‘awareness of affluence’ among the gratitude factors of GRAT, we found the following characteristics by type. We classified Type 1, ‘active gratitude through expression’, as one that best recognizes affluence because we obtained the highest sum of Z values in the case of ‘awareness of affluence’. We classified Type 2, ‘passive gratitude depending on conditions’, as a type that recognized affluence most poorly because we obtained the lowest sum of Z values in the case of ‘awareness of affluence’. In particular, the sum of Z values was negative only in the awareness of affluence. ‘Have focus’, a sub-factor of gratitude by Adler and Fagley [
7], paid more attention to what one already had rather than what one lacked, and realizing the meanings of materials and things connected to or around the person [
24]. Thus, Type 1 had more awareness and a sense of connection with the person’s things, while Type 2 did not have this awareness.
When we reviewed the characteristics by type relating to ‘gratitude in daily life’, we found Type 1 best perceives gratitude in daily life because we obtained the highest sum of the Z values in the case of ‘gratitude in daily life’. However, we obtained the lowest sum of Z values for Type 2, ‘passive gratitude depending on conditions’, indicating that this type perceived gratitude poorly in daily life. We also found Type 5, ‘gratitude through materials’, as a type that did not easily perceive gratitude in daily life, because the sum of Z values in the case of ‘gratitude in daily life’ was negative. People with a high gratitude disposition have developed the cognitive schema to see the positive aspects of various things they experience in daily life and be grateful for them [
21]. Therefore, we could infer that Type 1, ‘active gratitude through expression’, had a well-developed cognitive schema to be grateful, while Type 2, ‘passive gratitude depending on conditions’, and Type 5, ‘gratitude through materials’, had a less developed cognitive schema to be grateful.
When we reviewed the characteristics by type regarding ‘gratitude to others’, we classified Type 3, ‘gratitude through relationships’, as the type that best perceives gratitude to others, because we obtained the highest sum of Z values in the case of ‘gratitude to others’. We classified Type 5, ‘gratitude through materials’, as a type that felt gratitude to others the most poorly. Type 4, ‘gratitude through internal satisfaction’, was also a type that does not easily feel gratitude towards others because the sum of Z values in the case of ‘gratitude to others’ was negative. The more stable attachment a person had, the higher the level of gratitude the person showed in forming relationships and interactions with others [
40]. Therefore, Type 1, ‘gratitude through relationships’, formed stable attachments with others, while Type 5, ‘gratitude through materials’, and Type 4, ‘gratitude through internal satisfaction’, formed weak attachments.
Based on McCullough, Emmons, and Tsang’s [
8] declaration that gratitude dispositions have intensity, frequency, span, and density, we can analyze the relationships between individual type and GRAT’s gratitude factors.
Type 1, ‘active gratitude through expression’, showed the highest sum of Z values in the case of ‘awareness of affluence’ and ‘gratitude in daily life’, and the second highest sum of Z values in the case of ‘gratitude to others’. This type had a gratitude disposition with high intensity and a wide range. Therefore, one should encourage this type to keep its attitude of being grateful as it is now.
Type 2, ‘passive gratitude depending on conditions’, was a type that generally did not feel gratitude strongly, and showed the lowest sum of Z values in the case of ‘awareness of affluence’ and ‘gratitude in daily life’. This type had a gratitude disposition with low intensity, frequency, and a narrow range. For this type of person, a program to promote the gratitude disposition [
41], which increases gratitude and the contribution of others from their positive experiences, may be effective.
Type 3, ‘gratitude through relationships’, felt gratitude to others the most because this type showed the highest sum of Z values in the case of ‘gratitude to others,’ but generally low sum of Z scores in the case of ‘awareness of affluence’. Therefore, this type of person needs programs that promote a range of gratitude.
Type 4, ‘active gratitude through internal satisfaction’, showed the highest sum of Z scores in the case of ‘awareness of affluence’, but the sum of Z scores in the case of ‘gratitude to others’ was negative. For this type of person, a program that makes them perceive ‘gratitude to others’ may be effective.
Finally, Type 5, ‘gratitude through materials’, showed generally low sums of Z scores overall. In particular, the lowest sum of Z scores among the five types was in the case of ‘gratitude to others’. As with Type 2, a program that increases the overall gratitude disposition can be effective for this type.
As a result of this study, we identified differences in the degree to which one feels gratitude depending on situations among individual types. Individuals can feel gratitude only when they combine the positive aspect of the present moment and the experience of being grateful [
7]. In addition, gratitude is a two-stage cognitive process. The first stage is perceiving positive results, while the second is perceiving that the cause of positive results is external [
42]. Therefore, for a person to feel gratitude, they should feel positive emotions toward the object. Many studies show that people with a higher gratitude tendency have higher positive psychological capital [
43,
44,
45,
46]. Therefore, strong positivity for the current environment leads to high gratitude.
This study started by exploring an individual’s subjective inner world through the Q methodology, and classified individual preferences, emotions, ideals, and tastes; therefore, it can be said to be generating, rather than verifying, the hypothesis. This study quantitatively measured college students’ perception of gratitude and differentiated between types. The positive and negative perceptions of each type were quantitatively expressed, making the study useful for developing evaluation scales and items of experimental research in future gratitude research.
This study explored college students’ perceptions of gratitude through the Q methodology, but were are some limitations. First, whether each type derived with the Q methodology sufficiently reflected many individuals’ thoughts about gratitude is unclear. Through in-depth qualitative research on each individual’s experience of gratitude, it is necessary to analyze and study the internal experience and awareness of gratitude. To this end, it is essential to conduct in-depth research on gratitude felt by individuals through phenomenological research methods; these methods provide useful qualitative research methods related to gratitude. Secondly, there may be differences in the perception of gratitude between college students and other individuals. While carrying out this study, we felt that the objects and range of gratitude for college students were very narrow. Resultantly, it is questionable whether each type derived from the Q methodology can be classified similarly in other countries, because different individuals’ positive experiences and their results can affect perceptions of gratitude [
8].
Therefore, we believe that future research is necessary to broaden the understanding and scope of gratitude; this research must be influenced by culture and customs. To do this, we need to diversify the range of study subjects by generation, gender, and country. This will facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the thoughts and behaviors of that influence other individuals’ attitudes to gratitude.