Individual well-being often plays a role in shaping public policy, yet much of the evidence that informs decisions and policy is based on cross-sectional and experimental research that fails to account for the dynamic nature of well-being. Research that utilizes Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) and daily diary methods highlights how within-person variation in well-being can yield insights distinct from between-person analyses and laboratory-based designs. Highlighting distinct areas of research across domains of climate anxiety, meaning in life, values, empathy, nostalgia, and alcohol use, the review illustrates how within-person processes offer unique policy implications. Findings suggest that policies may be more effective when they account for temporal fluctuations, daily contextual factors, and differences between remembered and lived experiences. EMA research underscores the importance of tailoring interventions to specific moments, whether by supporting closer human-nature connections, fostering daily meaning-making practices, or addressing the anticipation of alcohol use. Ultimately, integrating research on dynamic states of well-being into policy may enhance both individual and societal outcomes.
AffleckG.ZautraA.TennenH.ArmeliS. (1999). Multilevel daily process designs for consulting and clinical psychology: A preface for the perplexed. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(5), 746–754. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.67.5.746
2.
AinscowM. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587
3.
Barragan-JasonG.LoreauM.de MazancourtC.SingerM. C.ParmesanC. (2023). Psychological and physical connections with nature improve both human well-being and nature conservation: A systematic review of meta-analyses. Biological Conservation, 277, 109842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109842
4.
BresinK.MekawiY.VeronaE. (2018). The effect of laboratory manipulations of negative affect on alcohol craving and use: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 32(6), 617–627. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000383
5.
BrownM. G.CarahN.TanX. Y. (Jane)AngusD.BurgessJ. (2024). Finding the future in digitally mediated ruin: #nostalgiacores and the algorithmic culture of digital platforms. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 30(5), 1710–1731. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565241270669
6.
BrunswikE. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. University of California Press.
DepowG. J.FrancisZ.InzlichtM. (2021). The experience of empathy in everyday life. Psychological Science, 32(8), 1198–1213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797621995202
10.
DienerE. (2009). Well-being for public policy. Oxford University Press.
11.
DienerE.EmmonsR. A.LarsenR. J.GriffinS. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
12.
DolanP.WhiteM. P. (2007). How can measures of subjective well-being be used to inform public policy?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(1), 71–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00030.x
13.
DoraJ.PiccirilloM.FosterK. T.ArbeauK.ArmeliS.AuriacombeM.BartholowB.BeltzA. M.BlumenstockS. M.BoldK.BonarE. E.BraitmanA.CarpenterR. W.CreswellK. G.De HartT.DvorakR. D.EmeryN.EnkemaM.FairbairnC. E., …KingK. M. (2023). The daily association between affect and alcohol use: A meta-analysis of individual participant data. Psychological Bulletin, 149(1-2), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000387
14.
FischerR.KarlJ. A. (2023). Unraveling values and well-being—Disentangling within- and between-person dynamics via a psychometric network perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(6), 1338–1355. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000449
15.
HoggT. L.StanleyS. K.O’BrienL. V.WilsonM. S.WatsfordC. R. (2021). The Hogg Eco-Anxiety Scale: Development and validation of a multidimensional scale. Global Environmental Change, 71, 102391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102391
16.
KahnemanD. (1999). Objective happiness. In KahnemanD.DienerE.SchwarzN. (Eds.), Well-being: Foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 3–25). Russell Sage Foundation.
17.
KahnemanD.DeatonA. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(38), 16489–16493. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011492107
18.
KahnemanD.KruegerA. B.SchkadeD. A.SchwarzN.StoneA. A. (2004). A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method. Science, 306(5702), 1776–1780. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1103572
19.
KahnemanD.RiisJ. (2005). Living, and thinking about it: Two perspectives on life. In The science of well-being (pp. 285–304). Oxford University Press.
20.
KawasakiS.ZouX.WildschutT.SedikidesC. (2023). Organizational nostalgia as a novel pathway toward greater employee well-being. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 53(12), 1155–1173. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.13004
21.
KingK. M.DoraJ.SchultzM.McCabeC. J.LeeC. M.ShodaY.FairlieA. M.LittD. M.LewisM. A.PatrickM. E.SmithG. T. (2025). Within-day associations between affect and intentions to drink alcohol in adolescents and young adults: A registered report. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 39(5), 411–430. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001074
22.
KirbyJ. N.TellegenC. L.SteindlS. R. (2017). A meta-analysis of compassion-based interventions: Current state of knowledge and future directions. Behavior Therapy, 48(6), 778–792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2017.06.003
LeunissenJ.WildschutT.SedikidesC.RoutledgeC. (2020). The hedonic character of nostalgia: An integrative data analysis. Emotion Review, 13(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073920950455
25.
LinL. (2019). Is searching for meaning in life related to civic engagement?: Individual- and society-level moderators. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01334
26.
LutzP. K.ZelenskiJ. M.NewmanD. B. (2023). Eco-anxiety in daily life: Relationships with well-being and pro-environmental behavior. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, 4, 100110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cresp.2023.100110
27.
National Research Council. (2013). Subjective well-being: Measuring happiness, suffering, and other dimensions of experience (A. A. Stone & C. Mackie, Eds.). National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18548
28.
NewmanD. B. (2022). Low income amplifies the negative relationship between nostalgia proneness and well-being. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 17(6), 3311–3326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-022-10066-8
29.
NewmanD. B.GordonA. M.MendesW. B. (2025). Income and education show distinct links to health and happiness in daily life. Nature Human Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02264-9
30.
NewmanD. B.LutzP. K.SachsM. E.ZelenskiJ. M. (2025). Unlocking the bitter potential of nostalgia: Covariation between and causal effects of nostalgia on envy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 128(2), 438–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000529
31.
NewmanD. B.NezlekJ. B.ThrashT. M. (2018). The dynamics of searching for meaning and presence of meaning in daily life. Journal of Personality, 86(3), 368–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12321
32.
NewmanD. B.SachsM. E. (2023). Variation in bittersweet nostalgic feelings and their divergent effects on daily well-being. Emotion, 23(4), 937–948. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001137
33.
NewmanD. B.SachsM. E.StoneA. A.SchwarzN. (2020). Nostalgia and well-being in daily life: An ecological validity perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(2), 325–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000236
34.
NewmanD. B.SchwarzN.StoneA. A. (2021). Global reports of well-being overestimate aggregated daily states of well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 16(3), 407–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2020.1725608
35.
NewmanD. B.StoneA. A. (2019). Understanding daily life with Ecological Momentary Assessment. In KardesF.HerrP. M.SchwarzN. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in consumer psychology (pp. 259–275). Routledge.
36.
NezlekJ. B. (2001). Multilevel random coefficient analyses of event- and interval-contingent data in social and personality psychology research. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(7), 771–785. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201277001
37.
PassmoreH.-A.LutzP. K.HowellA. J. (2023). Eco-anxiety: A cascade of fundamental existential anxieties. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 36(2), 138–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720537.2022.2068706
38.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141
39.
SchwartzS. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
40.
SchwarzN. (2012). Why researchers should think “real-time”: A cognitive rationale. In Handbook of research methods for studying daily life (p. 27). Guilford Press.
41.
SchwarzN.StrackF. (1999). Reports of subjective well-being: Judgmental processes and their methodological implications. In KahnemanD.DienerE.SchwarzN. (Eds.), Well-being: Foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 61–84). Russell Sage Foundation.
42.
SedikidesC.WildschutT.RoutledgeC.ArndtJ.HepperE. G.ZhouX. (2015). To nostalgize: Mixing memory with affect and desire. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 51, 189–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2014.10.001
SkiminaE.CieciuchJ.SchwartzS. H.DavidovE.AlgesheimerR. (2018). Testing the circular structure and importance hierarchy of value states in real-time behaviors. Journal of Research in Personality, 74, 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.02.001
45.
StegerM. F.FrazierP.OishiS.KalerM. (2006). The meaning in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(1), 80–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80
46.
StegerM. F.KashdanT. B.SullivanB. A.LorentzD. (2008). Understanding the search for meaning in life: Personality, cognitive style, and the dynamic between seeking and experiencing meaning. Journal of Personality, 76(2), 199–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00484.x
TovW.LeeH. W. (2016). A closer look at the hedonics of everyday meaning and satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 585–609. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000081
49.
WirtzD.KrugerJ.Napa ScollonC.DienerE. (2003). What to do on spring break? The role of predicted, on-line, and remembered experience in future choice. Psychological Science, 14(5), 520–524. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.03455
