What does it mean to be “strengths-based” or to be a “strengths-based practitioner?” These are diffuse areas that are generic and ill-defined. Part of the confusion arises from the customary default of practitioners and leaders across many cultures to label anything positive or complimentary as “strengths-based,” whether that be an approach, a theoretical orientation, an intervention, or a company. Additional muddle is created by many researchers and practitioners not making distinctions between very different categories of “strength” in human beings – strengths of character, of talent/ability, of interest/passion, of skill/competency, to name a few. To add clarity and unification across professions, we offer seven characteristics and a comprehensive definition for a character strengths-based practitioner. We center on the type of strength referred to as character strengths and explore six guiding principles for understanding character strengths (e.g., character is plural; character is being and doing) and their practical corollaries. Reflecting this foundation and based on character strengths research, our longstanding work with strengths, discussions with practitioners across the globe, and a practitioner survey asking about strength practices (N = 113), we point out several character strengths practices or approaches we describe as soaring (e.g., explore and encourage signature strengths; practice strengths-spotting), emerging (e.g., the integration of mindfulness and character strengths), or ripe with potential (e.g., phasic strengths; the tempering effect; the towing effect). We use the same framework for describing general research domains. Some areas of research in character strengths are soaring with more than 25 studies (e.g., workplace/organizations), some are emerging with a handful of studies (e.g., health/medicine), and others are ripe with potential that have none or few studies yet opportunity looms large for integrating character science (e.g., peace/conflict studies). Using this framework, we seek to advance the exchange and collaboration between researcher and practitioner, as well as to advance the science and practice of character strengths.

Niemiec, R. M., & Pearce, R. (2021). The practice of character strengths: Unifying definitions, principles, and exploration of what’s soaring, emerging, and ripe with potential in science and in practice. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-18. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590220 

There has been limited focus in the disability field on assessing and intervening to promote strengths of character. However, character strengths have received significant attention in the broader field of positive psychology. This paper provides an overview of the growing science of character strengths and explores why and how character strengths are relevant to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and a strengths based perspective in the disability field. We offer key concepts, research findings, and interventions from the science of character that can provide a framework for the intellectual and developmental disabilities field to begin to build on strengths of character to enhance the systems of supports and quality of life outcomes experienced by people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Niemiec, R.M., Shogren, K.A., & Wehmeyer, M.L. (2017) Character strengths and intellectual and developmental disability: A strengths based approach from positive psychology. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disability. 52(1), 13–25. 

We investigated the relationship between various character strengths and life satisfaction among 5,299 adults from three Internet samples using the Values in Action Inventory of Strengths. Consistently and robustly associated with life satisfaction were hope, zest, gratitude, love, and curiosity. Only weakly associated with life satisfaction, in contrast, were modesty and the intellectual strengths of appreciation of beauty, creativity, judgment, and love of learning. In general, the relationship between character strengths and life satisfaction was monotonic, indicating that excess on any one character strength does not diminish life satisfaction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)

Park, N., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004) Strengths of Character and Well-Being. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(5), 603–619. doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.5.603.50748 

We hypothesized that the amount of positive experiences at work (job satisfaction, pleasure, engagement, meaning) is a function of the extent to which the situational circumstances at the workplace allow for the application of an individual’s signature character strengths. For the description of the individual a reliable and valid instrument already exists, but not for the environment. Hence, the newly developed Applicability of Character Strengths Rating Scales (ACS-RS) with information on its reliability and validity were also presented. A sample of 1,111 adults filled in the ACS-RS and measures for possession of character strengths and positive experiences at work. The ACS-RS was reliable by means of internal consistency and inter-rater reliability. It proved to be valid in several ways being sensitive to: (a) the differences in the applicability of trait-relevant behavior in formal versus informal situations by showing higher applicability of the character strengths in the latter; (b) the differences between traits regarding their applicability across situations; (c) people’s disposition to choose situations fitting their dispositions by showing positive relationships between the degree of possession and applicability. Moreover, correlations between applicability of strengths and positive experiences increased with the individual centrality of the strengths. The more signature strengths were applied at the workplace, the higher the positive experiences at work. This study showed that character strengths matter in vocational environments irrespective of their content. Strengths-congruent activities at the workplace are important for positive experiences at work like job satisfaction and experiencing pleasure, engagement, and meaning fostered by one’s job.

Harzer, C., & Ruch, W. (2013). The application of signature character strengths and positive experiences at work. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(3), 965–983. doi.org/10.1007/s10902-012-9364-0 

The impact of nine strengths-based positive interventions on well-being and depression was examined in an Internet-based randomized placebo-controlled study. The aims of the study were to: (1) replicate findings on the effectiveness of the gratitude visit, three good things, and using character strengths interventions; (2) test variants of interventions (noting three good things for 2 weeks; combining the gratitude visit and three good things interventions; and noting three funny things for a week); and (3) test the effectiveness of the counting kindness, gift of time, and another door opens-interventions in an online setting. A total of 622 adults subjected themselves to one of the nine interventions or to a placebo control exercise (early memories) and thereafter estimated their degrees of happiness and depression at five times (pre- and post-test, 1-, 3-, and 6 months follow-up). Eight of the nine interventions increased happiness; depression was decreased in all groups, including the placebo control group. We conclude that happiness can be enhanced through some ‘‘strengths-based’’ interventions. Possible mechanisms for the effectiveness of the interventions are discussed.

Gander, F., Proyer, R. T., Ruch, W., & Wyss, T. (2013). Strength-based positive interventions: Further evidence for their potential in enhancing well-being and alleviating depression. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(4), 1241–1259. doi.org/10.1007/s10902-012-9380-0 

Strengths overuse and strengths underuse, alongside its companion of strengths optimal use are explored as a means to wellbeing and handling life suffering. The golden mean of character strengths refers to the expression of the right combination of strengths, to the right degree, and in the right situation. Along with a variety of interventions, this article explores the intervention of strength spotting to in the pursuit of optimal strengths use and the management of overuse and underuse.

Niemiec, R.M., (2019). Finding the golden mean: the overuse, underuse, and optimal use of character strengths. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 32(3-4), 453-471. doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2019.1617674 

Strengths-based clinical practices are critical for supporting the wellbeing of individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities. The VIA Inventory of Strengths (‘VIA Survey’) is an assessment grounded in positive psychology that may contribute to strengths-based practices. To identify how this assessment is used in clinical practice with individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities, we conducted focus groups (n = 15) with clinicians who have used this survey with this population. We also asked individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (n = 36) to comment on the process of completing the VIA Survey. We found that clinicians utilize the VIA Survey with individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disability to foster self-esteem and self-understanding, provide a framework for understanding strengths, communicate across service systems and shape strengths-based interventions. Individuals with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities also endorsed use of the survey to increase their self-knowledge and self-esteem. Future research should address accessibility of the survey to fostergreater uptake and propose standard protocols for independent survey completion.

Schwartz, A.E., Caoili, A., Beasley, J.B., Kramer, J.M., & Kalb, L.G. (2022): Clinical applications of the via inventory of strengths with individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 18(3), 439-338. doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2022.2036797 

The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in character strengths for people with disabilities by using an international dataset by the VIA Institiute on Character. Specifically, we aimed to explore (a) the top and bottom five character strengths reported by different disability groups and all people with disabilities more broadly, and (b) group differences in each character strength and total character strengths. The investigator contacted the VIA Institute on Character (http://www.viacharacter.org/) for obtaining the dataset for the current study. After data cleaning, our sample size resulted in 11,699 people with disabilities. Among most people with disabilities, the top five character strengths scores were love of learning, honesty, appreciation of beauty and excellence, kindness, and fairness. The bottom five character strengths scores were self-regulation, perseverance, zest, spirituality, and prudence. Knowing that there is heterogeneity in character strengths across groups gives us a better understanding of the areas that people with different disabilities and conditions might thrive and provides clinicians and practitioners with a more nuanced understanding for how to possibly intervene with their clients. Positive psychiatry and psychology implications are discussed.

Umucu, E., Lee, B., Genove, H. M., Chopik, W. J., Sung, C., Yosuaka, M., & Niemiec, R. M. (2022). Character strengths across disabilities: An international exploratory study and implications for positive psychiatry and psychology. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.863977 

Background Understanding the positive qualities of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities can provide a much-needed counterpoint to deficit-based depictions of disability. Method This study examined how 163 young adults (ages 18–30) viewed the strengths of their brothers and sisters with intellectual disability or autism using the Assessment Scale for Positive Character Traits-Developmental Disabilities (Woodard, 2009). In addition, the authors examined factors that may shape their perspectives. Results Overall, siblings' ratings of strengths were moderate to high, indicating an overall portrait of strengths. The majority of brothers and sisters with disabilities was described as having multiple strengths and their profiles on this measure were highly individualized. Lower overall ratings were associated with several variables, including not using speech as a primary mode of communication, exhibiting challenging behaviours, having autism and not currently living together. Conclusions The authors offer recommendations for future research and practice related to supporting siblings with and without disabilities.

Carter, E. W., Carlton, M. E., & Travers, H. E., (2020). Seeing strengths: Young adults and their siblings with autism or intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 33(3), 574-583. doi.org/10.1111/jar.12701. 

The purpose of this study is to understand the role of school relationships in shaping students’ character development in middle childhood. Students and teachers completed surveys on student–teacher relationships, peer relationships, social-emotional learning (SEL), parent-teacher communication, and character strengths of fairness, hope, bravery, teamwork, self-regulation, social responsibility, and prosocial leadership. Participants were 1881 Brazilian children in fourth or fifth grade across 288 classrooms and 60 schools. Data were analyzed using a multi-level model framework. Higher student–student relationships were associated with higher starting scores of character strengths paired with a stronger increase among classes whose relationships improved over time. Higher quality student–teacher relationships were associated with a larger increase in character strengths among boys. Teachers’ usage of SEL strategies, student–teacher relationships and student peer relationships were important predictors of both classroom baselines and the change in character strengths across time. Most of the existing literature on character strengths is based on older adolescent samples from affluent countries and with little Latin American representation. This study supports existing literature on the relevancy of character strengths in the educational context, but adds the importance of seeing it as a contextual and relational outcome.

Thomas, K. J., da Cunha, J. & Santo, J. B., (2022). Changes in character virtues are driven by classroom relationships: A longitudinal study of elementary school children. School Mental Health, 14, 266-277. doi.org/10.1007/s12310-022-09511-8 

A randomized wait-list control study examined the effects of two positive psychology interventions (PPIs) on 300 families across six countries. A systems approach was used to design the PPIs and to interpret the impact of these upon family happiness. A system is an interconnected set of elements (e.g., the people, practices, rituals, and resources of a family) that are coherently organized around a common purpose (e.g., family functioning). System approaches recognize that individuals are influenced by the environments within which they are situated and as such move beyond interventions that target individual change to look at triggering relational change. Families who undertook the PPIs were significantly happier at post-test compared to pre-intervention levels and compared to the wait-list control families. This study suggests that introducing positive practices (e.g., strength spotting) into a family may act to change the system elements and, thus, change family outcomes. System theory and Fredrickson’s broaden-and-build theory are used to explain the results.

Waters, L., (2020). Using positive psychology interventions to strengthen family happiness: A family systems approach. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 15(5), 645-652. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2020.1789704 

Character strengths interventions constitute a diverse and highly promising subset of strategies and programs within the larger field of positive education. The diversity in this developing subgroup can be distinguished along a number of variables; however, central to effective and sustained intervention is the commitment to a systems approach to implementation. Through the practiced-based evidence of exemplars around the world, an emerging model for a systems approach to character strengths program implementation is being reified. Character strengths implementations grounded in systems change express a unique opportunity in that character strengths are simultaneously the content of the intervention and an effective process element for a systems approach to change.

Coppley, J., & Niemiec, R. M. (2021). Character strengths interventions in education systems. The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Education, 395-420. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64537-3_16 

Two studies demonstrated the positive associations that authoritative parenting and strength-based parenting have with life satisfaction in adolescents. In Study 1, teenagers’ (N = 689; Mage = 15.20, SD = 3.80; 52% male) reports of the degree to which their parents demonstrated authoritative and strength-based parenting (SBP) explained over a third of the variance in life satisfaction scores (Adj. R2 = 35%). SBP explained 19% of variation in life satisfaction scores above and beyond the effects of authoritative parenting. Furthermore, SBP prospectively and significantly predicted 5% of life satisfaction in teenagers 12 months later. Study 2 recruited 127 adolescent-parent dyads (Adolescent Mage 15.30, SD = 2.30; 58% female; Parent Mage = 46.01, SD = 11.02; 67% mothers) and found that parent-reports of the degree to which they are aware of their son/daughter’s strengths and the degree to which they encouraged their son/daughter to use their strengths explained additional variance in life satisfaction in adolescents beyond their adolescent son/daughter’s own strengths-knowledge and strengths-use. It was concluded that strength-based parenting is a significant contributor to life satisfaction during adolescence.

Waters, L. (2015). Strengths-based parenting and life satisfaction in teenagers. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 2(11), 158-173. doi.org/10.14738/assrj.211.1651