ArticlePLOS mental health2025
The Seity Check-In: A novel tool for assessing momentary well-being.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Seity Check-In (SCI) is a new, multidimensional measure of momentary well-being that features both hedonic and eudaimonic elements. It imposes minimal cognitive demands on respondents, asking them to report their current levels of energy, direction, belonging, and joy by selecting one of five "happy face" emojis for each dimension. This task can be completed in just a few seconds. The psychometric model underlying the SCI is formative, with each of the four dimensions contributing directly to well-being. A preregistered data analysis of 564 individuals who were living in the United States and completed the SCI and other instruments found high correlations (r = .84 to.86) with two established measures of well-being, providing strong evidence for criterion validity. Furthermore, responses for each SCI dimension were highly correlated (r = .80 to.85) with items adapted from other scales designed to assess the same dimension, providing strong evidence for construct validity. Analyses of open-ended mood descriptions corroborated the psychometric findings. We conclude that the SCI offers considerable utility for assessing well-being, especially in applied situations.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.