Human psychological functioning vacillates continuously between the urgent necessity to remediate perceived deficits and the transcendent urge to actualize latent potentials. In mid-twentieth-century humanistic psychology, the dichotomy of Being and Deficiency—commonly designated as B and D—emerged as the quintessential theoretical architecture explaining this fundamental polarity in human motivation, cognition, affection, and values. By differentiating states driven by psychological hunger from those energized by existential growth, this dual-realm model illuminates the complete trajectory of personality maturation from survival-oriented deficiency to autonomous self-actualization.
Being and Deficiency (B and D)
1. Concise Definition
Being and Deficiency (B and D) denotes the foundational psychological polarity formulated by Abraham Maslow to distinguish between two distinct modes of human motivation, cognition, affective connection, and ontological orientation. In this humanistic framework, Deficiency (D) refers to tension-reduction states instigated by physiological or psychological deprivation, in which behavior is channeled toward procuring external sustenance, safety, belonging, or status. Conversely, Being (B) denotes growth-oriented, metamotivated states of awareness and action wherein an individual, emancipated from basic deficit cravings, experiences autonomous self-actualization, unitive perception, and intrinsic ontological values.
At its core, the D-realm functions homeostatically: it is governed by visceral or psychological deficits that generate internal anxiety, prompting instrumental behaviors designed to alleviate disequilibrium and restore baseline comfort. When deficit needs remain unsatisfied, an organism suffers pathology, neurosis, or physical illness, making D-motivation imperative for baseline survival and basic adaptation. By contrast, the B-realm represents a non-homeostatic, growth-facilitated operational mode characterized by expressive spontaneity, aesthetic appreciation, metamotivational vitality, and unconditional relationality. Rather than striving to mend a painful lack, the individual operating within the B-domain seeks enrichment, ontological maturity, and alignment with transpersonal reality.
2. Etymology & Linguistic Origin
The term Deficiency derives linguistically from the Latin deficientia, originating from the verb deficere (composed of the prefix de-, meaning “down” or “away from,” and facere, meaning “to make or do”), signifying to fail, fall short, or lack an essential element. In psychological discourse, deficiency represents a quantified or qualitative void within the organism that demands replenishment from the surrounding environment. Historically rooted in physiological mechanics—such as caloric or vitamin depletion—the construct was expanded within psychoanalysis and behaviorism to encapsulate psychological drives driven by tension reduction.
Conversely, Being traces its linguistic lineage to Old English beon and Proto-Germanic *biju-, ultimately descending from the Proto-Indo-European root *bheue-, which signifies to exist, grow, or come into manifestation. Transposed through twentieth-century European phenomenology and existential philosophy—most prominently Martin Heidegger’s Dasein and ontological inquiries into Sein (Being)—the term entered the American psychiatric and psychological lexicon. Maslow explicitly adopted the uppercase designators “B” and “D” in his seminal monograph Toward a Psychology of Being (1962) to demarcate the profound phenomenological boundary separating deficit-oriented existence from ontological self-fulfillment.
3. Pronunciation & Grammatical Form
The terminology is pronounced as follows: “Being” is pronounced /ˈbiː.ɪŋ/ and “Deficiency” is pronounced /dɪˈfɪʃ.ən.si/; the acronymic abbreviation “B and D” is pronounced /biː ænd diː/. Within academic nomenclature, “Being” functions both as an abstract mass noun denoting ultimate ontological presence and as a classifying modifier (e.g., Being-cognition, Being-love, Being-values). “Deficiency” operates as an abstract noun characterizing the state of shortfall or, attributively, as a categorical adjective (e.g., Deficiency-motivation, Deficiency-love, Deficiency-needs).
In standard psychological notation, these constructs are routinely hyphenated with their respective functional domains, producing compound terms such as B-needs, D-needs, B-cognition, D-cognition, B-love, and D-love. In scholarly writing, authors capitalize the letters “B” and “D” to prevent ambiguity, specifically reserving these notations for Maslowian personality systems rather than standard lowercase alphabetical usage.
4. Detailed Conceptual Explanation
The conceptual dichotomy between B and D represents a paradigmatic transformation in motivational theory, distinguishing behaviors aimed at filling an inner emptiness from those expressing abundance. Within the deficiency system (D-realm), human behavior is dominated by instrumental utility. Environmental objects, interpersonal relationships, and cognitive pursuits are evaluated almost exclusively by their capacity to satisfy an unmet biological or emotional demand. Under D-cognition, perception becomes narrow, vigilant, and selective: an individual starving for acceptance perceives others merely as potential dispensers of affection or judgment, filtering out objective nuances in favor of functional relevance. Consequently, D-motivated existence remains inherently defensive, anxious, and dependent on external validation, because the satisfaction of deficiency needs rests within the control of external agents.
Conversely, when fundamental physical, security, relational, and esteem requirements are systematically gratified, the organism undergoes a qualitative developmental shift into the realm of Being (B-realm). Within this mode, motivation ceases to be a deficiency-correcting drive and becomes self-actualization and metamotivation. The person is no longer driven by an urgent need to acquire something missing from the self; rather, they are propelled toward expressing, actualizing, and exploring inherent capabilities. In the B-realm, cognitive awareness becomes panoramic, unclouded, and intrinsically appreciative, a condition Maslow labeled B-cognition. Perceived entities are experienced in their rich totality, valued for their intrinsic existence rather than their pragmatic utility.
Furthermore, the experiential texture of emotional connection is deeply governed by this division. Deficiency-love (D-love) resembles an emotional transaction: an individual loves another because that partner satisfies intense needs for security, validation, physical comfort, or self-esteem. While D-love serves a normal developmental and protective purpose, it frequently breeds jealousy, clinging behavior, apprehension of loss, and transactional conflict. In contrast, Being-love (B-love) is unconditional, non-possessive, and unselfish. In B-love, the individual marvels at the authentic reality of the other person without demanding subservience, self-gratification, or behavioral modification, enjoying the partner’s independent growth as an end in itself.
Crucially, the B and D framework does not conceptualize human beings as inhabiting these domains in absolute isolation. Instead, Maslow posited a dynamic equilibrium wherein most individuals operate along a continuum. While self-actualizing individuals spend substantial periods anchored within the B-realm—experiencing peak experiences, aesthetic rapture, and creative illumination—unforeseen life stressors, severe resource scarcity, physical illness, or social rejection can abruptly trigger deficiency responses. Nonetheless, healthy maturity is marked by an expanding capacity to inhabit B-modes of living even amid ordinary environmental challenges.
5. Historical Development
The genesis of the B and D paradigm coincided with the emergence of the “Third Force” in American psychology during the 1950s and 1960s. Up to that juncture, the discipline was heavily polarized between Freudian psychoanalysis, which viewed human drive primarily as biological tension reduction governed by pathological conflict, and behaviorism, which reduced action to stimulus-response conditioning driven by physiological drives. In formulating humanistic psychology, Abraham Maslow argued that by studying solely clinical populations and animal laboratory subjects, psychology had systematically ignored the highest reaches of human nature, mistaking chronic deficiency struggles for the totality of human motivation.
Maslow originally introduced the conceptual precursor to B and D in his famous 1943 paper, “A Theory of Human Motivation,” where he outlined the classical hierarchy of needs. In this early framework, lower levels—physiological, safety, love/belonging, and esteem—were implicitly conceptualized as deficit-based drives. However, it was during his extensive observational studies of historical luminaries, creative exemplars, and emotionally healthy contemporaries throughout the 1950s that Maslow realized that self-actualizing individuals did not merely possess higher quantities of motivation; they possessed an entirely different kind of motivation.
By 1962, with the publication of Toward a Psychology of Being, Maslow formally established the structural designations of B and D. He dedicated extensive chapters to delineating B-cognition versus D-cognition and B-love versus D-love. During his tenure as president of the American Psychological Association in the late 1960s, Maslow further articulated the philosophical and transpersonal implications of the B-realm in The Farther Reaches of Human Nature (published posthumously in 1971), culminating in his introduction of the “B-Values” (Being-Values) or metamotivational principles that govern fulfilled existential life.
6. Theoretical Foundations
The theoretical infrastructure underlying the B and D dichotomy rests on three distinct pillars: evolutionary-holistic biology, existential phenomenology, and organismic personality theory. From evolutionary biology and Kurt Goldstein’s organismic theory, Maslow integrated the principle that a living organism is not a mere assemblage of isolated mechanisms reacting to deficits, but an integrated whole possessing an inherent directional impulse toward growth, order, and competence. Goldstein’s assertion that self-actualization is the master motive of biological systems directly informed Maslow’s conviction that B-motivation is natural, healthy, and physiologically grounded.
From existentialism and phenomenology—represented by figures such as Jean-Paul Sartre, Martin Buber, and Rollo May—Maslow extracted the vital distinction between having and being, as well as Buber’s famous formulation of the I-It versus I-Thou relationships. D-cognition and D-love mirror the pragmatic, instrumental mechanics of Buber’s I-It encounter, wherein external entities are processed as objects for personal consumption or defensive fortification. Conversely, B-cognition and B-love embody the sacred, holistic, and reverent engagement characteristic of the I-Thou encounter, acknowledging the intrinsic worth of external reality.
Finally, the framework harmonizes with the organismic humanism championed by Carl Rogers. Rogers postulated an innate “actualizing tendency” that flourishes whenever environmental conditions provide unconditional positive regard and psychological safety. Rogers’s fully functioning person operates almost entirely within what Maslow termed the B-realm: living existentially in the present, displaying organismic trust, exhibiting high creativity, and navigating reality free from rigid, deficit-driven perceptual distortions.
7. Key Components, Types & Dimensions
The B and D taxonomy cuts across several major dimensions of psychological functioning, each presenting symmetrical yet profoundly contrasting manifestations:
- D-Needs (Deficiency Needs): The foundational strata of Maslow’s hierarchy, encompassing physiological integrity (food, water, sleep), physical and economic safety, social belongingness, and external self-esteem. Non-satisfaction produces physiological vulnerability, severe anxiety, loneliness, or inferiority complexes.
- B-Needs (Being Needs or Metaneeds): Higher-order developmental aspirations that emerge naturally once deficit drives are adequately secured. These include the pursuit of truth, artistic expression, philosophical coherence, self-governance, and altruistic contribution. Frustration of B-needs does not induce basic survival panic, but rather existential metapathologies such as alienation, apathy, and cynicism.
- D-Motivation vs. B-Motivation (Metamotivation): D-motivation operates on the principle of tension reduction, seeking homeostasis and equilibrium through external satisfaction. B-motivation represents non-teleological, expressive fulfillment, where the activity is pursued for its own inherent delight and self-expressive joy.
- D-Cognition vs. B-Cognition: D-cognition evaluates the environment through a filtered lens of utility, categorizing stimuli into threats, tools, or irrelevancies. B-cognition is panoramic, non-judgmental, holistic, and capable of perceiving paradoxical complexities without needing to force cognitive closure.
- D-Love vs. B-Love: D-love is grasping, dependent, anxiety-laden, and driven by personal emotional voids, frequently resulting in possessiveness. B-love is serene, appreciative, non-possessive, and centered upon celebrating the autonomy and flourishing of the beloved.
- B-Values (Metavalues): Fourteen ultimate qualities identified by Maslow that define the B-realm, including Wholeness (integration), Perfection (necessity), Completion (finality), Justice (fairness), Aliveness (vitality), Richness (depth), Simplicity (essence), Beauty (elegance), Goodness (benevolence), Uniqueness (individuality), Playfulness (joyous ease), Truth (authenticity), and Self-Sufficiency (autonomy).
8. Examples & Illustrative Cases
To grasp the operational dynamics of the B and D realms, consider the realm of career development. An individual driven predominantly by D-motivation views employment strictly as a financial vehicle or an arena to secure prestige and appease an underlying fear of insignificance. Such an individual constantly monitors corporate hierarchies, treats colleagues as rivals or stepping stones (D-cognition), and experiences profound burnout and psychological distress when accolades fail to permanently extinguish internal insecurities. In contrast, an artisan or scientist functioning in the B-realm experiences their work as a vocational calling. Tasks are completed with absorption, precision, and delight in the pursuit of craftsmanship or scientific insight (B-values of Truth and Perfection). While financial reimbursement is acknowledged, it is secondary to the intrinsic rewards of creative discovery.
In interpersonal and romantic partnerships, the divergence between D-love and B-love is equally stark. A case in point involves a relationship wherein one partner exhibits chronic emotional dependency, continually demanding verbal reassurances, dictating the partner’s social associations, and feeling terrified of rejection. This dynamic reflects severe deficiency-level attachment: the partner is utilized as an emotional prosthetic to ward off isolation. Conversely, an individual exemplifying B-love relates to their significant other with relaxed admiration, taking genuine joy in the partner’s independent interests, celebrating their achievements without jealousy, and maintaining an enduring bond that thrives on mutual personal growth rather than enmeshment.
A third clinical illustration involves aesthetic perception. Under normal D-cognitive conditions, a commuter walking through an urban park ignores the trees, landscape, and shifting sunlight, focused entirely on reaching the train station on time to avoid workplace censure. Under B-cognition—frequently triggered during peak experiences—the same individual might suddenly pause, captivated by the intricate symmetry of a falling leaf or the interplay of light on water. The natural world is experienced with intense clarity, reverent awe, and timeless fascination, completely emancipated from pragmatic considerations.
9. Measurement & Assessment
Operationalizing and quantifying the subtle phenomenological contours of B and D has presented long-standing methodological challenges. Because Maslow initially relied on qualitative biographies and clinical observations, subsequent psychometricians endeavored to construct standardized instruments to measure movement toward the B-realm. The pioneering instrument in this domain is the Personal Orientation Inventory (POI), formulated by Everett L. Shostrom in 1964. The POI comprises 150 paired-choice comparative statements designed to measure values, behaviors, and cognitive orientations critical to self-actualization, specifically evaluating an individual’s transition from deficiency reliance to Being-orientation across scales such as Time Competence and Inner Directedness.
Building upon the POI, subsequent researchers designed shorter, psychometrically refined scales. The Short Index of Self-Actualization (SISA), developed by Jones and Crandall (1986), reliably assesses an individual’s capacity to transcend deficiency-driven defensiveness, measuring autonomous decision-making, emotional acceptance, and trust in one’s internal organismic valuations. Similarly, the Personal Orientation Dimensions (POD) scale provides granular assessments of metamotivational awareness, examining an individual’s appreciation for Maslowian B-values such as synergy, creative spontaneity, and non-exploitative relationality.
In contemporary psychological science, elements of the B and D framework are measured through related empirical constructs. Scales evaluating Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Aspirations (Aspiration Index by Kasser and Ryan) precisely trace the empirical boundary between D-motivated strivings (wealth, external fame, attractive appearance) and B-motivated growth orientations (self-development, authentic community connection, personal growth). Similarly, validated psychometric inventories assessing mature love (such as compassionate love inventories) and experiential awe provide empirical access to what Maslow classified as B-love and B-cognition.
10. Applications & Practical Significance
The conceptual dichotomy between B and D exerts significant practical influence across diverse applied domains, particularly in psychotherapy, pedagogical design, and organizational leadership. In clinical psychotherapy, the model guides diagnostic formulation and treatment trajectories. Therapists recognize that when patients present with chronic depression, pervasive anxiety, or maladaptive interpersonal clinging, they are frequently trapped in unfulfilled D-need loops. Effective humanistic and integrative interventions prioritize the remediation of these developmental deficiencies by establishing a therapeutic alliance grounded in unconditional safety and empathy. Once early deficiency wounds are stabilized, therapeutic objectives systematically transition toward metamotivational cultivation, fostering client autonomy, existential meaning-making, and intrinsic self-expression.
In educational settings, recognizing the primacy of D-needs before B-needs revolutionizes pedagogical strategy. The well-known educational aphorism “Maslow before Bloom” captures this direct dynamic: students who arrive at the classroom malnourished, living in domestic terror, or experiencing profound peer ostracism (unmet D-needs) cannot allocate neurological and cognitive resources to abstract intellectual inquiry, critical reasoning, and creative mastery (B-needs). Progressive educational programs therefore incorporate universal nutritional access, emotional safety nets, and restorative justice to satisfy deficiency demands, thereby freeing children to engage in authentic B-cognition and joyful learning.
Within organizational psychology and management consulting, the B and D architecture serves as the foundation for transformative leadership models. Classical bureaucratic oversight (exemplified by Douglas McGregor’s Theory X) presumes that employees are exclusively D-motivated organisms requiring coercive surveillance, external punishments, and monetary incentives to avert natural indolence. Conversely, enlightened workplaces apply Theory Y and Maslow’s principles of “Eupsychian Management.” By establishing living wages, occupational stability, and supportive team cultures, progressive organizations extinguish basic deficiency anxieties, allowing workers to operate through B-motivation—taking personal pride in craftsmanship, solving multifaceted organizational challenges, and finding personal actualization through communal mission.
11. Research & Empirical Evidence
While early academic critics occasionally dismissed Maslow’s B and D formulations as impressionistic or philosophical, decades of subsequent empirical research have robustly validated its central tenets. The most formidable modern corroboration emerges from Self-Determination Theory (SDT), established by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan. SDT’s vast cross-cultural empirical literature distinguishes between extrinsic motivation (closely mirroring D-motivation) and intrinsic motivation (mirroring B-motivation). Research demonstrates that behaviors driven by external pressures, rewards, or guilt reduction fail to foster psychological well-being, whereas activities pursued for inherent enjoyment, autonomy, and competence reliably predict resilience, vitality, and emotional flourishing.
A landmark global study conducted by Louis Tay and Ed Diener (2011) evaluated need fulfillment across 123 countries, representing over 60,000 participants. Their extensive empirical analysis substantiated Maslow’s universal need dimensions, proving that the fulfillment of basic safety and physiological requirements (D-needs) strongly correlates with everyday life evaluation and the reduction of negative affect, whereas the satisfaction of autonomous, growth-oriented psychosocial needs (B-needs) uniquely predicts higher-order life satisfaction and positive affect.
Furthermore, contemporary neuroimaging investigations into peak experiences and mystical states—canonical expressions of B-cognition—have revealed identifiable neurobiological correlates. Research utilizing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has shown that peak moments of aesthetic awe, creative absorption, and transpersonal unity are associated with significant down-regulation in the brain’s default mode network (DMN). This temporary deactivation of the DMN corresponds neurobiologically to the suspension of self-referential rumination, personal anxiety, and defensive boundary surveillance that characterizes the liberation of B-cognition from deficiency monitoring.
12. Cultural & Cross-Cultural Considerations
Cross-cultural examinations of B and D reveal nuanced variations in how deficiency states are experienced and how Being-values are conceptualized across diverse societies. In Western individualistic cultures, self-actualization and B-realm pursuits are frequently framed in terms of idiosyncratic self-expression, radical personal autonomy, and the attainment of private aspirations. In such environments, individuals may perceive D-needs as personal obstacles to be rapidly overcome in the quest for solitary accomplishment.
Conversely, within collectivistic contexts—such as those predominant in East Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America—the boundaries between deficiency and being are fundamentally mediated by communal harmony and relational interconnectedness. In these cultural matrices, the satisfaction of belongingness and social respect (traditionally classified as intermediate D-needs) is rarely experienced as a self-centered prerequisite; rather, it constitutes an enduring component of moral being. Metamotivation and B-values in collectivistic settings frequently manifest as filial piety, societal contribution, self-effacement for group flourishing, and transgenerational stewardship.
Moreover, indigenous psychological paradigms frequently challenge the rigid hierarchical progression from D to B. In impoverished or politically oppressed communities worldwide, researchers frequently document vibrant manifestations of B-cognition, communal joy, and profound artistic and spiritual engagement existing alongside acute material deprivation. This resilience illustrates that while severe biological deprivation compromises physiological longevity, the human capacity for ontological appreciation, dignity, and B-values can endure even in severely challenging environments.
13. Criticisms, Debates & Limitations
Despite its enduring appeal, the B and D paradigm has faced rigorous critique from various psychological sectors. Psychodynamic scholars argue that Maslow’s dichotomy presents an overly romanticized, post-Enlightenment view of human nature that minimizes the shadow, aggression, and unresolved unconscious drives. From a Freudian perspective, the high-minded attributes of the B-realm—such as altruistic B-love and unitive B-cognition—may sometimes serve as elaborate reaction formations or manic defenses designed to insulate the conscious ego from primitive deficiency anxieties and repressed infantile aggression.
Empirical methodologists have historically criticized the fuzzy boundaries separating B-needs from D-needs. Operationalizing constructs such as “wholeness,” “aliveness,” and “perfection” into psychometrically rigorous variables remains notoriously difficult. Furthermore, Maslow’s initial empirical sample for self-actualizing individuals drew heavily from highly educated, socioeconomically privileged Caucasian historical figures (such as Thomas Jefferson, Jane Addams, and Albert Einstein), prompting accusations of cultural and class elitism. Critics asserted that access to the luxury of B-motivation was fundamentally subsidized by socioeconomic security, rendering the framework less applicable to marginalized populations fighting structural oppression.
Another prominent theoretical debate centers on whether B and D represent qualitatively distinct psychological stages or simply extreme poles of a continuous, dimensional continuum. Evolutionary psychologists suggest that all human endeavors—including art, philosophy, and transpersonal spirituality—can ultimately be mapped onto basic evolutionary survival and reproductive advantages, challenging the notion that any motivational state can ever be entirely emancipated from deficiency functions.
14. Related Terms & Distinctions
The nuances of B and D are best appreciated through direct comparison with related psychological concepts and alternative terminological usages:
- Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation: Developed within Self-Determination Theory, extrinsic motivation corresponds closely with D-motivation (seeking external reward or avoiding negative outcomes), while intrinsic motivation parallels B-motivation (engaging in an activity for its inherent satisfaction and growth).
- Homeostatic vs. Growth Drives: Classical biological drives (hunger, thirst) are homeostatic, aiming to eliminate deficit states; growth drives are telic, developmental, and self-reinforcing, gaining momentum rather than dissipating upon expression.
- Eudaimonia vs. Hedonia: In positive psychology and ancient Greek philosophy, hedonia (pleasure, discomfort reduction) mirrors D-need satisfaction, whereas eudaimonia (virtue, actualization, meaning) embodies the living realization of B-values.
- Letter-Reversal Confusion (“b-d confusion”): In developmental psychology and learning disability diagnostics, “b-d confusion” refers to a spatial and directional orthographic reversal common in early literacy and developmental dyslexia, possessing entirely distinct etymological and functional roots from Maslow’s ontological construct.
- Bondage and Discipline (B&D): In clinical sexology and human sexuality research, B&D refers to an established subculture of non-normative erotic play involving physical restraint and consensual authority, having no theoretical connection to humanistic motivation theory.
15. Summary & Key Takeaways
Abraham Maslow’s formulation of Being and Deficiency provides a profound dual-realm model of the human psyche. Deficiency (D-realm) represents our vulnerability to deprivation, driving homeostatic, instrumental behaviors aimed at preserving survival, security, and social acceptance. Being (B-realm) reflects our intrinsic impulse toward growth, creativity, unitive perception, and metamotivational flourishing. While deficiency keeps the organism alive, it is the pursuit and realization of Being that renders life deeply meaningful, authentic, and whole.
In conclusion, the dichotomy of Being and Deficiency stands as one of the most enduring, holistic conceptual frameworks in motivational psychology. By delineating the journey from deficit-driven reactivity to autonomous self-actualization, this humanistic paradigm continues to inspire contemporary advances in psychotherapy, education, organizational design, and positive psychology, reminding us that healthy human existence is defined not merely by the absence of inner deficit, but by the courageous embodiment of our highest human capacities.
References
- Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
- Goldstein, K. (1939). The Organism: A Holistic Approach to Biology Derived from Pathological Data in Man. American Book Company.
- Jones, G. E., & Crandall, R. (1986). Validation of a short index of self-actualization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12(1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167286121007
- Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3), 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167296223006
- Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
- Maslow, A. H. (1962). Toward a Psychology of Being. D. Van Nostrand Company.
- Maslow, A. H. (1971). The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. The Viking Press.
- Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin.
- Shostrom, E. L. (1964). An inventory for the measurement of self-actualization. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24(2), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446402400203
- Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2011). Needs and subjective well-being around the world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023779