International Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2012, 3, 319-327
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ijcm.2012.35063 Published Online September 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ijcm) 1
The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model
of Mental Health: From Chinese Psych ological Suzhi
Research Perspectives
Xinqiang Wang, Dajun Zhang*
Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality of Ministry of Education, Center for Mental Health Education, Southwest University,
Chongqing, China.
Received May 5th, 2012; revised June 17th, 2012; accepted July 20th, 2012
ABSTRACT
Aiming at the limitations of psychopathology (PTH), the dual-factor model of mental health (DFM) was proposed as a
new mental health concept and methodology under the background of positive psychology trend. In this paper we pro-
pose giving an overview of DFM, and doub t, criticize, and modify DFM from the perspective of Chinese psychological
suzhi research. The available literature from 1983 to 2012 that is related to DFM and concerning psychological suzhi
research in the past 20 years has been reviewed. In additio n, we also abso rbed the idea of positiv e psychology and Tra-
ditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) Constitution theory to develop theoretically the relationship model between psycho-
logical suzhi and mental health. The relationship model between psychological suzhi and mental health modifies and
transcends PTH and DFM. It will be the new research area of mental health research.
Keywords: Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health; Psychopathology; Relationship Model between Psychological Suzhi
and Mental Health; Subjective We ll-Being
1. Introduction
The fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), DSM-IV has been
issued by the American Psychiatric Association since all
countries are paying increasing attention to human be-
ings’ mental health. The DSM-IV includes the d iagnostic
standards and therapeutic plans for more than 340 kinds
of mental or psychopathologic illness, but it does not
actually explain ways to relieve the pain for patients of
psychological illnesses. Meanwhile, the number of psy-
chological patients across the world has increased [1].
Therefore, we should reflect on the traditional mental
health model and strive to find a new and scientific men-
tal health model with high effectiveness and efficiency.
The dual-factor model of mental health (DFM) was set
forth under the background of positive psychology to
solve the deficiencies of the traditional model of mental
health [1-7].
2. Basic Concepts of Dual-Factor Model of
Mental Health
2.1. It Insists That Mental Health Should Be a
Complete State
The DFM insists that mental health is not the absence of
mental illness or the high subjective well-being (SWB),
but a complete state that integrates the absence of mental
illness and the high SWB. Well-being and mental illness
are two related, but distin ct, dimensions of mental health
[2-4,8]. This corresponds with the opinions of Headey
[9]: Well-being (life satisfaction, positive affects) and
ill-being (anxiety, depression).
2.2. It Classifies the Mentally Healthy People
The DFM takes SWB, the positive indicator, and psy-
chopathology (PTH) symptoms, the negative indicator as
two indispensable factors for mental health diagnosis. It
can be used to classify people into complete mental
health, incomplete mental health, incomplete mental ill-
ness and complete mental illness four groups based on
such indicators and to forecast the mental health func-
tions of those four groups and the development trend of
their mental health [1,3,6,7].
2.3. Purpose of Psychological Prevention and
Intervention
Previous research showed that individuals’ mental disor-
der in the early stage may induce other complications,
increase the probability of relapse of mental illness and
*Co
r
res
p
ondin
g
autho
r
.

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives
320
make the treatment more complicated [1]. Therefore, the
DFM emphasizes positive prevention and advocates the
use of the aforesaid two-dimensional (PTH and SWB)
classification standard to identify which individual needs
to improve the SWB in order to actively prevent mental
illness and which individual need intervention [3,7]
“Symptom reduction may be only a first step in treat-
ment” (pp. 50-51) [1]. This model no longer makes pa-
tients remain in incomplete mental health (languishing)
and deems disappearance of syndromes as the end of
treatment, but holds that incomplete mental health may
be the intermediate point for individuals to suffer mental
illness or achieve complete mental health. It insists that
intervention and treatment should help people overstep
the baseline of their previous psychological functions and
finally achieve complete mental health. It believes that
the enhancement of such positive factors as SWB will
improve the effects of intervention and treatment and
complete mental health may effectively reduce the prob-
ability of relapse [1,7].
3. Deficiencies of Dual-Factor Model of
Mental Health
Firstly, it is about the value and necessity of SWB inter-
vention. Some existing research has acknowledged that
SWB is consistent across situations and is stable across
the life span, even after th e occurrence of intervening life
events [10]. Some recent researches also indicated that
some events are so tragic (e.g. the death of one’s child,
and divorce) th at people never regain their set-point, and
that there are deficiencies in the set point theory of
well-being, individuals may have a set point for SWB,
around which SWB rises and falls over time but to which
SWB eventually returns [9,11]. It indicates that although
positive emotion or life satisfac tion is relatively easier to
be improved in a short time, they are not stable after
training or development. The duration is short. Around
the set point, they may fluctuate. The intervention gets
half the result with twice the effort, or is even futile.
Therefore, its value as an effective indicator is greatly
reduced. The scientific effectiveness of overstressing and
partially focusing on strengthening SWB is doubtful [12].
SWB indicator as the to ol to evaluate th e current positive
state of individuals may be effective and necessary,
which corresponds to the focus of DFM. However, we
believe that to understand the state of mental health
(positive or negative) is just the beginning of diagnosis.
It is important for prevention, facilitation or treatment,
but it is far from sufficient for fundamentally preventing,
maintaining and facilitating mental health and for thor-
oughly removing mental disorders. It is because that to
reach and maintain the state of complete mental health as
stated by DFM, the moderating or mediating factor (the
factor can be effectively intervened or cultivated, and is
stable to a certain extent) behind the current state of
mental health, as well as the mechanism of action should
be further studi ed.
Secondly, do SWB and PHT share a cause-effect rela-
tionship, or are the results related? The World Health
Organization’s conceptualization of mental health as a
positive state of psychological well-being goes beyond
the absence of disease [13]; namely, no matter positive
mental health or negative mental health, they are sub-
stantially a mental state [14], and are consequential psy-
chological states under life events. Therefore, SWB may
not be the factor that influences mental illness. SWB is
not predictable. SWB may only be related to mental ill-
ness and is also a consequence of mental health state.
People may question the mentioned opinions with the
fact that “the improvement of SWB eases depression,
anxiety and other mental illnesses”. Now, it is time to
introduce the third point.
Thirdly, can mental health state be improved through
education, or can it be moderated, maintained or facili-
tated through a third party? Hai-Zhong Zhang believed
that “mental health cannot be improved directly through
education” (p. 59), and “‘state’ cannot be improved di-
rectly through education. Education improves the suzhi
(namely quality) of people through knowledge convey-
ance and behavioral training” (p. 59) [15]. Educators
have gradually realized that mental health not only has
external reflections (psychological state), but also has
substantial characteristics (psychological suzhi). For
example, researchers believed that “good adaptability
and behaviors are external reflections, and the substance
is good psychological suzhi” [16]. Da-Jun Zhang be-
lieved that “the psychological suzhi of the youth and
children is the core of their psychological structure, and
the substance of psychological activities (domination
role); and mental health is the state layer (surface layer or
explicit layer) of psychological structure, and also the
reflection of the state (symptom) of psychological suzhi.
Therefore, in terms of improving the psychological suzhi
of the youth and children, the basic countermeasure or
the fundamental way to solve the mental problems of the
youth and ch ildren is to foster sound ps ychological suzhi
of the youth an d children” (p. 27) [17]. Which one is the
cause? And which one is the effect? Obviously, it is
long-term (rather than short-term) state that forms the
psychological suzhi of individuals, and the psychological
suzhi of individuals dominate the current state of indi-
viduals [12,14 ]. Peterson and h is colleagues carr ied out a
retrospective study through sampling on the Internet.
And the results showed that character strengths (the defi-
nition of character strengths overlaps and is similar the
definition of psychological suzhi) help individuals to

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives 321
recover from physical and mental illnesses. Thus, re-
searchers inferred that the intervention measures that
facilitate such character strengths will help those who
suffer from physical or mental health crisis to better re-
cover physical and mental health [18]. Therefore, mental
health is a state and cannot be improved directly through
education [12]. Education and intervention can only im-
prove psychological suzhi or character strengths and
other psychological factors. Behind the result that the
improvement of SWB reduces depression, anxiety or
other mental illnesses is the mediating or moderating
effects of psychological suzhi, which is a necessary basis
for setting forth the relationship model between psycho-
logical suzhi and mental health.
4. Preliminary Development of Relationship
Model between Psychological Suzhi and
Mental Health
Researchers believe that mental health should include
more positive assets, strengths, resilience and other indi-
cators of wellness. Alth ough the DFM does not focu s on
the evaluation of strengths, it paves the way for strength-
based assessments [19]. According to DFM, specific
fundamental individual characteristics, such as per sonality,
may substantially influence children’s mental health
status [6]. These point out the direction for “predicting
mental health based on psychological suzhi” or “foster-
ing psychological suzhi to promote and substantially
maintain mental health” [14 ]; and reflect the thought that
psychological suzhi should be included in the model to
develop relationship model between psychological suzhi
and mental health.
4.1. Connotation and Structure of Psychological
Suzhi
Psychological suzhi is a concept set forth by Chinese
scholars under the backg round of quality-oriented edu ca-
tion, and by absorbing the essence of traditional culture
[14,20]. Psychological suzh i is an importan t, integr al part
of people’s characteristics [20]. As a Chinese-originated,
there is no corresponding conception in the Western
psychology literature for psychological sushi [21,22]. To
help readers have a better understanding about this con-
ception, Zhang coined the word psychological suzhi, in
order to avoid reader’s confusion [21]. In Chinese psy-
chology, this conception had also been translated as
mental quality, psychological quality, mental diathesis,
or psychological diathesis. However, the word “quality”
cannot cover the whole meaning of suzhi [22]. In recent
decades, many Chinese scholars including Dajun Zhang,
Jisheng Wang, Deli Shen, Guocai Yan, Zhengzhi Feng
have been conducting a lot research on psychological
suzhi. From 1980 to 2011, in the China Academic Jour-
nal Network Publishing Database (CAJD), the title con-
tains “心理素质” (psychological suzhi in Chinese) aca-
demic papers have 4990, keywords contains “心理素质”
academic papers have 31293, only 2011 this year key-
words contains “心理素质” academic papers also have
2267. Among them, the Psychological Suzhi Research
Team of the Southwest University led by Zhang Da-Jun
is the most influential and the most recognized team [23].
Based on individuals’ physiological conditions, psy-
chological suzhi is a steady, fundamental and derivative
mental quality or characteristic, which is formed through
the internalization of extrinsic elements and is closely
related with individuals’ adaptive and creative behaviors
[21,24]. Substantially, psychological suzhi is a kind of
psychological quality that consists of three dimensions,
including cognition quality, personality quality, and ada-
ptability. These three dimensions can be further divided
into 22 elements, such as comprehensiveness, swiftness,
openness, purposiveness, inquisitiveness, persistence,
awareness, monitoring, independence, optimism, emo-
tional stability, adven turousness, interpersonal adap tation,
stress adaptation, etc [24], and are evaluated through
typical behaviors [14]. In terms of structure-function,
Da-Jun Zhang also believed that psychological suzhi is
the integration of elements and functional value of psy-
chology and behaviors [25]. Elements include cognition
quality and personality quality, and functional value is
the adaptability d eveloped based on elements [14]. To be
specific, cognition quality is indicated by human’s re-
flection of the objective reality. Cognition quality is di-
rectly involved in the cognition of the objective reality,
and is the basic component of psychological suzhi. Per-
sonality quality is reflected by how people treat the ob-
jective reality. Although personality quality cannot di-
rectly cognize the objective reality, it motivates and
regulates cognition. Personality quality is the motive-
tional component of the elements of psychological suzhi.
Adaptability is the habitual behavior tendency reflecting
based on the cognitio n quality and personality quality, by
learning, responding to and defending the external social
environment; by controllin g, understanding and adjustin g
the internal psychological process; and through the in-
teraction with the social and living environment. It is a
factor in the structure of psychological suzhi that has the
most derivative functions. Therefore, according to the
summary and conclusion in terms of structure-function,
the model of static relation structure theory of psycho-
logical suzhi is showed below (see Figure 1).
4.2. The Theoretical Basis for the Relationship
Model between Psychological Suzhi and
Mental Health
Substantially, psychological suzhi is a stable psycho-

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives
322
Figure 1. Model of relation structure theory of psychological suzhi.
logical quality, which includes “multi-level self-orga-
nizing system from stable endogenesis psychological
quality to explicit behavioral habits” [26]; while mental
health is a positive an d good psychological state. Da-Ju n
Zhang set forth that “generally speaking, those who have
sound or high psychological suzhi will seldom have
mental disorders; even if psychological problems occur,
they can usually adjust everything by themselves; nor-
mally they have healthy psychology. On the contrary,
those who have unsound or low psychological suzhi will
have mental disorders easily; or faced with psychological
problems, they cannot adjust easily by themselves; and
normally they have unhealthy psychology” [17]. Psy-
chological suzhi moderates or plays a mediation role in
how the external risk and pathogenic factors or protective
factors influence mental health, for example, psycho-
logical suzhi moderates an d plays a mediation role in the
protection provided by social support system to mental
health. Many research into the relationship between
mental health and subjective support, objective support
& utilization of support showed that “for mental health,
the most important aspect is that whether people feel they
have a sufficient and good social support system, and
whether they can utilize the system effectively, rather
than how many helps the system actually has provided”
(p. 458) [27]. In addition, psychological suzhi also plays
a decisive role in the self-regulation and self-recovery of
individuals. Substantially, the relationship between psy-
chological suzhi and mental health is “root cause” and
“symptom”, which is similar to the relationship between
constitution and health state.
As a conception of Traditional Chinese Medicine
(TCM) Constitution Theory, constitution is the integra-
tion of specific physical qualities and certain psycho-
logical qualities [28]. It refers to the comprehensive and
relatively stable qualities or individual characteristics of
morphological structure, physiological functions and
psychological states that are developed based on innate
gift and acquisition during the life process of people
[28,29]. In many cases, constitution determines the vul-
nerability to some disease and the tendency during
pathological changes, and influences the formation of
“symptoms”. Constitution restricts the changes and out-
comes of “symptoms”, namely constitution is the basis
for “different symptoms for the same disease” and “the
same symptom for different diseases”. The research by
He Wen-Bin and He Ling into the Yellow Emperor’s
Canon of Medicine illustrated the theory well: “the Yel-
low Emperor’s Canon of Medicine focuses on individual
characteristic, constitution and other internal factors; and
believes that even with the same emotion and stimuli of
psychological and social factors, some will be sick while
the other not, and the location of illness and symptoms
will be different, the root cause for which is the differ-
ences of individual characteristics and constitution. Thus
treatment should be based on individual characteristic
and constitution” [30]. It also explains “why individuals
with different psychological suzhi will have different
mental health states when they face the same risk factors,
namely, factors can modify individual responsiveness to
stress”.
Researchers believed that “Application of a general
immunity model as a common framework to resilience
research in mental health can help to clarify underlying
mechanisms and challenges, which contribute to our
understanding of health in general and mental health in
particular” (p. 491) [31]. Resilience refers to individual’s
capacity and traits to respond to stress, frustration,
trauma and negative events [32]. It can be studied from
individual power and supportive power [33-35]. The
connotation of individual capacity partially overlaps that
of psychological suzhi, and there are similarities between
them [34,35], such as optimism. The difference lies in
that psychological suzhi is a kind of behavior that is
reflected in behaviors and activities, and that psycholo-
gical suzhi emphasizes the relatively stable psychological

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives 323
quality and individual power. Although psychological
suzhi is different from resilience, they both highlight the
core role of individual quality or capacity in mental
health. Resilience research from the view of individual
quality or capacity also provides important theoretical
and proof basis for development of the relationship
model between psychological suzhi and mental health. In
addition, the research and theory of the relationship
between personality traits and mental health, and the
research and theory of the relationship between character
strengths and mental health also provide important
theoretical and proof basis, which has been illustrated in
detail in other papers, and will not be illustrated in the
this article.
4.3. Basic Theoretical Views of the Relationship
Model between Psychological Suzhi and
Mental Health
Existing researches have proved that mental health is the
problem of individuals and also the problem of groups
and the society [36]. From the perspective of individual
mental health, the model focuses on individual psycho-
logical suzhi and individual psychological quality; con-
siders the important role of social environment and sup-
port system in an individual’s mental health; theoretically
develops the relationship model between psychological
suzhi and mental health based on existing research re-
sults and theoretical analysis. The connotation of the
model mainly includes two related levels.
4.3.1. The Mechanism Level
The core concept of the model is that the external risk
factors and protective factors act through psychological
suzhi, and emphasizes that psychological suzhi is the key
of mental health problem. This concept has been recog-
nized by a large number of psychologists and official
documents of the government in China. For example
Chong-De Lin holds that “the key of mental health edu-
cation lies in improving the psychological suzhi of stu-
dents” [37]; Da-Jun Zhang believes that “the fundamen-
tal means to maintain the mental health of students is to
foster sound psychological suzhi” (p. 494) [26]; Hai-
Zhong Zhang argued that “psychological suzhi must be
intervened to improve mental health” [15]; according to
the Outline of Guidance for Mental Health Education of
Pupils and Middle School Students (September 25, 2002)
issued by Chinese ministry of education, “promote the
development of healthy psychological Suzhi, and main-
tain mental health of students”, and “gradually im- prove
their psychological suzhi”. The mechanism level includes
the sub-mechanism levels for the development of psy-
chological suzhi and action of psychological suzhi.
4.3.1.1. Sub-Mechanism Level for the Development of
Psychological Suzhi
It sets forth that psychological suzhi is developed during
the interaction of social and cultural environment and
hereditary and physiological basis when external stimuli
is gradually internalized into stable, basic and implicit
psychological suzhi [24]. Such psychological quality is
relatively stable, which will further cause the initiative
selection of social and cultural environment, goes after
profits and avoids disadvantages, so that it will selec-
tively accept the influence of the environment and main-
tain or promote the development or improvement of
psychological suzhi (see Figure 2).
4.3.1.2. Sub-Mechanical Level for the Action of
Psychological Suzhi
It sets forth that individual psychological suzhi plays a
crucial moderating or mediating role in the occurrence
and development of illness, and that psychological suzhi
and mental health state (including positive mental health
state and negative mental health state) influences each
other and develop dynamically. To be specific, it is re-
flected by that: the external risk factors of mental prob-
lems act through psychological suzhi (internal); the cog-
nition quality an d personality quality are the endo genous
factors for the occurrence and development of mental
problems; adaptability in the structure of psychological
suzhi reflects the interaction between external and inter-
nal causes, and is the intermediary step for the action of
external cause through internal cause; the level and the
sound degree of psychological su zhi moderates and plays
an mediation role in how the external risk factors influ-
ence an individual’s mental health state; maintaining a
certain state of the individual’s mental health that further
affects and reshapes individual psychological suzhi (see
Figure 2).
With respect to the influence of external environment
and psychological suzhi on an individual’s mental health,
if the influence of one of them increases, the influence of
the other one will decrease. And the proportion of their
influence is related with the age of individuals (see Fig-
ure 3). Generally speaking, the influence of psychology-
cal suzhi will increase when people are growing up, and
will decrease slightly when they become old. On the
contrary, the influence of external factors on mental
health will decrease as people are growing up and will
slightly increase when they become old. Therefore, at-
tention to and research into the action mechanism of
psychological suzhi for adolescence, and strengthening
psychological suzh i training or cultiv atin g of adolescence
are of significant practical and theoretical meanings to
the adolescence who rebel parents’ protection, and who
are going through fast but unstable physical and psycho-

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives
324
Hereditary and
physiological basis
Social and cultural
envi r o nment (c ontain education)
Development
mechanism
Action
mechanism
External
protective f actors
(Such as social
supports) Psychological Suzhi
(mediation and
moderation)
External hazardous
And pa thogentc
factors
(Such as stressful events)
Initiatively choose environment
and acc ept inf luence
Negative mental health state
Positive mental health state
Figure 2. Theoretical model of mental health mechanism of the relationship model between psychological suzhi and mental
health.
Figure 3. The influence of external environment and psy-
chological suzhi on an individual’s mental health.
logical changes, and who have troubles related to mental
health frequently.
4.3.2. Assessment and Target Level
With respect to the assessment and diagnosis of current
state of an individual’s mental health and overall situa-
tion of the individual’s mental health, the relationship
model between psychological suzhi and mental health
sets forth that the classified and qualitative assessment
should be combined with quantitative assessment; name ly,
assess the individual’s situation on a classified and on
qualitative basis, and then based on the assessment re-
sults, perform quantitative assessment.
4.3.2.1. Classified and Qualitative Assessment
The assessment includes the classified assessment of the
current state of mental health, and assessment of the
overall situation of an individual’s current mental health.
Classified assessment of the current state of the indi-
vidual’s mental health is to assess the current state of the
individual’s mental health by combining the score of
positive mental health indicator (such as SWB) with
score of negative mental health indicator (such as de-
pression). And then classifies individuals into four cate-
gories, namely, complete mental health, incomplete
mental health, incomplete mental illness and complete
mental illness, which are the same as DFM classification
[1-3,6,7].
The assessment of the overall situation of current
mental health is based on the score of positive mental
health indicator, score of negative mental health indicator
(Score is obtained by reverse-scoring of negative indica-
tor), and the score of psychological suzhi indicator. If
only the score of psychological suzhi indicator is lower
than cut point, then the individual is classified into Vul-
nerable I (mild) group; if the score of psychological suzhi
indicator and scor e of positive mental health ind icator are
lower than cut point, then the individual is classified into
Vulnerable II (severe) group; if the score of psychology-
cal suzhi indicator and score of negative mental health
indicator are lower than cut point, then the individual is
classified into Troubled I (mild) group; if the score of
positive mental health ind icator, score of negative mental
health indicator, and the score of psychological suzhi
indicator are all lower than cut point, the individual is
classified into Troubled II (severe) group; if only the
score of positive mental health indicator is lower than cu t
point, the individual is classified into Easy Recovery I
(mild) group; if only the score of negative mental health
indicator is lower than cut point, the individual is classi-
fied into Easy Recovery II (moderate) group; if the score
of positive mental health ind icator, and score of negative
mental health indicator are both lower than cut point, the
individual is classified into Easy Recovery III (severe)
group; if no score is lower than cut point, the individual
is classified into Flourishing group (see Table 1).

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives 325
Table1. Grouping and grouping standard of the relationship model betw e e n psychological suzhi and mental health.
The score of psychological suzhi indicator lower
than cut point
The score of positive mental
health indicator lower
than cut point
The score of negative mental
health indicator lower
than cut point Category
YES NO NO Vulnerable I (mild) group
YES YES NO Vulnerable II (severe) group
YES NO YES Troubled I (mild) group
YES YES YES Troubled II (severe) grou p
NO YES NO Easy Recovery (mild) gro upⅠ
NO NO YES Easy Recovery II (moderate) group
NO YES YES Easy Recovery III (severe) group
Lower than
cut point?
NO NO NO Flourishing group
Note: The score of negative mental health indicator is obtained by reverse-scoring of negative indicator.
4.3.2.2. Quantitative Assessment
The assessment also includes the assessment of the cur-
rent state of mental health, and assessment of the overall
situation of individual’s current mental health.
The State Assessment Index (SI) is the product of the
standard score of positive mental health indicator (PI,
such as SWB) and the standard score of negative mental
health indicator (NI, such as PHT) (Score is obtained by
reverse-scoring of negative indicator), which is the un-
derside area as shown in Figure 4.
The Overall Assessment Index (OI) is the products of
the score of positive mental health indicator(PI), scor e of
negative mental health indicator(NI), and the score of
psychological suzhi indicator (SZI), namely OI = PI × NI
× SZI, and is the volume shown in Figure 4.
4.3.2.3. Application Methods and Intervention Tips for
Classified and Qualitative Assessment and
Quantitative Assessment
The relationship model between psychological suzhi and
mental health is a methodology model. Researchers can
adopt overall measurement (namely measurement of
PHT, SWB and overall psychological suzhi) to classify
individuals, diagnose and develop intervention plans.
However, what is more important is that specific meas-
urement indicators (such as depression indicator of nega-
tive mental health, life satisfaction indicator of positive
mental health, and emotional competency indicator of
psychological suzhi) should be selected as per the actual
needs and the model, so as to classify and diagnose indi-
viduals and develop intervention plan.
With respect to the application of qualitative assess-
ment and quantitative assessment, individuals should be
classified first according to the score of negative mental
health indicator, positive mental health indicator, and
psychological suzhi indicator; and then based on such
classification, consider the score of current state of men-
tal health, and score of overall situation of individuals’
mental health under the same category. Substantial dif-
NI
PI
3.0
SZI
Such as SWB
6.0
4.0 Such as PHT
Note: PI is positive mental health indicator; NI is negative mental health
indicator; SZI is psychological suzhi indicator.
Figure 4. Simulated diagram of the current state of an indi-
vidual’s mental health and overall situation of mental
health under the relationship model between psychological
suzhi and mental health.
ference exists among groups, but these groups can be
changed through in tervention and the relevant factors. SI
and OI cannot be compared between different categories,
but only under the same category. With higher score, the
current state of mental health or the overall situation of
mental health will be better.
The relationship model between psychological suzhi
and mental health highlights positive prevention of ill-
ness; improves psychological suzhi so as to treat mental
illness, prevents unstable treatment effect and relapse;
and improves psychological suzhi to prevent harm
caused by risk and pathogenic factors, and prevents
mental illness. Meanwhile, according to the principle of
solving both the symptoms and root causes, the model
stresses that proper preventive and intervening measures
should be arranged as per the respective categories of
individuals. The key to cure mental illness, promote and
maintain mental health lies in the development of sound
psychological suzhi. The eventual target of intervention

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives
326
is to realize Flourishing group.
5. Conclusion
Although it is not possible to foster psychological suzhi
in a short period, psychological suzhi that has been de-
veloped or cultivated is relatively stable for a certain pe-
riod, has the function of forecasting, and is significant for
an individual’s mental health, academic success, and
work performance. Therefore, we believe that the rela-
tionship model between psychological suzhi and mental
health can effectively overcome the deficiencies of PTH
and DFM. Enhancement of psychological suzhi under the
model will be a new field of research on mental health
and mental health education.
6. Acknowledgements
This study was supported by 2010 Key Pr oject “Research
for the dual-factor model of mental health in youth” at
Key Humanity Social Science Research Institute in
Chongqing, China.
REFERENCES
[1] C. L. M. Keyes and S. J. Lopez, “Toward a Science of
Mental Health: Positive Directions in Diagnosis and In-
terventions,” In: C. R. Snyder and S. J. Lopez, Eds.,
Handbook of Positive Psychology, Oxford University
Press, New York, 2005, pp. 45-59.
[2] P. J. Greenspoon and D. H. Saklofske, “Toward an Inte-
gration of Subjective Well-Being and Psychopathology,”
Social Indicators Research, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2001, pp. 81-
108. doi:10.1023/A:1007219227883
[3] S. M. Suldo and E. J. Shaffer, “Looking beyond Psycho-
pathology: The Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health in
Youth,” School Psychology Review, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2008,
pp. 52-68.
[4] B. Doll, “The Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health in
Youth,” School Psychology Review, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2008,
pp. 69-73.
[5] C. L. M. Keyes, “The Mental Health Continuum: From
Languishing to Flourishing in Life,” Journal of Health
and Social Behavior, Vol. 43, 2002, pp. 207-222.
doi:10.2307/3090197
[6] S. P. Antaramian, E. S. Huebner, K. J. Hills and R. F.
Valois, “A Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: Toward
a More Comprehensive Understanding of Youth Func-
tioning,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 80,
No. 4, 2010, pp. 462-472.
[7] X. Q. Wang, D. J. Zhang and J. L. Wang, “Dual-Factor
Model of Mental Health: Surpass the Traditional Mental
Health Model,” Psychology, Vol. 2, No. 8, 2011, pp.
767-772. doi:10.4236/psych.2011.28117
[8] R. B. Wilkinson and W. A. Walford, “The Measurement
of Adolescent Psychological Health: One or Two Dimen-
sions?” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 27, 1998,
pp. 443-455. doi:10.1023/A:1022848001938
[9] B. Headey, “The Set Point Theory of Well-Being Has
Serious Flaws: On the Eve of a Scientific Revolution?”
Social Indicators Research, Vol. 97, No. 1, 2010, pp.
7-21. doi:10.1007/s11205-009-9559-x
[10] E. Diener and R. E. Lucas, “Personality and Subjective
Well-Being,” In: D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Sch-
warz, Eds., Foundations of Hedonic Psychology: Scien-
tific Perspectives on Enjoyment and Suffering, Chapter 11,
Russell Sage Foundation, New York,1999.
[11] R. E. Lucas, P. S. Dyrenforth and E. Diener, “Four Myths
about Subjective Well-Being,” Social and Personality
Psychology Compass, Vol. 2, No. 5, 2008, pp. 2001-2015.
doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00140.x
[12] X. Q. Wang and D. J. Zhang, “A Review on the Dual-
Factor Model of Mental Health and Its Prospect,” Chinese
Journal of Special Education, No. 10, 2011, pp. 68-73.
[13] World Health Organization, “Promoting Mental Health:
Concepts, Emerging Evidence, Practice,” World Health
Organization, Geneva, 2005.
[14] D. J. Zhang and X. Q. Wang, “An Analysis of the Rela-
tionship between Mental Health and Psychological Suzhi:
From Perspective of Connotation and Structure,” Journal
of Southwest University, Vol. 38, No. 3, 2012, pp. 69-74.
[15] H. Z. Zhang, “Mental Health Can Not Be Improved
through Education,” Forum on Contemporary Education,
No. 1, 2008, pp. 56-59.
[16] D. L. Shen and H. X. Ma, “On Mental Health Diathesis,”
Studies of Psychology and Behavior, Vol. 2, No. 4, 2004,
pp. 567-571.
[17] D. J. Zhang, “On School Psychological Suzhi Education,”
Southwest China Normal University Press, Chongqing,
2004.
[18] C. Peterson, N. Park and M. E. P. Seligman, “Greater
Strengths of Character and Recovery from Illness,” The
Journal of Positive Psychology, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2006, pp.
17-26. doi:10.1080/17439760500372739
[19] K. W. Merrell, “Better Methods, Better Solutions: De-
velopments in School-Based Behavioral Assessment,”
School Psychology Review, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2010, pp. 422-
426.
[20] D. J. Zhang, J. L. Wang, X. H. Li and X. L. Feng, “Edu-
cational Psychology in China,” Zeitschrift für Päda-
gogische Psychologie, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2012, pp. 57-67.
doi:10.1024/1010-0652/a000060
[21] D. J. Zhang, “Psychological Suzhi and Its Structure,” In:
A. M. Columbus, Ed., Advances in Psychology Research,
Nova Publication, New York, 2010, pp. 239-250.
[22] D. J. Zhang, J. L. Wang and L. Yu, “Introduction,” In: D.
J. Zhang, J. L. Wang and L. Yu, Eds., Methods and Im-
plementary Strategies on Cultivating Students’s Psycho-
logical Suzhi, Nova Science Publishers, New York, 2011.
[23] C. X. Liu, “A Study of the Implicit Theory on Middle
School Student’s Psychological Suzh,” Master Thesis,
Southwest University, Chongqing, 2011.
[24] D. J. Zhang, Z. Z. Feng, C. Guo and X. Chen, “Problems
on Research of Students’ Mental Quality,” Journal of

The Criticism and Amendment for the Dual-Factor Model of Mental Health: From
Chinese Psychological Suzhi Research Perspectives
327
Southwest China Normal University, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2000,
pp. 56-62.
[25] D. J. Zhang, “On Man’s Mental Quality ,” Studies of Psy-
chology and Behavior, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2003, pp. 143-146.
[26] D. J. Zhang, “School Psychological Suzhi Education and
Students’ Mental Health,” In: D. J. Zhang, C. Guo and L.
Yu, Eds., Education Psychology, People’s Education
Press, Beijing, 2005, pp. 493-525.
[27] Y. M. Ye and X. Y. Dai, “Development of Social Support
Scale for University Students,” Chinese Journal of Clini-
cal Psychology, Vol. 16, No. 5, 2008, pp. 456-458.
[28] Q. Wang, “Constitutional Theory in Traditional Chinese
Medicine,” People’s Medical Publishing Press, Beijing,
2005, pp. 9-15.
[29] Q. Wang, “Status and Prospect of Constitutional Theory
in Traditional Chinese Medicine,” Chinese Journal of
Basic Medicine in Traditional Chinese Medicine, Vol. 8,
No. 2, 2002, pp. 6-15.
[30] W. B. He and L. He, “Yellow Emperor’s Canon of Medi-
cine and Ecological Medicine in Modern Bio-Psycho-
logical Society,” Journal of Nanjing University of TCM,
Vol. 7, No. 2, 2006, pp. 69-70.
[31] D. M. Davydov, R. Stewart, K. Ritchie and I. Chaudieu,
“Resilience and Mental Health,” Clinical Psychology Re-
view, Vol. 30, 2010, pp. 479-495.
doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.003
[32] K. M. Connor and T. Davidson Jr., “Development of a
New Resilience Scale: The Connor-Davidson Resilience
Scale (CD-RISC),” Depression & Anxiety, Vol. 18, No. 2,
2003, pp. 76-83. doi:10.1002/da.10113
[33] Y. Q. Hu and Y. Q. Gan, “Development and Psychomet-
ric Validity of the Resilience Scale for Chinese Adoles-
cents,” Acta Psychologica Sinica, Vol. 40, No. 8, 2008,
pp. 902-912.
[34] X. Q. Wang, H. C. Li and X. J. Pang, “Analysis on Resil-
ience and Other Factors of the Male Prisoners Who Re-
enter the Prison,” Journal of Wuhan Technical College of
Communications, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2010, pp. 54-57.
[35] X. Q. Wang and D. J. Zhang, “The Change of Junior
Middle School Students’ Life Satisfaction and the Pro-
spective Effect of Resilience: A Two Year Longitudinal
Study,” Psychological Development and Education, Vol.
28, No. 1, 2012, pp. 91-98.
[36] H. H. Yan, “Mental Health and Mental Health Evaluation
Standard,” Education Exploration, No. 7, 2001, pp. 65-
66.
[37] C. D. Lin, “The Key of Mental Health Education Is to
Enhances Students’ Psychological Quality,” The Teach-
ing of Thought and Political Study, No. 11, 2000, pp.
34-35.