Whether you want to look and feel healthier or improve your performance on the job, a lifestyle that supports healthy habits is vital. These include a balanced diet, regular physical activity, sufficient sleep and avoiding smoking and excessive alcohol consumption. However, it is important to recognise that not everyone has access to an ideal lifestyle and the majority of people are living with limitations arising from environmental and personal factors.
The concept of lifestyle is a historically significant topic for research in sociology, social medicine, health psychology and other related fields. Yet there is no clear definition for it and various disciplines have developed different theories. Despite this, the concept has become an integral part of the health discourse.
In sociological currents, such as those of Weber and Bourdieu, lifestyle has been analysed on the level of behaviours. In this context, it is viewed as an expression of class position, and the aim of this article is to review and critically examine the use of the term in this sense.
Moreover, the concept is also used in the context of lifestyle-health research where it is seen as a way to improve health. This research is largely defined by behavioural approaches, and tends to focus on the identification of risk factors that can be modified by intervention strategies. However, the term ‘lifestyle’ is often used in an overly simplified manner, limiting it to a collection of behavioural choices that can be regarded as ‘healthy’ or ‘unhealthy’ [1].
The approach that interprets lifestyles as principally styles of thought has its roots in the work of Alfred Adler. According to him, the framework of guiding values and principles that individuals construct in their first years of life end up defining a system of judgement that informs all of their actions throughout their lives. This approach, which focuses on the analysis of value profiles and the comparison of lifestyles within and between groups, was developed further by Milton Rokeach and Arnold Mitchell’s VALS research and Lynn R Kahle’s LOV research.
In contrast, the critical health psychology perspective emphasises a vision of lifestyle not as a set of individual behavioural patterns that are conditioned by an environment but as contextually situated and meaningful health practices that are the result of a dynamic interaction between an individual and their environment. To this end, the author has reexamined the main models and theories of lifestyle in the psychological and sociological fields through an internal, external, and temporal dimension in order to identify the main components that characterise the concept of lifestyle. These elements are the basis for a new definition of the term, which is presented in this paper.