In conceptualizing virtues as fully distinct constructs and vices as the absence of virtues, positive psychology is unable to provide a coherent account that explains tensions between virtues. This article puts forward a simple, holistic model that emphasizes the counterbalancing nature of virtues and conceptualizes vices as both deficiencies and excesses of virtues. Virtues check-and-balance one another to temper instantiations of vice. To test this model, a longitudinal study (N = 299) was conducted on goals and goal pursuit, investigating the virtuous strategies of patience and courage and their relations with the vices of passivity and reactivity. Findings suggested empirical support for the virtue counterbalancing model. Additionally, there were interesting distinctions at the within level (e.g., specific goal level) and between level (e.g., characteristic person level) of analysis, which provide further insight into how these virtues and vices relate. Implications for the model and future research directions are discussed.

We compare the definition of virtue in philosophy with the definition and operationalization of virtue in psychology. We articulate characteristics that virtue is presented as possessing in the perennial western philosophical tradition. Virtues are typically understood as (a) dispositional (b) deep-seated (c) habits (d) that contribute to flourishing and (e) that produce activities with the following three features: they are (f) done well, (g) not done poorly, and (h) in accordance with the right motivation and reason. We form a definition from these characteristics and defend our exclusion of some other characteristics from the definition. Using our definition as a rubric, we evaluate conceptions of virtue in psychology, showing how many fall short at operationalizing at least one component of the philosophical notion of virtue.