Chapter Five Happiness and Subjective Well-being

Happiness is an emotional state characterized by joy, satisfaction, contentment and fulfillment.

It includes positive emotions and life satisfaction Happiness differs from individual to individual
it is not a constant state it is characterized by experience is more positive feelings than negative

Three types
1.human to human:
feeling happy in the presence of someone. It may be parent , friends, siblings etc.

2.with plants and animal:

people who are associated with nature or have craze of pets and feels happy and satisfied with them.

3. materialistic:
human to things. people feels pleasure while shopping, gaining money etc.

History of happiness
Happiness has been a topic of interest for many centuries, starting with ancient Greek philosophy, through post-
Enlightenment WesternEuropean moral philosophy (especially Utilitarianism) to current quality-of-life and well-
being research in social, political and economic sciences (Veenhoven, 1991a). Today, happiness as a concept seems
to be readily embraced by most people and appears to be more valued than the pursuit of money, moral goodness or
going to heaven (King & Napa, 1998). Not surprisingly, during the past thirty years and especially since the creation
of positive psychology, psychology too has turned its attention towards the study of happiness and well-being.

There are several reasons why the field of well-being is flourishing at the moment:

• First, Western countries have achieved a sufficient level of affluence(wealth, prosperity), so that survival is no
longer a central factor in people’s lives. Quality of life is becoming more important than matters of economic
prosperity.
• Personal happiness is becoming more important because of growing trends towards individualism.
• Finally, a number of valid and reliable measures have been developed, which have allowed the study of well-being
to establish itself as a serious and recognized discipline (Diener et al., 2001).

Buddhist

Plato : called platonic happiness. According to him life will be satisfied, when you fulfill your desires
according to him every individual strives to achieve goals.
Socrates: according to him happiness is not achieved by seeking pleasure but by achieving virtues (moral standards)
when an individual is not satisfied with virtues he can’t achieve happiness.
it depends on how we fulfill our responsibilities
it is not about seeking more but to enjoy the little.
it depends on how you enjoy the little things in your life

Epicurus: he established school of happiness

according to him friends and happiness are linked together
good bond between friends leads to happiness

Abu Hamid Al Ghazali:

he is considered the fourth most authority figure after the PROPHET
he wrote a book “the revival of religious science” which consists of 600 pages.
then it was divided into volumes
his book was translated into………….
“the alchemio of happiness”
it involves the transformation of one self
relationship with GOD
and how the conduct lies on the basis of hereafter

Aristotle:
made a distinction between happiness
Hidonia often associated with pleasure, doing what feels good
it includes self-care, fulfilling desires, experiencing enjoyment and feeling a sense of fulfillment.
Eudaimonia seeking virtue(high moral standard) and meaning.
important component of it is that your life has meaning, value and purpose
it is associated more with fulfilling responsibilities investing in long term concerned with the welfare of other people
and living up to personal ideas. These two are commonly known today in psychology as pleasure and meaning. The
third component which is suggested by psychologists is engagement which is the feeling of commitment and
participation in different areas of life.
foe eg; volunteering for a cause you believe in, might be more meaningful than pleasurable.

Personal happiness
individualistic and collectivistic culture also determine happiness
Subjective measures
Objective measures

Who is happy?
The answer is simple but a little unexpected – almost everyone. The collated results of 916 surveys of 1.1 million
people in 45 nations show that, on a scale of 0 to 10, the average score was 6.75. So, people are generally more
happy than they are unhappy (Myers, 2000). Between 84 and 89 per cent of Americans, for example, score
themselves above neutral in happiness inventories. Most countries are well above the neutral point, the exception
being the former Soviet bloc countries (e.g. Bulgaria, Russia, Belarus, Latvia), where the average is somewhere
close to 5 on a 10-point scale (Argyle, 2001).

Who is not happy?

The same groups usually have the lowest happiness ratings, including: those who have recently lost their partners,
clients new to therapy, hospitalized alcoholics, new inmates and students under political repression.

Why is it good to be happy?

The common-sense answer to this question is that happiness is good because it feels good. However, research
evidence demonstrates that there are other benefits too: positive affect and well-being lead to sociability, better
health, success, self-regulation and helping behaviour. Interestingly, well-being enhances creativity and divergent
thinking.
It appears that happiness, similar to positive affect, stimulates playing with new ideas. New research has also shown
that happy people persist longer at a task that is not very enjoyable in itself (tell your boss that only the happiest
employees should be attending boring meetings!), are better at multi-tasking and are more systematic and attentive
(Diener, 2001). When it comes to health, happiness is known to have a beneficial effect on immune system
functioning – experimental studies demonstrate that it even protects us from the common cold (Cohen et al., 2003)!

What is even more fascinating is that well-being is associated with longevity. One study analysed the application
letters of nuns entering convents at the age of 18 for expressions of happiness. It is important to note that all of these
nuns had a very similar, moderate lifestyle – they didn’t smoke or drink, had a balanced diet and worked as teachers.
The results indicated that happiness expressed in these letters at the age of 18 predicted life duration. Years later, at
the age of 85, 90 per cent of nuns whose happiness was in the upper quarter were still alive, compared with 34 per
cent of those who were least happy. Even at the age of 94, over half (54 per cent) of the happiest nuns were still
alive, while only 11 percent of those whose happiness fell into the lowest quarter were still living. So it looks like
happiness can buy you an extra 9.4 years of life (Danner et al., 2001)!
Before we go any further . . . Would you like to test yourself once again? If your answer is yes, follow the
instructions below. In the box below, you will find five statements with which you may agree or disagree. Using the
scale of 1–7 provided, indicate your agreement with each statement by placing the appropriate number on the line
following that statement. Try to be open and honest in your responding.

The 7-point scale

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
strongly disagree slightly neither slightly agree strongly
disagree disagree agree agree agree
nor
disagree
In most ways my life is close to my ideal
The conditions of my life are excellent

I am satisfied with my life

So far I have got the important things I want in
life
If I could live my life over, I would change
almost nothing

Now add together all five numbers to get your overall score.
It should be between 5 and 35. The results of this questionnaire can show how satisfied you are with your life
(Diener et al., 1985).
An answer in the region of 15 to 25 is considered average, below 14 indicates that your life satisfaction is less
than average, while if your total score falls between 26 and 35 you are probably quite happy with your life. Read
on to find out more about life satisfaction and the part it plays in our happiness.

What happiness really is, or the science of subjective well-being

There is a big debate in psychology about whether happiness can and should be measured objectively or
subjectively. Some argue that it cannot possibly be measured objectively because none of the obvious behaviours
can be linked to happiness in a reliable manner. Even an outgoing and friendly appearance, which is seen frequently
among happy people, can be used as a mask by those who are unhappy. Others, however, including Nobel Prize
winner Daniel Kahneman, believe in the objective assessment of happiness, which could be gathered from averaged
out multiple assessments of people’s moods over a period of time. This way, a happiness assessment would not need
to be tied to memory and retrospective accounts (Kahneman, 1999). Nevertheless, the subjective paradigm appears
to prevail at the moment, and this is what I will focus on here.

So far in this chapter, I have been using the words ‘happiness’ and ‘well-being’ interchangeably. This is because the
notion of subjective well-being (SWB) is used in research literature as a substitute for the term ‘happiness’. It
encompasses how people evaluate their own lives in terms of cognitive and affective explanations, and can be
represented in the following way (Diener, 2000):

SWB = SATISFACTION WITH LIFE + AFFECT

The first, cognitive part of subjective well-being is expressed by life satisfaction. Life satisfaction represents one’s
assessment of one’s own life. One is satisfied when there is little or no discrepancy between the resent and what is
thought to be an ideal or deserved situation. On the other hand, dissatisfaction is a result of a substantial discrepancy
between present conditions and the ideal standard. Dissatisfaction can also be a result of comparing oneself with
others. Affect represents the emotional side of SWB. The notion of affect (which was discussed in Chapter 2)
comprises both positive and negative moods and emotions that are associated with our everyday experiences.

Even though common sense would suggest that we should feel most happy if we experience the maximum amount
of intense positive affect and not very frequent negative affect, research demonstrates that this is not the case. The
research shows that, while it is very important to experience positive affect often, intense positive affect is not
necessary for well-being. It appears that intense positive emotions usually come at a price, as they are often followed
by periods of low affect. Also, they can negatively affect the evaluation of subsequent (usually less intense) positive
experiences (Diener et al., 1991).

Back to practical matters – can we raise our subjective well-being?

A number of theories say that it is impossible to permanently change someone’s level of happiness. One of these
theories, the so-called Zerosum, says that happiness is cyclical and that happy and unhappy periods follow each
other. Any attempt to increase happiness will soon be nullified by a consequent unhappy period. Another theory
claims that happiness is a fi xed characteristic and is, therefore, not open to change, although happiness is not quite
as stable during adolescence and early adulthood and can be affected by major life changes. Therefore, it is more
likely that happiness ‘tends to get’ fixed, rather than being fixed from the very beginning (Veenhoven, 1991a).
Adaptation theory predicts that although happiness reacts to negative and positive life events, it returns to baseline
shortly afterwards. Lottery winners soon revert to their normal level of well-being, and paraplegics and
quadriplegics seem to adjust to their conditions and revert almost to their previous level of well-being (Brickman et
al., 1978). This is called the ‘hedonic treadmill’. It has been discovered that only life events that occurred during the
previous two- or three-months influence well-being (Suh et al., 1996). However, despite the evidence that people get
adjusted to both lottery winning and spinal injuries, there are certain conditions (such as widowhood and long-term
unemployment) to which people never adjust completely (Seligman, 2002).

Taking into account the findings of many scholars, Seligman offers the happiness formula:

H = S + C + V,
where H stands for happiness,
S for a set range, C for the circumstances and V for the factors under voluntary control.
S is a genetically determined level of happiness, which remains relatively stable throughout the lifespan and
returns to its original level soon after the majority of significant life events. It determines happiness up to about 50
percent.
C is the circumstances we’ve already considered (and accounts for about 10 per cent). So, if you want to be happy,
get married, join a church but don’t bother about making more money, staying healthy, getting educated or moving
to a sunnier climate.
Finally, factors under voluntary control (V) refer to intentional and effortful practices a person can choose to
engage in (which account for about 40 per cent) (Seligman, 2002).
Of course, this formula is far from perfect. Genes and marriage are hardly the same fruit, and are more like apples
and pears that cannot be added up. Nevertheless, the formula gives an indication of possibility and the room to
manoeuvre (the 40 per cent).

What is important for happiness and what is not?

Which of the following would you say are important for happiness: money, friends, having children, getting
married, looks, health, moving to a better climate? Is your age important? What about your level of education? The
safety of your community? Common sense predicts that the most likely source of satisfaction with life is objective
circumstances, but often this is not the case. There is a weak relationship between happiness and many life
circumstances we consider so important that we would sacrifice years of our lives to have them. Compare your
thoughts with Table 5.1, which summarizes the research findings on the correlates1 of happiness, and see whether
you’ve got it right (Argyle, 2001).
A word of warning here – unravelling cause and effect is not easy. Although these correlates are often considered to
be the causes of happiness, they may as well be its consequences. For example, it may be that having good friends
brings happiness or that those who are happy attract good friends.

TABLE 5.1 THE TRUTH AS RESEARCH KNOWS IT

SWB IS RELATED TO SWB IS NOT REALLY RELATED TO

Optimism Age (although there are somewhat contradictory
findings in this respect)
Extraversion Physical attractiveness
Social connections, i.e., close friendships Money (once the basic needs are met, the difference
between the very rich and aright is small)
Being married (marriage still scores better than Gender (women are more often depressed but also more
cohabitation, although the latter is picking up as a often joyful)
predictor of SWB in individualistic societies).
Having engaging work Educational level
Religion or spirituality Having children (see the next section for further clarification)

Leisure Moving to a sunnier climate (in fact, moving to Australia will not
increase your SWB only by 1-2 percent)

Good sleep and exercise Crime prevention

Social class (through lifestyle differences and better Housing
coping methods)
Subjective health (what do you think about your health) Objective health (what doctors say)

Happiness and personality

A meta-analysis of 148 studies by DeNeve and Cooper found that, of 137 personality characteristics that had been
studied (as of 1996), the following were moderately predictive of happiness: trust, emotional stability, locus of
control (what happens to me is the result of my effort rather than luck, chance or fate), desire for control, hardiness
(feelings of control, commitment and challenge), absence of tension, self-esteem, absence of neuroticism (undue
anxiety), extraversion (being outgoing), agreeableness (easy to get along with), and repressiveness-defensiveness in
the face of life difficulties. Some of the above personality characteristics are probably easier to change than others,
and as a result are more or less likely candidates for helping to increase happiness (e.g. changing your level of
extraversion is actually quite difficult).
Happiness and relationships
One of the strongest predictors (and not only correlates!) of happiness is social relationships. In fact, to be happy we
need to spend six to seven hours a day in social settings, and up to nine if our jobs are stressful (Rath & Harter,
2010). This applies regardless of whether we are extraverted or introverted (Froh et al., 2007). In their study of
exceptionally happy people (10 per cent of 222 college students), Diener and Seligman (2002) found only one main
difference between the happiest and the rest of the students. The very happy people had a rich and fulfilling social
life. They spent the least time alone, had good relationships with friends and had a current romantic partner. They
did not have fewer negative and more positive events, nor differed on amount of sleep, TV watching, exercise,
smoking, drinking, etc. Perhaps not surprisingly, frequency of sexual intercourse is strongly associated with
happiness.
Marriage usually leads to a rapid increase in SWB, which, unfortunately, comes down after a while. However, it
does not return to the starting point, but stays at a higher level than before marriage. So marriage changes the set
point of SWB, although this change is not large.
However, if your relationship is on the rocks, you are likely to be less happy than people who are unmarried or
divorced.
Interesting facts about well-being
• Real income has risen dramatically in the prosperous nations over the last 50 years, but levels of SWB have
remained flat (Easterlin et al., 2010).
• People in wealthy nations appear to be much happier than in poorer ones but this finding does not hold true for
some nations (e.g. Brazil) (Diener et al., 1995).
• Denmark and Costa Rica keep competing for the title of the happiest country on Earth (Hefferon & Boniwell,
2011).
• Desiring wealth leaves one less happy (Kasser, 2002).
• Making an extra $10,000 per year would increase your happiness only by about 2 per cent (Christakis & Fowler,
2009).
• Spending money on others increases your happiness (Dunn et al., 2008).
• People who go to church are happier and live longer, although this may be explained by the social support that
belonging to a religious community gives to people (Ciarrocchi et al., 2008).
 • Having children does not make you happier and having under-fives and teenagers actually makes you less happy.
Saying that, having children can make your life more meaningful, and also parents tend to live longer (Kobrin &
Hendershot, 1977).
• Children genetically predisposed to unhappiness can benefit from early positive environmental influences better
than their more genetically contented peers (Belsky & Pluess, 2008).
• Hanging out with happy people will increase your level of happiness (Christakis & Fowler, 2009).
• Watching soap operas enhances well-being (Argyle, 2001).
• All objective life circumstances combined account for no more than 10 per cent of variance in well-being (Diener,
1999; Ryan & Deci, 2001).
Chapter 9. POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY & LIFE COMPLEXITIES AND CHALLENGES
Stress, limitations, challenging situations, loss, significant life changes, like getting older, and even death, are an
inevitable part of being human. Although on the surface these issues sound like nemeses of positive psychology, some
argue that instead of ignoring them, positive psychology should study how managing them can contribute to a life
well lived.

Dealing with adversity

Coping strategies

When stress hits, we all use different ways of coping with adverse or challenging situations. Researchers organise
these coping strategies into three broad groups: problem-focused, emotion- focused, and avoidant coping. 133.
Problem-focused coping happens when people identify the problem and take steps to resolve it. These strategies aim
to modify the source of stress directly, sorting the problem out. Emotion-focused coping is focused not so much on
the problem but on the emotions it arouses in us. So, if we turn to someone else for assistance, it would generally be
for emotional support (e.g. talking things through, crying, empathy), rather than instrumental (e.g. specific advice on
what to do in the situation). It often pays off to deal with the emotions first, before focusing on the actual problem at
hand. When the emotions have been diffused, we can think better and evaluate the situation more accurately, seeing
the opportunities in it. These strategies are also more appropriate for uncontrollable stresses, such as bereavement,
when it is impossible to solve the problem. Avoidance coping happens when people try to deny that the problem
exists, and try to block it out of their minds (possibly with the help of alcohol, drugs, sex or even work).

The concrete strategies in these three broad groups can be functional and dysfunctional. For example, accepting
responsibility for solving a problem or developing a realistic action plan are amongst the functional problem-focused
strategies, whilst procrastination or pessimism are amongst the dysfunctional ones. Similarly, catharsis, emotional
discharge or asking friends for support are the constructive emotion-focused ways of coping, whilst getting involved
in destructive relationships, aggression or wishful thinking are much less so. Avoidance-focused strategies also can be
useful in the short-term. It may be a good idea to go to the movies or play pool with friends in order to distract
yourself from a pressing problem for an evening. However, being permanently distracted and mentally disengaged
from it is. dysfunctional, partly because unattended problems do not get sorted out by themselves but tend to worsen
with time.

Adaptive defence mechanisms

If coping strategies are something that we consciously engage in, psychoanalysts claim that we also have certain
unconscious processes that assist us in recovering from life's stresses. These unconscious processes, called adaptive
defence mechanisms, are positive and very useful. Amongst them are: anticipation, affiliation, humour, self-assertion,
self-observation, sublimation and suppression. Just to give some examples, anticipation prepares us emotionally for
potentially unfavourable outcomes of challenging situations. Affiliation leads us to pick up the phone and chat to a
friend about a hard day at work, without deliberately using it as a coping strategy. Reframing negative situations into
humorous ones is a common and very effective mechanism. Sublimation allows to us to transform negative reactions
(e.g. aggression) or strong natural urges (e.g. sexual desire) into constructive activities. All of these defences tend to
develop and become more effective as our lives. progress. The more we use them, the better our adaptation and
resilience will become.

Whilst both functional coping strategies and adaptive defence mechanisms are very helpful, the dividing line between
them is rather vague, and there are some overlaps when it comes to the particulars. If we become aware of our defence
mechanisms, for example, don't they automatically relocate into the deliberate strategies camp?

Post-traumatic growth

We encounter stresses on a daily basis, some of them more severe than others. However, at times we are faced with
traumatic events that have a potential to change the course of our lives forever. It may be the tsunami that took or
ruined the lives of thousands on Boxing Day 2004; it may be genocide, like the one in Rwanda; rape, sexual abuse,
learning that one is HIV-positive or has terminal cancer, losing a loved one, perhaps a child, giving birth to a heavily
disabled baby, losing one's home in a fire, or losing one's own limb...

These (and, unfortunately, many other devastating events) can shatter our very picture of the world. Certain beliefs
(e.g. people are good or the world is just) may no longer seem true, many goals may no longer be important. Yet,
even when this happens, some individuals emerge from the experience, having gained something from it. This
phenomenon is called post-traumatic growth. Many people feel that they are much stronger following the adversity,
and have more confidence in themselves and their capacities. Others report improved and stronger relationships
(trauma often acts like a litmus paper, revealing the value of your relationships), or having a greater feeling of
compassion for others in similar situations. Sometimes people learn to appreciate anew what they have and even the
small things in life that we so often take for granted. Moreover, some individuals discover meaning or spirituality in
the aftermath of the event, leading to the development of a more coherent and satisfying worldview and life
philosophy.

Many religious scholars, philosophers and writers have emphasised the positive that can be found in suffering.
Amongst them are theologians from the Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Islamic traditions and thinkers like Nietzsche,
Dante, Dostoyevsky and Solzhenitsyn". The Austrian psychiatrist, Frankl, wrote a book entitled Man's Search for
Meaning about his experiences in a Nazi concentration camp. This book is a tribute to finding humanity and
meaningfulness even in the midst of despair, when all the attributes of existence (identity, possessions, loved ones,
even the right to live) have been taken from an individual.

So how do we move from such traumatic experiences to growing as people? The process usually starts with
attempting to make sense of what happened. This takes place almost automatically, people try to work out which steps
and coincidences have led to the event. Then comes an attempt to remake sense of life as a whole or cognitive re-
structuring. The internal world has to be rebuilt anew, often with major alternations in one's view, even of oneself.
This process is more deliberate. If it is absent, and the assimilation of the traumatic experience into one's life picture
does not happen, the person may not be able to come to terms with the event and may also be vulnerable to future
negative occurrences.

Frankl believed that the attitude an individual adopts towards adversity is absolutely crucial for a successful
adjustment : 'Everything can be taken from a man but...the last of the human freedoms to choose one's attitude in any
given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way. If a traumatic situation is interpreted as a challenge, the person
is more likely to experience post-traumatic growth.

Finally, another crucial factor is interpersonal support.

Assisted by sympathetic interpersonal connections, which encourage and allow disclosure and growth, a person has a
much better chance to adjust successfully
Interestingly, post-traumatic growth is associated with not only better psychological, but also physical, health. For
example, HIV- positive men who actively engage in meaning-making after the loss of their partners, have much better
immunological indicators of disease progression 2-3 years after the event than those who do not

It's important to note that both growth and distress often co- exist. In fact, it may be the balance between recognition
of gains and losses that leads to the best adjustment¹¹¹. This, of course, is not to say that trauma is necessary for
growth. Trauma is not good and cannot be good per se, but it can bring meaningful personal changes 42. A person
may become even wiser as a result of post- traumatic growth, which is our next subject.

Wisdom

Wisdom is something that can assist us in dealing with challenging and complex situations¹43. Wisdom can be
facilitative to post- traumatic growth and can also grow from it¹44, although, of course, traumatic events are not
necessary to become wise.

Currently, there are two dominant theories of wisdom within. positive psychology, which are the Berlin's wisdom
paradigm and Sternberg's balance theory of wisdom.

Berlin's Wisdom Paradigm

This paradigm defines wisdom as knowledge about fundamental life pragmatics, including concern with the conduct,
purpose and meaning of life

Five criteria are seen to be essential for wisdom: 1) rich factual knowledge about pragmatics (or facts) of life, having
a truly superior level of information; 2) rich knowledge of how to deal with these pragmatics "know how to make
decisions, resolve conflicts, etc.; 3) knowledge about many themes and contexts of life, such as: self, family, school,
workplace, and understanding how they are interrelated, how they change and affect each other; 4) recognition and
tolerance of differences in beliefs and values (this does not imply relativism of values); 5) recognition and
management of uncertainty and tolerance of ambiguity (accepting that knowledge has limits and we can never predict
with 100% accuracy what will happen in the future). Someone with deep knowledge about life can be considered wise
if all these five criteria are met.

Importantly, wisdom does not depend on superior cognitive or technical knowledge. Wisdom is a combination of
intellectual aspects with deep understanding of affect and motivation. Experience (and training) in dealing with
complex life problems enhance the development of wisdom
The researchers from the Berlin's wisdom group found that contrary to popular beliefs, wisdom can characterize
people of any age 47. Whilst wisdom rapidly increases during adolescence and young adulthood, it may not rise any
further during the adult years.

Sternberg's Balance Theory of Wisdom

According to this theory, wisdom is a combination of practical intelligence and tacit knowledge, applied to solving
problems in order to achieve a common good for all 48. This tacit element, already emphasised by Aristotle,
Sternberg interprets as flexibility and ability to appreciate nuances that cannot be learnt from any formalised set of
rules. This model places a strong accent on balance.

For example, wisdom involves balancing among multiple interests, including intrapersonal (or own), interpersonal (of
other people around you), and extrapersonal (things that would be good for everyone, wider organisations,
community, country, environment). Wisdom also involves balance between different ways in which we can respond
to the situation and our environment. For instance, faced with the same situation, we can adapt to it, shape it so it
adapts to us, or select a new environment that is more conducive to our needs and actions.

Wisdom is usually applied to dealing with complex problems involving multiple competing interests and multiple
response strategies. The outcome of wisdom is a judgement or advice on how these problems can be solved in such a
way that the common good is satisfied

( *Tips & Tools: Awakening wisdom

Create an image that represents wisdom for you and engage in a dialogue with it. It can be a sage, philosopher,
an old friend, relative or teacher.* )

Both of the above models seem to have their merits. An emphasis on balance is undoubtedly important, however, a
notion of 'common good' carries an inherent value judgement. The Berlin 'common good carries an inherent value
judgement. The Berlin paradigm seems very comprehensive, but lacks the essential tacit component of wisdom and
appears rather complicated. None of the models mention what may be one of the most important components of
wisdom: capacity to foresee the long-term consequences of one's actions.

Positive ageing

The ageing process is a major challenge that the vast majority of us are bound to encounter sooner or later. The good
news is we are living longer nowadays. The bad news-ageing does not seem to be held in high respect in the media
and popular culture. When asked to describe the first image that comes to their mind when they think of an older
person, the majority of people mention terms such as: wise, slow, ill, infirm and frail's. In fact, we know from the
previous part of the chapter that wisdom is not connected with age (our common perception is wrong here), so how
correct are our other stereotypes (which, incidentally, are all negative)? We eagerly count 'the wrinkles of age. Ageing
is associated with decline in physical and sensory functioning, impaired hearing, vision, capacity to taste and savour.
Deterioration of cognitive abilities and a struggle to remember names are also often emphasized. Reduction in social
interactions and eventual loneliness seem to be all part of this inevitable process. Yet, do they have to be?

In fact, research data shows that most adults over 65 are very healthy. A large survey carried out in the mid-90s
demonstrated that 73% of people between 78 and 84 reported no disabling conditions, and 40% of those over 85
reported being in a similar state of health 52. Contrary to the existing stereotypes, many physical problems can be
eliminated with good diet and exercise. It is never too late to start living healthily, our bodies are unbelievably
forgiving. Within 5 years, for example, all the negative effects of even very heavy smoking can be reversed. Proper
maintenance can do miracles!

Even declining cognitive performance (including memory) can actually be improved with quite modest training. In
fact, an older adult's brain continues to produce new neurons, and does not lose as many old ones as once thought . It
can even learn new things fairly well. The 'use it or lose it' expression is very relevant here, as well as being
applicable to sexual functioning. But what is fundamentally important for maintaining effective cognitive functioning
is the belief that one can learn and remember. An American psychiatrist, George Vaillant, followed two groups of
men for over 30 years (from the time before they were 50 to their 70s and 80s), studying their ageing processes. He
discovered six factors that (contrary to expectations) did not predict healthy ageing: ancestral longevity (how long
one's parents lived), cholesterol level, parental social class, warm childhood environment, stable childhood
temperament (rated by parents) and stress. What does predict good healthy ageing, however, are the following seven
factors: not being a heavy smoker or stopping smoking young (by about the age of 45), mature adaptive defences
(discussed earlier in the chapter), absence of alcohol abuse (moderate drinking is perfectly fine), healthy weight,
stable marriage, exercise and years of education (the more, the better).

It sounds like, that with a bit of work and in the absence of unpredictable events (such as being struck by lightning),
successful ageing is a matter of some effort and not taking it too seriously. Moreover, not only can many of the
negatives associated with ageing be avoided, older age can bring some positives and potential strengths

For example, older people have less likelihood of clinical depression than younger ones. They also experience fewer
negative emotions than younger people, but a similar number of positive emotions. They exhibit a greater emotional
complexity (e.g. joy and sadness can be intermixed at the same moment) and more contentment. They form deeper
and closer bonds with people and derive more satisfaction from relationships. Whilst there is a decrease in the number
of social interactions, this is because there is less contact with unimportant acquaintances, not because less time is
spent in fulfilling contacts. Because time becomes more meaningful, older people select contacts more carefully and
strategically. These deep social engagements are protective against cognitive impairment, including dementia. Older
people tend to have an intact memory for emotionally important material. They are better in interpersonal interactions,
and better able to see interpersonal problems from multiple perspectives. For example, when discussing conflicts,
older couples show fewer negative emotions and more affection towards their partners than younger ones

What seems to make a difference is the extent of older people's engagement with life. Managing to maintain normal,
personally meaningful activities (whether intellectual, physical or social) is seen as another key to successful ageing.
For example, researchers have observed a much more successful ageing process and longevity in Kibbutz
communities, because retirement does not longevity in Kibbutz communities, because retirement does not equate to
stopping work, responsibilities are preserved, jobs tend to become adjusted to changing abilities, and there is a
widespread social support

Feeling in control, able to make choices and a positive attitude are also of paramount importance. People who
perceive themselves to be younger than others of the same age have a higher level of internal control. Positive
attitudes are associated with: good memory, longevity, good health, well-being and a will to live. Contrary to popular
expectations, ageing does not need to become an unpleasant experience. Positive ageing can add more life to years,
not just years to life' . Rather than seeing ageing as a negative process, a more appropriate conclusion, perhaps, is that
all stages in life have their strengths and gains, together with weaknesses and losses. It's just how we look at it. We
usually don't focus on the negatives of childhood, such as dependency, lack of freedom, lack of knowledge and
intellectual capacities, so why would we focus on the negatives of ageing? The changes brought by the ageing process
are best approached as challenges, which can be successfully tackled with appropriate attitudes and maintenance, and
transformed into something we can benefit from.

Chapter 7. MEANING IN MAKING: VALUES, MOTIVATION AND LIFE GOALS

Now that we know what makes us truly fulfilled, let's consider what else can help us get there This chapter deals with
three interrelated topics values, motivation, and life goals, all of which play a role in enhancing hedonic and
eudaimonic well-being. Even though it is important that our fundamental biological (safety, hunger, thirst) and
psychological (autonomy, relatedness, competence) needs are satisfied, this is not sufficient for optimal functioning.
In order to make choices and to act, we need to know what our values and beliefs are. We need to be motivated to
start doing the things that we choose to do. Finally, we need to set goals that are achievable, relevant to us, and reflect
our deeply held values.

Values

Values are the things that are important to us. They are deeply held beliefs that we usually internalise during our
upbringing, or decide on as we grow older. It is essential to distinguish needs from values. Needs are inborn, they
exist even if we are not aware of them and are universal. Values, on the other hand, are learned or chosen, are parts of
our consciousness and are specific to each of us. Needs are pretty stable we want to eat today and we'll want to eat
tomorrow (or even later today) yet again. Values are open to change. Few people can maintain absolutely identical
values throughout their lifetimes.

Values form the basis of why we do what we do. For instance, they help us harness and prioritise needs. If we valued
everything equally, we wouldn't be able to act, because we wouldn't know where to start Values are especially useful
in explaining why we do things that we don't actually like doing. Not many people enjoy changing nappies, yet the
value of caring overrides the value of what we like or dislike in the vast majority of cases (otherwise there would be
many more frustrated babies out there).

Modern society no longer offers us a reliable and convincing set of values. In fact, we are in a so-called 'value-gap'
with regard to the loss of consensus. We have learnt to realise and accept that other people's values can be different
from ours, and with that our own values became, to some extent, arbitrary. Losing values, or not knowing which
values to choose, can be devastating. Countries in the former Soviet bloc, for example, have undergone an astonishing
experience, in which the values that people held were shattered over a very short period of time, wit nothing coming
to replace them.

Shalom Schwartz identified 10 values, which he believes can be universal (found cross-culturally): power,
achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity and security".
Indeed, research offers a lot of support for his claim that the list is comprehensive. If you had to guess, which of the
above values do you think are associated with subjective well-being? Self-direction and achievement values (probably
because they emphasise autonomy and competence) appear to be, whilst tradition and conformity values are related to
lower well-being. This is because they rely on so-called extrinsic motivation (which will be discussed in the next part
of the chapter).

Values are often linked to worries. If you think that worries are something to do with mental health and nothing to do
with positive psychology, think again. Researchers distinguish between two types of worries miero worries and macro
worries Micro worries are all about yourself and others close to you ('Will I get an interview?" "What if he leaves
me'). Not surprisingly, they lead to poor well- being. Moreover, people who have a lot of these worries, usually hold
power and hedonism values. Macro worries, on the other hand, are about society, the world or universal issues (AIDS
in Africa or presidential elections in the USA). People who are high on universalism and benevolence values have
these types of worries, together with a higher level of well-being" So, worrying is actually good for you, as long as it
is not self-centred.

Can you think of any other universal values that are not in this list?

Motivation

Why do you get up in the morning? Why don't you just stay in bed all day, doing nothing? Motivation is the force
behind getting up, going to work, opening a study book in the middle of the night, etc. Yet this force is not as simple
as it looks on the surface.

There are two fundamental types of motivation: extrinsic and intrinsic. Intrinsic motivation reflects the inborn human
tendency to seek out novelty and challenges, to explore the world, to exercise our capacities. When we are
intrinsically motivated, we do something for the sake of it, simply out of enjoyment or interest. We are extrinsically
motivated when we do an activity for the sake of something else or in order to attain some other outcome (e.g. going
to work in order to earn money).

(Tips & Tools: Awakening intrinsic motivation

Intrinsic motivation is enhanced for activities that are: moderately challenging, those we feel we can do well, or
that give us satisfaction),

To make the story a bit more complicated, extrinsic motivation has four different subtypes: external, introjected,
identified and integrated.

External motivation happens when we feel driven by outside forces, performing an activity either in order to obtain a
reward or avoid punishment. We do something because we have to do it, Introjected motivation is based on self-
control, acting in order to avoid guilt, pressure and anxiety. We do something because we would feel guilty if we
didn't. Identified motivation means we do something because we can see why it is important (even though we don't
enjoy it).

Finally, integrated motivation means we do something because we fully subscribe to the values underlying our
behaviour, which have become a part of ourselves.
On the motivation continuum, identified and integrated motivations are very close to the intrinsic one, which means
the more we develop these types of motivation, the less we would have to force ourselves to do things. The closer one
moves towards identified and intrinsic motivation, the more authentic and fulfilling his or her life becomes

(Tips & Tools

Enhancing your intrinsic motivation Give yourself a chance to make as many choices as you can, acknowledge how
you feel about different situations and whether your point of view differs from that of others. This would enhance
your autonomy, and, consequently, intrinsic motivation.)

Why is autonomy so important for intrinsic motivation? If we are relatively free to choose our actions, then it's easier
for us to appreciate the reasons for performing them. However, if we feel forced or compelled to do something, it is
more difficult for us to internalise the motivation. That is why offering rewards for activities that should be internally
motivated actually serves to undermine performance and achievement.

(Tips & Tools

Developing integrated motivation in children Avoid rewarding, forcing, or cajoling children to do homework or
other desired activities. This may lead to a lack of responsibility. Instead, providing a meaningful rationale for an
activity, making it more interesting, empathising with difficulties, giving plenty of praise, supporting autonomy and
being interested and caring, are the keys to raising self-motivated kids. )

Life Goals

To a great extent, well-being depends on our ability to choose a direction in life, to form intentions and to make sure
we are following a certain preferred path. Life goals, which are also called core goals, personal strivings, personal
projects, life tasks, and future aspirations are specific motivational objectives by which we direct our lives. They are
not the same as needs because they are formulated at the conscious level. They differ from values one may hold. They
are also distinct from short-term goals because they. direct people's lives for an extended duration. Researchers find
that knowing what life goals one pursues, why he or she is pursuing them, and how well these goals correspond with
the person's values can help improve the quality of a person's life.

The Self-Concordance model claims that well-being is higher when people select goals that are based on identified,
integrated and intrinsic motivation (see previous part) 104. Not only are self- concordant goals associated with higher
hedonic and eudaimonic well-being, but people are also more likely to sustain efforts in achieving them, as
longitudinal research demonstrates. When these goals are achieved, well-being gets enhanced even further. The
reason why self-concordant goals promote well-being is because they satisfy innate psychological needs (see previous
chapter).

What goals?

Some researchers think that certain goals are more likely to contribute to well-being than others. For example, a
humanist, Erich Fromm (1976), made a distinction between a 'having orientation (obtaining wealth and status) and a
'being orientation (e.g. self-actualisation) and found that people with a being orientation are happier, on average
(perhaps, because they don't suffer from status anxiety and don't waste their time trying to keep up with Jones's).
Many others also think that focusing on extrinsie goals (financial success, social recognition and appearance) is not
quite as good an idea as focusing on intrinsic aspirations (e.g. self-acceptance, affiliation and community feeling)107
Extrinsic goals are associated with lower self-esteem, more drug use, more television watching, more difficult and
less satisfying relationships, and acting in a narcissistic and competitive manner.

However, other research, for example, the value-as-a-moderator model, came to somewhat different conclusions,
showing that it is not so much the content of the goals themselves that is important, but the congruence between the
values a person holds and their goals. This particular model explored Schwartz's ten universal values (power,
achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity and security).
The researchers did not find that extrinsic values (such as power) or intrinsic values (e.g. benevolence, self-direction)
were associated with lower and higher well-being respectively, only that the value-congruent goals and activities
provide a sense of satisfactions

It turns out that if people value money, set up materialistic or other resource-related goals (money, health, athletic
ability and attractiveness) and manage to obtain these resources, they feel more satisfied than those who don't value
these resources. (We know, nevertheless, that their satisfaction will not last, and they will become accustomed to
these resources very quickly).

So, while the content of goals (like having and being) may be important per se, the congruence or how well one's
goals match one's values is of no lesser importance.

Tips & Tools

Managing goals conflict
Goals can be in conflict with our values, which is what incongruence is about. However, goals can also be in
conflict within themselves (e.g. when achievement of one goal blocks the achievement of another). You can
establish a dialogue between conflicting goals and see if they can find a common ground)

Well-being is enhanced when people choose to pursue goals that are:

 Feasible, realistic and attainable.

 Those they are making progress towards. Personally meaningful.
 Those that people feel highly committed to. Intrinsic.
 Concerned with community, intimacy and growth.
 Self-concordant and congruent with people's motives and needs.
 Valued by one's culture.
 Not conflicting.

If the pursuit of goals is so important for well-being, why do people so often fail to pursue them? There are several
reasons for this First of all, people often choose to pursue goals that are less important but urgent and attract more
attention (daily chores, events, etc.). Secondly, we fear that we might not be able to accomplish something for one
reason or another and, as a consequence, never even try. Finally, sometimes it's just hard to keep going we may run
out of energy and give up before achieving a desired outcome (a high drop out rate from distance learning institutions,
such as the Open University, is one such example).

You may have noticed that in this chapter I did not make a distinction between hedonic (happiness) and eudaimonic
(personal growth/transcendence) when talking about the impact of goals on well-being. This is because much of the
research on goals used traditional measures of well-being (i.e. hedonic). However, there are many reasons to believe
that pursuing certain types of goals and having an internal congruence between our goals and values, may have an
even higher impact on our eudaimonic well-being.

Chapter Fifteen The Future of Positive Psychology

Positive psychology - the state of the field

Today, positive psychology is an acrive movement with its own national and international conferences, committees,
groups and sub-groups, major textbooks and even its own scientific journal. The Positive Psychology Network
actively supports the scientific and academic development of young and early-career researchers in its field. I have
included, at the end of the book, a list of positive psychology resources for those who might be interested in pursuing
their study (or practice) of positive psychology further.

What is right with positive psychology?

When, in 1999, I first heard about positive psychology, I realized immediately that, for me, this was it. It simply made
sense. Finally, we had psychology studying interesting topics, rather than something largely irrelevant and
unappealing for anyone else but researchers themselves. Finally, it was allowed to use words like 'happiness' and
'character' from the podiums of research conferences and in scientific journals. And finally, distinguished and senior
scholars were there to place the soft and fluffy self-help-type topics onto the serious psychological agenda.

Seven years from the moment Martin Seligman (a president of the American Psychological Association at one time)
launched positive psychology, the landscape of psychology as a whole had changed. In 1998, the ratio of psychology
papers on depression to psychology apers on well-being was 7:1, yet by end of 2005 this ratio was 5:1. In these seven
years, nearly five times as many papers were published on hope than on hopelessness, and 3.5 times more articles on
optimism than pessimism. Today, psychology is no longer just a science of pathology and depression, operating
purely within the disease model, as the science of optimal functioning has firmly established its place under the sun.

What is wrong with positive psychology?

There are a lot of things that are right with positive psychology, yet there are a lot of things that are either wrong or
potentially wrong with it. This book has endeavoured to provide a balanced view of this currently flourishing field,
illuminating its successes and noting its drawbacks. In this section, I will spend a bit more ume concentrating on the
latter, highlighting the main critique and problems of positive psychology.

A lack of an acknowledgement of its historical roots

Although positive psychology has a rich history with many predecessors, it is often surprisingly ignorant of previous
developments on the topics it studies (many of which are thousands of years old). Not only can this lead to
reinventing the wheel yet again, but also to staking claim to someone else's ideas without adequate acknowledgement
(Cowen & Kilmer, 2002). Luckily, some positive psychologists agree that acknowledgements are very important, and
recognize that better connections with its historical roots would make positive psychology stronger rather than
weaker; a little less exotic perhaps, but also less threatening (Peterson & Park, 2003). Attempting to argue that the
movement is brand new only leaves an impression of innovation, which disappears if one opens any reference book to
an entry of 'happiness'.
A lack of a guiding cohesive theory

At present, an overarching theory of pestive psychology, one thai can pull together all of the topics that is studies,
lackung Positive pevchology auns to improve to maty things, often without knowing exactly what the connections
between them are. The very choice of us topics may sometimes be arbitrary. For example, the inclusion of tyranny of
freedom seems determined more by chance tham by direct relevance (Cowen & Kilmer, 2002).

Reductionist 'scientific' methodology

It is not the first time psychology has attempted to model the study of a person on natural setences. Many
psychologists, although they are prob ably still in the minority, wonder how such a complex subject as the human
being can be studied by a methodology that reduces it to numbers and statistics. Two of the many major problems
with adopting such an approach lie in either elaborating the obvious (something that your grandmother knew) or
failing to address any important questions. Tennen and Affleck write 'In its short history, positive psychology has
already inherited negative psychology's worst methodological habits (Tennen & Affleck, 2003).

Drawing big conclusions from weak findings

Even when adopting the mainstream 'scientific ideology, positive psychology often relies on methods that are cheaper
and easier to run. More than half of the studies in the field are so-called correlation studies Correlation studies help to
establish that one thing is reliably associated with another (eg exercise is associated with better health). However
correlation studies do not allow us to conclude that one thing leads ut another-so-called causality. For example, people
who exercise might be healthier because of that, of people who are healthier might have more energy to engage in
exercise. Even though psychologists know very well char correlations do not unply causality, they aften interpret their
und ings as if they do, leaving an impression that one thing leads to another (Lazarus, 2003a), Beware, marriage is
only associated with well-being)

Danger of becoming an ideological movement

'Hooray for positive psychology! Make sure to get on the bandwagon! These are the types of implicit slogans that
prompted several thinkers to assert that positive psychology may be in danger of becoming an ideological movement
(Lazarus, 2003b). The many hazards of that include a narrow mindset, resentment of any criticism, hero worship. self-
perpetuating beliefs, arrogance and getting stuck in self-imposed positivity, leading to a lack of depth, lack of realism
and simplifications

Positivity as a societal expectation

Professor Barbara Held argues that there is a major 'dark downside to the positive psychology movement, with a side-
effect being that vierims of unfortunate circumstances, and other sufferers, are blamed for their own misery. When
these people fail to exhibit the necessary optimism, strength, virtue and willpower, this is often interpreted as their
own fault. The tyranny of the positive attitude may paradoxically reduce subjective well-being, the very condition it is
designed to enhance. The implicit cultural mandate that unhappiness is intolerable and should be abolished may
therefore be harmful (Held, 2004). Another Barbara, thus time Ehrenreich, found on the discovery of her breast cancer
that not only did she have to confront a life-threatening illness but also a whole bunch of pink paraphernalia, from
proud cancer-defying slogans on sweatshirts and cuddly teddy bears with a breast cancer ribbon on their chests
through to pink roses in the mammogram changing room She discovered that as a cancer victim she was almost
expected to exude happiness and optimism, and was frowned upon for exposing herself and fellow cancer patients to
toxic negativity. This experience became the Foundation for her acclaimed hook Smile or Die (Ehrenreich, 20101
which exposed the pitfalls in positive thinking and positive psychology, Despite being slightly misinterpreted on p.
174 (I really do value sceptical and questioning students!), I find her book a compelling read and tend to agree with
the author on several points

Ignorance of positive aspects of negative thinking

Some research has suggested that mildly depressed older women live longer (Hybels er al., 2002) and that
cheerfulness (specifically optimism and sense of humour) was associated with younger age of death in a longitudinal
study (Friedman et al., 1993) As discussed in Chapter 3. defensive pessimism can be a good thing, depending on the
individual Furthermore, there is some evidence to support the case for complaining (Kowalski, 2002). Although
chronic complainers tend to be disliked and the engagement of chronic complaining facilitates negative moods in self
and others, there are benefits to such practices. For example complaining in novel, unpleasant situations can be a good
form of social bonding (e.g. when in a waiting room, at a new college or any other unfamiliar situation, expression of
complaints about unpleasant circum stances can be an effective ice-breaker).

One-sidedness and lack of balance

Even if you succeeded in engaging in positive thinking and feelings and not paying much attention to the stressful
side of life, would that really guarantee you happiness? Or, perhaps, boredom? One of the greatest psychologists of
our time, Richard Lazarus, challenges the implicit message of separation between the positive and negative, arguing
that these two are just two sides of the same coin 'Speaking metaphorically rather that mystically, God needs Satan
and vice versa. One would not exist without the other. We need the bad, which is part of life, to fully appreciate the
good. Any time you narrow the focus of attention too much to one side or another, you are in danger of losing
perspective' (Lasarus, 2003) The realities of life most often fall in between the positive and negative If the psychology
of the past made a major mistake of focusing mainly on the negative, often at the expense of the positive, isn't positive
psychology making the same mistake by allowing the pendulum to swing too far to the opposite side! If the
proponents of positive psychology are saying that the psychology of the last sixty years is simply incomplete, that is
fine, as long as it is not blocked out as a consequence. Positive psychology is in danger of flourishing at the expense
of the negative and neutral, rather than contributing to the balanced perspective on a person's life (Lazarus, 20036).
Saying that, some of the contributors to the positive psychology movement appreciate that the dichotomy between the
positive and negative may be misleading. Csikszentmihalyi (1992: 69) writes. We should reconcile ourselves to the
fact that nothing in the world is entirely positive; every power can be misused'.

The words of Tennen and Affleck (2003: 168) serve as a good ending to this rather critical section:

A positive psychology that declares its independence from research in the areas of stress, coping and adaptation; that
insists on making qualitative distinctions between seemingly positive and negative human characteristics; that
determines a priori and without attention to context those characteristics that will be studied as strengths, that follows
psychology's most intractable methodological bad habits and then wears these habits as a merit badge, that distances
itself from its predecessors; and dismisses its critics as suspicious and close minded is, to use Lazarus's terminology, a
movement without legs

If we conceive of psychology as a whole as a dialectic process (Lazarus, 2005a), we can identify 'negative
psychology' with the thesis, positive Psychology with antithesis, and an integration between these two with synthesis.
It is not possible to abandon the opposites (thesis and antithesis), because both are necessary for a synthesis. Some
claim that positive psychology is more integrative now, more than twelve years into its existence (Linley & Joseph,
2004b). I wouldn't agree with that Positive psychology, going through an active period of marketing to the general
public, still tries to appear as new and distinct as it can. This is not, however, to say that the integration is not possible.

What does the future hold?

In years to come, it is likely that positive psychology can self-correct at least some of the criticisms discussed above.
My hopes for the discipline and its future research areas can be summarized under four 'Cs': context, complexity,
creativity and challenge. The context point relates to the fact that positive psychology is still largely a Western
discipline and little is known about its topics from a cross-cultural perspective. Acknowledging that the research
subject of positive psychology is a human being, we cannot avoid the issue of complexity. As such, I see the study of
unconscious phenomena, social desirability biases, limits of self-awareness and self- knowledge, individual
differences (especially when these are greater than inter-group differences) and frequent irrationality of human
behavior Is essential for the discipline. When we research factors that enable individuals to thrive, why do we not talk
about IQ, or changes that come from realizing you were wrong, or even crying? As it stands, positive psychology is a
scientific study of narrowly conceptualized positive phenomena with happiness as a common denominator. To tackle
this, we would need some creativity in our research designs and also openness to challenge

I do not possess the genius of Alvin Toffler to claim that I can accurately predict the future of positive psychology. It
is, however, possible to distinguish between three major potential trajectories. On the one hand, positive psychology
may continue as it is at present as a distinct movement, focused on the positive with the help of scientific methods,
attracting substantial funding, and (hopefully) delivering substantial findings to the research and general community.
On the other hand, in accordance with the predictions of its sceptics, it may turn out to be a fad, a movement without
the legs to travel on, failing to discover anything of major significance and falling a victim to its own ideology. On the
third hand (if there was such a thing), however, positive psychology may reach the point of synthesis with the so-
called 'negative psychology' and its rich heritage, embracing the diversity of available methods, integrating the
positive with the negative, and amalgamating all that we know and do not yet know about the most wonderful and
fascinating subject matter in the world (the human being) into a coherent whole. In this case, positive psychology will
probably cease to exist as an independent movement, yet this is the result I most hope for.