Chapter 16 PDF

Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain The second perceptual difference we discussed was sensory reducing/augmenting. This dimension originally referred to the tendency to reduce or augment painful stimuli and was first related to individual difference...

Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain The second perceptual difference we discussed was sensory reducing/augmenting. This dimension originally referred to the tendency to reduce or augment painful stimuli and was first related to individual differences in pain tolerance. It is now more generally used to refer to individual differences in sensitivity to sensory stimula- tion, with some individuals (augmenters) being more sensitive than others (reducers). This individual differ- ence may have important implications for the development of problem behaviours associated with seeking stimulation, such as smoking or other forms of drug abuse. Another aspect of cognition is how people interpret events in their lives. This approach to personality has its roots in the work of George Kelly. His personal construct theory emphasizes how people construct their experiences by using their constructs to make sense out of the world. Another general difference among people is in locus of control, the tendency to interpret events either as under one’s control or as not under one’s control. Many researchers now apply the locus of control concept in particular life domains, such as health locus of control or relationship locus of control. Learned helplessness is the feeling engendered when a person experiences an inescapable aversive situation. The feeling of helplessness may also generalize to new situations so that the person continues to act helplessly and fails to seek solutions to problems. The theory of learned helplessness was reformulated to incorporate how people think about events in their lives, particularly unpleasant events. Psychologists have focused on specific dimensions of people’s explanations, such as whether the cause is internal or external to the person, whether it is stable or unstable, and whether it is global or specific. A pessimistic explanatory style is internal, stable, and global. Personality can also be revealed by how people select projects and tasks to pursue in life. If you know what a person really wants out of life, then you probably know that person fairly well. Our goals define us, and the strategies with which we pursue those desires illustrate the active aspects of personality in our daily lives. Cognitive social learning theory was introduced and several specific examples of this approach were described. All of the example theories incorporate the concept of goals and related cognitive activities, such as expectan- cies, strategies, and beliefs about one’s abilities. These theories are important new additions to the psychology of personality because they emphasize how the psychological situation is a function of characteristics of the person (e.g., their self-efficacy beliefs). Intelligence was also discussed in this chapter, along with different views on intelligence (as academic achieve- ment versus an aptitude for learning). We reviewed the historical development of intelligence as starting with the view of this as a single and general trait up to today’s trend toward a multiple intelligences view. We also noted that culture influences which skills and achievements contribute toward intelligence and presented some results on a biological interpretation of intelligence. In addition, we briefly reviewed some of the controversies that are being debated in the area of intelligence. 400 lar65774_ch12_369-401.indd 400 1/17/20 6:44 PM  Chapter 12 Cognitive Topics in Personality Concept Check What is the primary focus of the cognitive domain of psychology? Consider its role in personality re- search specifically. Provide specific examples of individual differences in cognitive perception and interpretation. In other words, what are a few key cognitive variables on which people differ? Key Terms cognitive approaches personal constructs cognitive social learning personalizing cognition cognitive schema approach objectifying cognition postmodernism self-efficacy cognition locus of control modelling information processing generalized expectancies promotion focus perception external locus of control prevention focus interpretation internal locus of control “if... then...” propositions conscious goals specific expectancies achievement view of intelligence Rod and Frame Test (RFT) learned helplessness aptitude view of intelligence field dependent causal attribution general intelligence field independent explanatory style multiple intelligences pain tolerance pessimistic explanatory style cultural context of reducer/augmenter theory optimistic explanatory style intelligence constructs personal project inspection time 401 lar65774_ch12_369-401.indd 401 1/17/20 6:44 PM  CHAPTER 13 Emotion and Personality Issues in Emotion Research Emotional States versus Emotional Traits Categorical versus Dimensional Approach to Emotion Content versus Style of Emotional Life Content of Emotional Life Style of Emotional Life Interaction of Content and Style in Emotional Life Summary and Evaluation Key Terms The Cognitive/Experiential Domain I magine you are travelling to visit a friend who lives in a city that you’ve never visited before. You’ve taken a train to this city and are walking to your friend’s apartment from the station. The train was late, so it is dark as you begin to make your way in the unfamiliar neighbourhood. The directions you were given seem a little vague and, after 20 minutes of walking, you are beginning to think they are incorrect. It is late and there are not many people on the street. You are certain that the directions are wrong, your cellphone battery has died, and now you just need to find a phone to call your friend. You decide to take a shortcut through an alley and head back to the train station. The alley is dark, but short, and it will get you back to the train station faster, so you start down the alley. You are alert, a bit on edge, as you are really out of your element. You look over your shoul- der and notice that someone has followed you down the alley. Your heart is pounding. You turn and look ahead, and you see that someone has entered the alley in front of you as well. You suddenly feel trapped and you freeze. You are in a real predicament, as your way is blocked in both directions. Your breathing is rapid and you feel confused and light-headed. Your mind is racing, but you are not sure what to do as the two people are clos- ing in on you from both directions. Your palms are sweating and you feel the tension in your neck and throat, as if you might scream any second. The two people are getting closer and closer to you. You feel nervousness in your stomach as you look first in front, then behind. You want to run but cannot decide which way to go. You are paralyzed with fear; you stand there, trembling, not knowing whether you can run away or whether you will have to fight for your life. Suddenly, one of the people calls out your name. You realize it is your friend, who has come with his roommate to look for you between the train station and the apartment. You breathe a sigh of re- lief, and quickly your state of fear subsides, your body calms, your mind clears, and you greet your friend with an enthusiastic, “Am I glad to see you!” 402 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 402 1/17/20 6:48 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality In this example, you experienced the emotion of fear. You also experienced the emotion of relief, and perhaps even elation, at being rescued by your friend. Emotions can be defined by their three components. First, emotions have distinct subjec- tive feelings, or affects, associated with them. Sec- ond, emotions are accompanied by bodily changes, mostly in the nervous system, and these produce associated changes in breathing, heart rate, muscle tension, blood chemistry, and facial and bodily ex- pressions. And third, emotions are accompanied by distinct action tendencies, or increases in the The emotion of fear is characterized by a distinct facial probabilities of certain behaviours. With the emo- expression. Fear also has a distinctly unpleasant subjective tional feeling of fear, there are subjective feelings feeling. There are also the associated changes in physiology, of anxiety, confusion, and panic. There are also as- such as heart rate increases and increases in blood flow to sociated changes in bodily function, such as heart the large muscles of the legs and arms. These changes rate increases, decreased blood flow to the diges- prepare the frightened person for the intense action tive system (making for stomach queasiness), and tendency associated with fear, for example, to flee or increased blood flow to the large muscles of the to fight. legs and arms. These changes prepare you for the ©lightfieldstudios/123RF intense activity sometimes associated with fear. The activity, or action tendency, associated with fear is to flee or to fight. Why are personality psychologists interested in emotions? People differ from each other in their emotional reac- tions, even to the same events, so emotions are useful in distinguishing among individuals. For example, imagine losing your wallet, which contains a large sum of money, your credit card, and all your identification, including your driver’s licence. What emotions do you think you would feel—anger, embarrassment, hopelessness, frustra- tion, panic, fear, shame, guilt? Different people would have different emotional reactions to this life event, and understanding how and why people differ in their emotional reactions is part of understanding personality. Other theories of emotion emphasize the functions that emotions play, such as generating short-term adaptive actions that help us survive. For example, the emotion of disgust has the adaptive value of prompting us to quickly spit out something that is not good for us. Interestingly, the expression of disgust, even when the feel- ing is evoked by a thought or something that is only psychologically distasteful, is to wrinkle the nose, open the mouth, and protrude one’s tongue as if spitting something out. In his 1872 book The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, Charles Darwin proposed a functional analysis of emotions and emotional expressions. His analysis focuses on the “why” of emotions and expressions, in particular in terms of whether they increase the fitness of individuals (see Chapter 8 of this text- book). In his book he describes his observations of animals, his own children, and other people, linking particular expressions with specific emotions. He recognized that evolution by natural selection applied not only to anatomic structures but also to the “mind,” including the emotions and their expressions. How do emotions increase evolu- tionary fitness? Darwin concluded that emotional expressions communicate information from one animal to an- other about what is likely to happen. The dog baring its teeth and bristling the hair on its back is communicating to others that he is likely to attack. If others recognize this communication, they may choose to back away, thereby avoiding the attack. Many modern emotion theorists accept this functional emphasis, but most personality psy- chologists approach emotion with an interest in how and why people differ from each other in terms of emotions. 403 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 403 1/17/20 6:49 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain Issues in Emotion Research Several major issues divide the field of emotion research (Davidson, Scherer, & Goldsmith, 2003). Psycholo- gists typically hold an opinion on each of these issues. We consider two of these issues, beginning with the distinction between emotional states and emotional traits. Emotional States versus Emotional Traits We typically think of emotions as states that come and go. A person gets angry, then gets over it. A person becomes sad, then snaps out of it. Emotional states are transitory. Moreover, emotional states depend more on the situation a person is in than on the specific person. A man is angry because he was unfairly treated. A woman is sad because her bicycle was stolen. Most people would be angry or sad in these situations. Emotions as states are transitory; they have a specific cause, and that cause typically originates outside of the person (something happens in the environment). We can also think of emotions as dispositions, or traits. For example, we often characterize people by stating what emotions they frequently experience or express: “Tanya is cheerful and enthusiastic,” or “Mohammed is frequently angry and often loses his temper.” Here we are using emotions to describe dispositions, or persis- tent emotional traits, that a person has. Emotional traits are consistencies in a person’s emotional life. Traits, as you’ll recall from Chapter 3, are patterns in a person’s behaviour or experience that are at least somewhat consistent from situation to situation and that are at least somewhat stable over time. Thus, emotional traits are patterns of emotional reactions that a person consistently experiences across a variety of life situations. This pattern of emotional experiences is stable over time and characteristic for each person. To continue with the case of Mary, we might expect her to be cheerful at home, at school, and at work. Moreover, by referring to cheerfulness as an emotional trait, we would expect that she was cheerful last year and will most likely be cheerful next year, barring any major changes to her personality. Categorical versus Dimensional Approach to Emotion Emotion researchers can be divided into two camps based on their answers to the following question: What is the best way to think about emotions? Some suggest emotions are best thought of as a small number of pri- mary and distinct emotions (anger, joy, anxiety, sadness). Others suggest that emotions are best thought of as broad dimensions of experience (e.g., a dimension ranging from pleasant to unpleasant). Those who think that primary emotions are the key are said to take the categorical approach. Hundreds of terms describe different categories of emotions. Averill (1975), for example, compiled a list of 550 terms that describe different feeling states. This is similar to the situation with basic trait terms, in which psychologists started with thousands of trait adjectives and searched for the fundamental factors that underlie those many variations, concluding that there are probably about five primary personality traits that underlie the huge list of trait adjectives. Emotion researchers who take the categorical approach have tried to reduce the complexity of emotions by searching for the primary emotions that underlie the great variety of emotional terms (Levenson, 2003). They have not reached the kind of consensus that is found in the personality trait domain, however. The lack of consensus found in this area of psychology results from different criteria that researchers use for defining an emotion as primary. Primary emotions are thought to be the irreducible set of emotions, combinations of 404 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 404 1/17/20 6:49 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality which result in the huge variety of experienced emotions. This is similar to the primary trait issue discussed in Chapter 3. Various researchers have proposed crite- ria for determining which emo- tions are primary emotions. Ekman (1992a) requires that a primary emotion have a distinct facial expression that is recog- nized across cultures. For exam- ple, sadness is accompanied by frowning and knitting the brow. This facial expression is univer- sally recognized as depicting the emotion of sadness. Similarly, clenching and baring the teeth is associated with anger and is uni- versally recognized as anger. In fact, people who are blind from birth frown when sad, clench and bare their teeth when angry, and smile when they are happy. Be- cause individuals who are blind from birth have never seen the facial expressions of sadness, an- ger, or joy, it is not likely that they learned these expressions. Rather, Happiness can be thought of as a state or as a trait. People high in trait it seems likely that the expres- happiness experience frequent happiness states, or have a lower threshold sions are part of human nature. for becoming happy. Moreover, happiness is recognized around the world Based on these criteria of distinct through the expression of smiling. People from all cultures smile when they and universal facial expressions, are happy. (top left): ©Bartosz Hadyniak/Getty Images; (top right): ©Amos Morgan/Getty Images; Ekman’s list of primary emotions (bottom left): ©Shutterstock/zeljkodan; (bottom right): ©Thurtell/Getty Images contains disgust, sadness, joy, surprise, anger, and fear. Other researchers hold different criteria for counting emotions as primary. For example, Izard (1977) sug- gests that the primary emotions are distinguished by their unique motivational properties. That is, emo- tions are understood to guide behaviours by motivating a person to take specific adaptive actions. Fear is included as a primary emotion on Izard’s list because it motivates a person to avoid danger and seek safety. Interest is similarly a fundamental emotion because it motivates a person to learn and acquire new skills. Izard’s criteria result in a list of 10 primary emotions. In Table 13.1 we present additional lists of primary emotions based on various criteria. Jessica Tracy has also studied pride and suggests that it, too, is a pri- mary emotion. Read Highlight On Canadian Research: Finding Pride: Evidence for a New Discrete Emotion? 405 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 405 1/17/20 6:50 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain Table 13.1 A Selection of Theorists Who Provide Lists of Primary Emotions Theorists Basic Emotions Criteria Ekman, Friesen, & Anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, Universal facial expression Ellsworth, 1972 surprise Frijda, 1986 Desire, happiness, interest, surprise, Motivation to take specific actions wonder, sorrow Gray, 1982 Rage, terror, anxiety, joy Brain circuits Izard, 1977 Anger, contempt, disgust, distress, Motivation to take specific actions fear, guilt, interest, joy, shame, surprise James, 1884 Fear, grief, love, rage Bodily involvement Mower, 1960 Pain, pleasure Unlearned emotional states Oatley & Johnson- Anger, disgust, anxiety, happiness, Little cognitive involvement Laird, 1987 sadness Plutchik, 1980 Anger, acceptance, joy, anticipation, Evolved biological processes fear, disgust, sadness, surprise Tomkins, 2008 Anger, interest, contempt, disgust, Density of neural firing fear, joy, shame, surprise Source: Adapted from Ortony & Turner, 1990. Highlight On Canadian Research Finding Pride: Evidence for a New Discrete Emotion? Although the emotions in Table 13.1 are numerous and varied, there may be one important discrete emo- tion missing from the list: pride. Jessica Tracy of the University of British Columbia has dedicated much of her career to understanding, validating, and measuring this particularly boastful emotion. But what is pride, according to Tracy’s research? And does it indeed qualify as a distinct, universal emotion? As the Director of the Emotion and Self Lab at UBC, Jessica Tracy and her colleagues have worked hard to establish pride as a discrete emotion with its own recognizable and unique expression. As dis- cussed in her 2004 paper in Psychological Science, Ekman’s originally proposed set of six primary emotions with universal facial expressions is highly limited in its inclusion of positive emotion. In fact, happiness is the only positive emotion on the list, despite Darwin’s (1872) description of pride as one of the most distinct and evident emotions in human beings. In her early work, along with her colleague Richard Robins at the University of California–Davis, Tracy reported findings from three separate ex- periments, each validating pride as a discrete emotion. In the first experiment, researchers adminis- tered a forced-choice response format in which participants successfully identified pride among photographs of various emotional expressions, including pride, happiness, and surprise, at a frequency that was greater than chance. In experiment 2, an open-ended format was used in which any word could be offered by participants to describe photos of pride, happiness, and surprise. All photos of pride expressions were indeed identified as pride or pride-related (e.g., proud, self-confident) at a frequency greater than chance. 406 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 406 1/17/20 6:50 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality In their final experiment, Tracy and Robins (2004) manipulated specific features and bodily move- ments associated with pride in order to deter- mine which components resulted in the most frequent identification of pride in photographs shown to participants. Two photos were identi- fied as pride with a greater frequency than the rest. In each of these photos, expressions in- cluded a slight smile, the head tilted back with the chin up, and a fully visible expanded posture with either hands on hips or arms raised. The first expression (hands on hips) was identified as pride by 87 percent of judges. A similar expres- sion of pride is shown in the image below. In their definition of pride, Tracy and Robins (2007a) have distinguished between two key facets of the emotion that are especially impor- tant when predicting behaviour: authentic and According to research by Tracy and Robins (2004), hubristic pride. Authentic pride is based on this expression represents one of the two most achievement and contributes to a genuine common displays of pride, which appears to be sense of self-esteem. On the other hand, hubris- a discrete and culturally universal emotion. tic pride is associated with self-aggrandizing as- Source: Tracy, J.L., & Robins, R.W. (2007). The prototypical pride pects of narcissism and may contribute to expression: Development of a nonverbal behavior coding sys- aggression and hostility. The former is far more tem. Emotion, 7(4), 789–801. © by American Psychological As- likely to lead to prosocial behaviour, while the sociation. Reprinted with permission. latter is associated with low agreeableness. Al- though Tracy and Robins have developed scales to measure both aspects of pride, their research has indi- cated that the distinct facial and bodily expressions that define pride are the same for both authentic and hubristic forms (Tracy and Robins, 2007b). This suggests that the internal representations of this emotion have a degree of complexity that exceeds their outward expression. In recent research, authentic pride has been associated with higher achievement (Weidman et al., 2016) as well as humility—specifically, apprecia- tive humility, which is derived from personal success and more likely to involve celebrating others (in con- trast to self-abasing humility, which is associated with failure and shame; Weidman et al., 2018). Perhaps the most interesting area of support for pride as a discrete emotion comes from Tracy and Rob- ins’ (2008) cross-cultural research. As proposed by Ekman (1992a), an important criterion for the identi- fication of primary emotions is their recognition across cultures. In the 2008 paper, results were presented that confirm the recognition of pride expressions in both the United States and Italy. The second study presented in the paper further confirmed the reliable recognition of pride in an isolated, preliterate tribe in Burkina Faso, West Africa. The Burkinabe participants, according to Tracy and Robins (2008), were unlikely to have been exposed to the emotion via cross-cultural transmission, offering fur- ther evidence for pride as a universal emotion. Another approach to understanding the complexity of emotion has been based on empirical research rather than on theoretical criteria. In the dimensional approach, researchers gather data by having subjects rate themselves on a wide variety of emotions, then apply statistical techniques (usually factor analysis) to identify the basic dimensions underlying the ratings. There is remarkable consensus among researchers on the basic dimensions that underlie self-ratings of affect (Judge & Larsen, 2001; Larsen & Diener, 1992; Watson, 2000). Most of the studies suggest that people categorize 407 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 407 1/17/20 6:50 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain emotions using just two primary dimensions: how pleasant or unpleasant the emotion is, which psychologists refer to as valence, and how high or low on arousal the emotion is. When these two dimensions are arrayed as axes in a two-dimensional coordinate system, the adjectives that describe emotions fall in a circle around the two dimensions, as shown in Figure 13.1. FIGURE 13.1 The dimensional approach to emotion, showing two primary dimensions: high activation to low activation and positive valence (pleasantness) to negative valence (unpleasantness). This model of emotion suggests that every feeling state can be described as a combination of pleasantness/un- pleasantness (valence) and arousal. For example, a person can feel unpleasant feelings in a very high-arousal way (nervous, anxious, terrified) or in a very low-arousal way (bored, fatigued, tired). Similarly, a person can feel pleasant feelings in a high-arousal way (excited, enthusiastic, elated) or in a low-arousal way (calm, re- laxed). Thus the two dimensions of pleasantness and arousal are seen as fundamental dimensions of emotion. The dimensional view of emotion is based on research studies in which subjects rate their emotional experi- ences. Emotions that occur together, which are experienced as similar to each other, are understood as defin- ing a common dimension. For example, the emotions of distress, anxiety, annoyance, and hostility are very similar in terms of experience and thus seem to anchor one end of a dimension of negative affect. The dimen- sional approach to emotion refers more to how people experience their emotions than to how they think about their emotions. In contrast, the categorical approach relies more on conceptual distinctions among emotions: the primary emotions are those that have distinct facial expressions or distinct motivational properties. The dimensional approach, on the other hand, suggests that what we experience are various degrees of pleasant- ness and arousal and that every emotion we are capable of experiencing can be described as a combination of pleasantness and arousal (Larsen & Fredrickson, 1999; Larsen & Prizmic, 2006). 408 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 408 1/17/20 6:50 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality Some researchers prefer the categorical perspective, finding it useful to think about emotions as distinct categories rather than dimensions. For example, the emotions of anger and anxiety, although similar in terms of being high- arousal negative emotions, are nevertheless associated with different facial expressions, feelings, and action ten- dencies. Personality psychologists with a categorical perspective would be interested in how people differ from each other with respect to primary emotions, such as anger and anxiety. For example, are there individual or group differences in anxiety, sadness, or aggression? There are also personality psychologists who prefer to think about how people differ with respect to the primary dimensions of emotion. For example, who are the people who have a good deal of pleasantness in their lives? Who are the people who have frequent bouts of high-arousal un- pleasant emotions? In this chapter, we cover the research and findings from both of these perspectives. Concept Check Compare emotional states to emotional traits. When can emotional states become traitlike? What is the main difference between the categorical and dimensional approaches to emotion research? To il- lustrate the difference, consider how the emotion of pride would be defined by each approach. Content versus Style of Emotional Life Another distinction that is useful to personality psychologists is that between the content of a person’s emo- tional life and the style with which that person experiences and expresses emotion. Content is the specific kind of emotion that a person experiences, whereas style is the way in which an emotion is experienced. For example, saying that someone is cheerful is to say something about the content of the person’s emotional life, because this refers to the specific kind of emotions a person frequently experiences. However, to say that someone is high on mood variability is to say something about the style of their emotional life—that this per- son’s emotions change frequently. Each of these facets of emotion—content and style—exhibits traitlike prop- erties (stable over time and situations and meaningful for making distinctions among people). Content and style provide an organizational theme for discussing personality and emotion. We first discuss the content of emotional life, focusing on various pleasant and unpleasant emotions. We then consider emotional style, focusing on individual differences in the intensity and variability of emotional life. Content of Emotional Life Content of emotional life means the typical emotions a person is likely to experience over time. For example, someone characterized as an angry or hot-tempered person should have an emotional life that contains a good deal of anger, irritability, and hostility. Someone whose emotional life contains a lot of pleasant emotions we might characterize as happy, cheerful, and enthusiastic. Thus the notion of content leads us to consider the kinds of emotions that people are likely to experience over time and across situations in their lives. We begin with a discussion of the pleasant emotional dispositions. Pleasant Emotions In lists of primary emotions, happiness or joy are typically the only pleasant emotions mentioned (though some theorists include interest as a pleasant emotion). In trait approaches to emotion, the major pleasant disposition is happiness and the associated feelings of being satisfied with one’s life. We begin with these concepts. 409 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 409 1/17/20 6:50 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain Definitions of Happiness and Life Satisfaction Over 2,000 years ago, Greek philosopher Aristotle wrote that happiness was the supreme good and that the goal of life was to attain happiness. Moreover, he taught that happiness was attained by living a virtuous life and being a good person. Some modern researchers similarly emphasize eudaimonia, the creation of a life of meaning and purpose, as the route to happiness (e.g., King & Hicks, 2012). Other scholars and philosophers have offered other theories on the sources of human happiness. For example, unlike Aristotle, eighteenth-century French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau speculated that the road to happiness lies in the satisfaction of one’s desires and the hedonistic pursuit of pleasure. In the late nineteenth century, the founder of psychology in America, William James, taught that happiness was the ratio of one’s accomplishments to one’s aspirations. One could achieve happiness, James thought, in one of two ways: in accomplishing more in life or by lowering one’s aspirations. Although philosophers and psychologists have speculated about the roots of happiness for centuries, the scien- tific study of happiness is relatively recent (see Eid & Larsen, 2008, for a review). Psychologists began the seri- ous study of happiness (also called subjective well-being) in the mid-1970s. Since then, scientific research on the topic has grown by leaps and bounds. In recent years, hundreds of scientific articles on happiness have been published annually in the psychological literature (Diener & Selig- man, 2002). Indeed, a journal started in the year 2000, titled Journal of Happiness Research, publishes six volumes a year dedicated to the science of happiness. Another journal, the Journal of Positive Psychology, also publishes many scientific studies on happiness. One way to define happiness is to examine how researchers mea- sure it. Several questionnaire measures are widely used in surveys and other research. Because happiness is a subjective quality—it depends on an individual’s own judgment of their life—research- ers have to rely on questionnaires. Some of these questionnaires focus on judgments about one’s life, such as “How satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days? Are you very satisfied, satis- fied, not very satisfied, or not at all satisfied?” Other questionnaires focus on emotion, particularly on the balance between pleasant William James defined happiness as the and unpleasant emotions in a person’s life. An example of this type ratio of one’s accomplishments to one’s of questioning was proposed by Fordyce (1978), in which the sub- aspirations. ject is asked the following questions: ©SPL/Science Source What percent of the time are you happy? ____________ What percent of the time are you neutral? ____________ What percent of the time are you unhappy? ____________ Make sure your percents add up to 100. Among university students, data indicate that the average person reports being happy 65 percent of the time, neutral 15 percent, and unhappy 20 percent (Larsen & Diener, 1985). The percent happy scale is one of the better measures of happiness in terms of construct validity (see Chapter 2). For example, it predicts a wide range of other happiness-related aspects of a person’s personality, such as day-to-day moods and peer reports of overall happiness (Larsen, Diener, & Lucas, 2002). 410 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 410 1/17/20 6:50 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality Researchers conceive of happiness as having two complementary components. One is more cognitive and consists of judgments that one’s life has purpose and meaning and has been called the life-satisfaction compo- nent. The other component is affective and consists of the ratio of a person’s positive emotions to their nega- tive emotions averaged over time. This has been called the hedonic component and really refers to the balance of positive to negative emotions in a person’s life over time. The two components—life satisfaction and he- donic balance—tend to be highly correlated. Although we can think of cases where a person could be high on one and low on the other (e.g., a starving artist who feels her life has a great deal of purpose and meaning, yet is suffering greatly day to day to produce her art), the fact is that most people who have a life of meaning and purpose also have more positive than negative emotions in their life. Consequently, most psychologists refer to the general construct of happiness to talk about this characteristic. Can it be that happy people are just deluding themselves, that most people are really miserable and happy people just don’t know it or are denying it? It would be easy to lie on a questionnaire and to portray oneself as being happy and satisfied. This is the idea of social desirability, as discussed in Chapter 4. It turns out that measures of happiness do correlate with social desirability scores. In other words, people who score high on social desirability also score high on self-reported happiness scales. Moreover, social desirability measures also correlate with non-self-report happiness scores, such as peer reports of happiness. This finding suggests that having a positive view of oneself is part of being a happy person. Said differently, part of being happy is to have positive illusions about the self, an inflated view of one’s own characteristics as a good, able, and desirable person (Taylor, 1989; Taylor et al., 2000). We explore this topic further in Chapter 14. Despite the correlation of self-report measures of happiness with social desirability, other findings suggest that these happiness measures are valid (Diener, Oishi, & Lucas, 2003). These findings concern the positive corre- lations found between self-report and non-self-report measures of happiness. People who report that they are happy tend to have friends and family members who agree (Sandvik, Diener, & Seidlitz, 1993). In addition, studies of the daily diaries of happy people find that they report many more pleasant experiences than do un- happy people (Larsen & Diener, 1985). When different clinical psychologists interview a sample of people, the psychologists tend to agree strongly about which are happy and satisfied and which are not (Diener, 2000). And, in an interesting experiment, Seidlitz and Diener (1993) gave the participants five minutes to recall as many happy events in their lives as possible and then gave them five minutes to recall as many unhappy events in their lives as possible. They found that the happy people recalled more pleasant events, and fewer unpleasant events, than did the unhappy people. Questionnaire measures of happiness and well-being also predict other aspects of people’s lives that we would expect to relate to happiness (Diener, Lucas, & Larsen, 2003). For example, compared with unhappy people, happy people are less abusive and hostile, are less self-focused, and report fewer instances of disease. They also are more helpful and cooperative, have more social skills, are more creative and energetic, are more for- giving, and are more trusting (Myers, 1993, 2000; Myers & Diener, 1995; Veenhoven, 1988). In summary, self- reports of happiness appear to be valid and trustworthy (Larsen & Prizmic, 2006). After all, who but the individuals themselves are the best judge of their subjective well-being? See Table 13.2 for a sample “life satis- faction” questionnaire. What Good Is Happiness? It has long been known that happiness correlates with many positive outcomes in life, such as marriage, longevity, self-esteem, and satisfaction with one’s job (Diener et al., 1999). These correlations between desirable outcomes in life and happiness are often interpreted to mean that success in some area of life (e.g., a good marriage) will make a person happy. As another example, the small 411 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 411 1/17/20 6:50 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain Table 13.2 Satisfaction with Life Scale Below are five statements with which you may agree or disagree. Using the scale below, indicate your agreement with each item by placing the appropriate number on the line preceding that item. Please be open and honest in your responses. Strong Moderate Slight Slight Moderate Strong Disagreement Disagreement Disagreement Agreement Agreement Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. _____ In most ways my life is close to my ideal. 2. _____ If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing. 3. _____ I am satisfied with my life. 4. _____ So far I have gotten the important things I want in life. 5. _____ The conditions of my life are excellent. correlation between personal wealth and happiness is often interpreted as meaning that having money can make one (slightly more) happy. The majority of researchers in this area have gone on the assumption that successful outcomes foster happiness and that the causal direction goes from being successful leading to increased happiness. However, a group of researchers (Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005) questioned this assumption about the causal direction going from success to happiness. They suggested that there may be areas of life where the cau- sality goes in the opposite direction, from happiness to success. For example, it could be that being happy leads one to get married, or to have a better marriage, instead of having a good marriage leading one to become happy. In an extremely large meta-analysis of the happiness and well-being literature, Lyubomirsky and colleagues (2005) reviewed many studies that might be used to disentangle the causal direction between happiness and several different outcomes. Two kinds of studies are most useful in assessing causal direction. One type of study is longitudinal, in which people are measured on at least two occasions separated in time. If happiness precedes success in life, then we have some evidence that the causal direction might go from happiness to the outcome. A sec- ond type of study is experimental, in which happi- ness is manipulated (people are put in a good mood) for half the sample (the other half is the control group), and some outcome is measured. If the outcome is higher in the group undergoing the happiness induction than in the control group, then we have some evidence that the causal direc- tion might go from happiness to the outcome. Does having a good relationship cause a person to be Lyubomirsky and colleagues (2005) found that happy? Or does being happy cause one to have a good longitudinal studies provided evidence that hap- relationship? piness leads to, or at least comes before, positive ©Ariel Skelley/Blend Images LLC 412 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 412 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality outcomes in many areas of life. They found that happiness preceded many important positive outcomes, in- cluding fulfilling and productive work, satisfying relationships, and superior mental and physical health and longevity. Experimental studies also provide evidence that happiness can lead to several positive outcomes, including being more helpful and altruistic, wanting to be with others, increases in self-esteem and liking of others, a better functioning immune system, more effective conflict resolution skills, and more creative or more original thinking. Although happiness has been shown to lead to many positive outcomes in life, the situation with some out- comes might be more complex and involve reciprocal causality, which refers to the idea that causality can flow in both directions. For example, we know that happy people are more likely to help others who are in need. Also, from the experimental literature, we know that helping someone in need can lead to increases in happiness. This kind of reciprocal causality may apply to many areas of life, including having a satisfying mar- riage or intimate relationship, having a fulfilling job, or having high self-esteem. What Is Known About Happy People In an article titled “Who Is Happy?” psychologists David Myers and Ed Diener (1995) reviewed what is known about happy people. For example, are women happier than men, or are men the happier gender? In Canada and the United States, women are diagnosed with depres- sion twice as often as men. This might suggest that men are happier than women. However, men are at least twice as likely as women to become alcoholics. The use of alcohol may be one way men medicate themselves for depression, so the real rate of depression may be more similar for men and women. Re- searchers need to examine actual studies of happiness to address the gender difference question. Fortu- nately, an excellent and thorough review of the studies on gender and happiness has already been done. Haring, Stock, and Okun (1984) analyzed 146 studies on global well-being and found that gender accounted for less than 1 percent of the variation in people’s happiness. This finding of practically no difference be- tween men and women appears across cultures and countries as well. Michalos (1991) obtained data on 18,032 university students from 39 countries. He found that roughly equal proportions of men and women rated themselves as being satisfied with their lives. Diener (2000) also reports gender equality in overall happiness. Is happiness more likely among young, middle-aged, or older people? We often think that certain age periods are more stressful than others, such as the midlife crisis or the stress of adolescence. This might lead us to believe that certain times of life are happier than others. Inglehart (1990) addressed this question in a study of 169,776 people from 16 nations. It was found that the circumstances that make people happy change with age. For example, financial security and health are important for happiness later in life, whereas for younger adults success at school or work and satisfying intimate relationships are important for happiness. However, in look- ing at overall levels of happiness, Inglehart concluded that there was no evidence to suggest that any one time of life was happier than any other. Is ethnicity related to happiness? Are some ethnic groups happier than others? Many surveys have included questions about ethnic identity, so a wealth of data exist on this question. Summarizing many such studies, Myers and Diener (1995) conclude that ethnic group membership is unrelated to subjective well-being. For example, African Americans report roughly the same amount of happiness as European Americans and in fact have slightly lower levels of depression (Diener et al., 1993). Crocker and Major (1989) suggest that people from disadvantaged social groups maintain their happiness by valuing the activities they are good at, by com- paring themselves with members of their own group, and by blaming their problems on events that are out- side of their control. However, in Canada researchers at the University of Alberta have suggested that British 413 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 413 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain Canadians have higher levels of life satisfaction compared with Chinese Canadians (Spiers & Walker, 2009). In this case, researchers suggested that differences in how these groups define happiness may have made the measures employed less accurate. What about national differences in well-being? Are people from certain nations happier than people from other nations? The answer here seems to be yes. An impressive study by Diener, Diener, and Diener (1995) examined well-being scores obtained using probability surveys in 55 nations. The nations sampled in this study represented 75 percent of Earth’s population. The results are portrayed in Table 13.3, where the nations are rank-ordered on the well-being measure. Looking at the rankings, what do you think might account for the differences among the countries that were high and low on well-being? Table 13.3 Country Scores of Average Subjective Well-Being Country Subjective Well-Being Country Subjective Well-Being Iceland 1.11 Bangladesh –.29 Sweden 1.03 France –.38 Australia 1.02 Spain –.41 Denmark 1.00 Portugal –.41 Canada.97 Italy –.44 Switzerland.94 Hungary –.48 U.S.A..91 Puerto Rico –.51 Colombia.82 Thailand –.62 Luxembourg.82 South Africa –.63 New Zealand.82 Jordan –.77 N. Ireland.78 Egypt –.78 Norway.77 Yugoslavia –.81 Finland.74 Japan –.86 Britain.69 Greece –.89 Netherlands.68 Poland –.90 Ireland.57 Kenya –.92 Brazil.57 Turkey –1.02 Tanzania.51 India –1.13 Belgium.51 S. Korea –1.15 Singapore.43 Nigeria –1.31 Bahrain.36 Panama –1.31 W. Germany.18 E. Germany –1.52 Austria.15 U.S.S.R. –1.70 Chile.13 China –1.92 Philippines.10 Cameroon –2.04 Malaysia.08 Dominican Republic –3.92 Cuba.00 Israel –.18 Average 0.00 Mexico –.28 Standard deviation 1.00 Source: Diener, Diener, & Diener, 1995. 414 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 414 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality The researchers were able to assemble a broad array of other environmental, social, and economic information on each of these countries, and they tested whether any of these variables correlated with average national hap- piness. At the national level, the poorer countries appeared to possess less happiness and life satisfaction than the countries that were wealthier. The nations also differed in the rights they provided their citizens. The researchers found that the countries that provided few civil and political rights tended to have lower well-being than did the countries where civil rights and individual freedoms were well protected by laws. Other national variables, such as population density and cultural homogeneity, showed only minor correlations with well-being. Diener and colleagues (1995) concluded that differences in the economic development of nations may be the primary source of differences in the subjective well-being of societies. Researchers who have conducted similar but smaller-scale national surveys have offered similar findings (Easterlin, 1974; Veenhoven, 1991a, 1991b). Such findings might lead us to think that money or income makes people happy. People often think that if they made a bit more money or if they had a few more material goods, they would be happier. Some believe that if they win the lottery they will be happy for the rest of their lives. Researchers have found that there is no simple answer to the question about whether money makes people happy (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002, 2008). We explore this topic further in A Closer Look: Does Money Make People Happy? A Closer Look Does Money Make People Happy? Pop singer Madonna, also known as the “Material Girl,” has sung the praises of materialism. North Americans are often thought of as materialistic. In fact, in surveys, the goal of being very well off finan- cially is often rated as the top goal in life by first-year university students, surpassing other goals, such as being helpful to others, realizing potential as a person, and raising a family (Myers, 2000). This atti- tude is summarized by a bumper sticker seen on an expensive car towing a large boat, which read, “When the game is over, the person with the most toys wins.” Does having more make one a winner? Does money lead to happiness? Looked at in terms of national data, the answer seems to be that wealthier countries do indeed have higher average levels of life satisfaction than poorer countries. Myers and Diener (1995) report that the correlation between a nation’s well-being score and its gross national product (adjusted for population size) is +.67. However, national wealth is confounded with many other variables that influence well- being, such as health care services, civil rights, women’s rights, care for the elderly, and education. This is a classic example of how potential third variables might explain why two variables are related (see discussion of this problem in Chapter 2). For example, wealthier countries may have higher well-being because they also provide better health care for their citizens. To counteract this research problem, we must look at the relationship between income and happiness within specific countries. Diener and Diener (1995) report that, in very poor countries, such as Bangladesh and India, financial status is a moderately good predictor of well-being. However, once people can afford life’s basic necessities, it appears that increasing one’s financial status matters very little to one’s well-being. In countries that have a higher standard of living, where most people have their basic needs met (such as in Europe or North America), income “has a surprisingly weak (virtually negligible) effect on happiness” (Inglehart, 1990, p. 242). This finding of a lack of relation between income and happiness contradicts the views of many politi- cians, economists, and policymakers. Moreover, it seems to run counter to common sense, as well as 415 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 415 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain data on poverty and poor life outcomes. For example, people in the lowest levels of the economy have the highest rates of depression (McLoyd, 1998). Economic hardship takes a toll on people, increasing stress and conflict in people’s lives (Kushlev, Dunn, & Lucas, 2015). Poverty is associated with elevations in a variety of negative life outcomes, ranging from infant mortality to increased violent crimes, such as homicide (Belle et al., 2000). How can poverty be associated with such unfortunate circumstances, yet income not be related to happiness? The answer, it seems, lies in the notion of a threshold of income, below which a person is very unlikely to be happy, at least in North America (Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Once a person is above this threshold, however, the notion that having more money would make one happier does not seem to hold (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002). Myers and Diener (1995) make the analogy between wealth and health: the absence of either health or wealth can bring misery, but their presence is no guarantee that happiness will follow. An interesting experi- ment to test this assertion for wealth would be to take a sample of people and randomly assign them to two groups. In Group 1, you give each member $1 million. In Group 2, you give each member $1. Then you see whether, six months later, the people in Group 1 (the new millionaires) are happier than the people in Group 2. Of course, this experiment would be impossible to conduct, right? Wrong. With the advent of lotteries in North America, many people become millionaires overnight. Brickman, Coates, and Janoff-Bulman (1978) conducted a study of lottery winners, comparing their happiness levels with those of people from similar backgrounds who had not won large amounts of money. Within six months of winning, the newly rich lottery winners were found to be no more happy than the subjects in the control group. Apparently, winning the lottery is not as good as it sounds, at least not in terms of making a person permanently happy. External life circumstances have a surprisingly small effect on happiness and subjective well-being (Lucas, 2007). What can we conclude about money and happiness? Probably the most reasonable conclusion is that below a very low income level, a person is very unlikely to be happy. Being able to meet the basic needs of life (e.g., the needs on Maslow’s hierarchy that are discussed in Chapter 8, including food, shelter, and security) appears crucial. However, once those needs are met, research suggests that there is little to the notion that further wealth will bring increased happiness. Support for this idea is provided in a study by Diener, Ng, Harter, and Arora (2010) that is based on a huge sample that is rep- resentative of almost everyone on planet Earth. Elizabeth Dunn and her colleagues at the University of British Columbia, for example, reported a correlation of +.25 between household income and happi- ness (Aknin, Norton, & Dunn, 2009), but this study was based on data from the United States. Other American research by Diener and colleagues (1995) has found an even lower correlation of.12 between personal income and happiness. In a German sample, that correlation was found to be.20 (Lucas & Schimmack, 2009). Although these correlations are not negative, they are hardly large enough to think that having a huge income, in itself, will make you happy. In fact, analyses of data from the 2003 Statis- tics Canada General Social Survey revealed no significant correlation whatsoever between income and perceived happiness (Jehn, 2014). What wealthy people choose to do with their money may have more to do with their potential happiness than does the mere fact of having a lot of money. For example, Dr. Lara Aknin from Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia, has demonstrated that spend- ing money on others can have a greater positive impact on happiness than spending the same amount on oneself (Dunn, Aknin, & Norton, 2008). The effect of prosocial spending on happiness appears to be even greater when givers are aware of their positive impact (Aknin et al., 2013). Research on the objective circumstances of a person’s life—age, sex, ethnicity, income, and so on—shows that these matter very little to overall happiness, yet we know that people differ from each other and that, even through life’s struggles and disappointments, some people are consistently happier than others. Costa, McCrae, and Zonderman (1987) found, in a study of 5,000 adults, that the people who were happy in 1973 were also happy 10 years later, in spite of undergoing many changes in life. What else might explain why some people are consistently happier than others? 416 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 416 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality Exercise Recall and describe in writing a recent time when you purchased something for someone else. After writing a brief description of this, think of a time when you spent an equivalent amount of money on something for yourself. Now consider which of these two events produced the higher level of happiness in you? If you are like the participants in research reported in Science by Dunn, Aknin, and Norton (2008), you will find that spending one’s money on other people has a larger effect on happiness than spending money on oneself. Why do you think this might be so? The ef- fect is so reliable that these authors even found that participants randomly assigned to spend money on others experienced greater happiness than participants randomly assigned to spend money on themselves. Personality and Well-Being In 1980, psychologists Paul Costa and Robert McCrae concluded that demo- graphic variables, such as gender, age, ethnicity, and income, accounted for only about 10 to 15 percent of the variation in happiness, an estimate confirmed by others (Myers & Diener, 1995). This leaves a lot of the vari- ance in subjective well-being unaccounted for. Costa and McCrae (1980) proposed that personality might have something to do with disposing certain people to be happy and so looked into that research. The few studies existing at that time suggested that happy people were outgoing and sociable (Smith, 1979), emotionally sta- ble, and low on neuroticism (Wessman & Ricks, 1966). Costa and McCrae used such information to theorize that there may be two personality traits that influence happiness: extraversion and neuroticism. Moreover, Costa and McCrae made specific predictions about ex- actly how extraversion and neuroticism influenced happiness. Their idea was both simple and elegant. They began with the notion that happiness was the presence of relatively high levels of positive affect, and relatively low levels of negative affect, in a person’s life over time. Extraversion, they held, influenced a person’s positive emotions, whereas neuroticism determined a person’s negative emotions. Costa and McCrae (1980; McCrae & Costa, 1991) found that their model was supported by further research. Extraversion and neuroticism predicted the amounts of positive and negative emotions in people’s lives and hence contributed greatly to subjective well-being. In fact, extraversion and neuroticism accounted for up to three times as much of the variation in happiness among people compared with all of the common demo- graphic variables (e.g., age, income, gender, education, ethnicity, religion) put together. It appears that having the right combination of personality traits (high extraversion and low neuroticism) may contribute much more to happiness than gender, ethnicity, age, and all the other demographic characteristics. Their model of well-being is portrayed in Figure 13.2. Since Costa and McCrae’s original study in 1980, more than a dozen studies have replicated the finding that extraversion and neuroticism are strong personality correlates of well-being (summarized in Rusting & Larsen, 1998b). All of these studies have been correlational, however, usually taking the form of administering personality and well-being questionnaires, then examining the correlations (Lucas, Le & Dyrenforth, 2008). Correlational studies cannot determine whether there is a direct causal connection between personality and well-being, or whether personality leads one to live a certain lifestyle and that lifestyle in turn makes one 417 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 417 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain FIGURE 13.2 The influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well- being by making a person susceptible to positive and negative affect. Source: Adapted from Costa and McCrae, 1980. happy. For example, being neurotic may lead one to be a worrier and complainer. Other people dislike being around someone who worries a lot and is always complaining, so people may avoid the person who is high on neuroticism. Consequently, that person may be lonely and unhappy; however, that unhappiness may be due to the fact that the person drives people away by complaining all the time. The person’s neuroticism leads them to create certain life situations, such as making others uncomfortable, and these situations in turn make the person unhappy (Hotard et al., 1989). We can contrast this with a different view of the causal relation between personality and well-being, in which personality is viewed as directly causing people to react to the same situations with different amounts of posi- tive or negative emotions, hence directly influencing their well-being. A neurotic person may respond with more negative emotion, even to the identical situation, than a person low in neuroticism. These two different models of the relation between personality and well-being—the direct and the indirect models—are portrayed in Figure 13.3. In the indirect model (Panel B), personality causes the person to create a certain lifestyle, and the lifestyle, in turn, causes the emotional reaction. In the direct model (Panel A), even when exposed to iden- tical situations, certain people respond with more positive or negative emotions, depending on their level of extraversion and neuroticism. Larsen and his colleagues (e.g., Larsen, 2000a; Larsen & Ketelaar, 1989, 1991; Rusting & Larsen, 1998b; Zelen- ski & Larsen, 1999) have conducted several studies of whether the personality traits of extraversion and neu- roticism have a direct effect on emotional responding. In these studies, the participants underwent a mood induction in the laboratory. In one study, the subjects listened to guided images of very pleasant scenes (a walk on the beach) or very unpleasant scenes (having a friend dying of an incurable disease). In other stud- ies, the participants’ emotions were manipulated by having them look at pleasant or unpleasant photographs. Prior to the laboratory session, their personality scores on extraversion and neuroticism were obtained by questionnaire. The researchers were then able to determine if extraversion and neuroticism scores predicted responses to the laboratory mood inductions. Across several studies, the best predictor of responsiveness to the positive mood induction was the personality variable of extraversion. The best predictor of responses to the negative mood induction was neuroticism. It seems that it is easy to put an extravert into a good mood, and easy to put a high-neuroticism person into a bad mood. Moreover, these laboratory studies suggest that per- sonality acts like an amplifier of life events, with extraverts showing amplified positive emotions to good events and high-neuroticism subjects showing amplified emotions to bad events. These findings are important because they suggest that personality has a direct effect on emotions and that, even under controlled circum- stances, people respond differently to the emotional events in their lives, depending on their personalities. 418 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 418 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality Panel A Panel B FIGURE 13.3 Two models of the relationship between personality variables and subjective well-being. Panel A: Model showing a direct effect of personality on emotional life, where life events are amplified by the personality traits, resulting in stronger positive or negative emotions for high extraversion or neuroticism subjects, respectively. Panel B: Model of the indirect relation between personality and emotional life. Here personality causes one to develop a lifestyle, and that lifestyle in turn fosters positive or negative affect for the high extraversion or neuroticism individuals, respectively. 419 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 419 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain The finding that extraverts get more positive emotional “bang” out of the emotion-inducing “buck” (or event) has been replicated in several other psychological laboratories (e.g., Gomez, Cooper, & Gomez, 2000; Gross et al., 1998). Some researchers, however, have failed to find the effect of extraversion on positive affective reac- tivity. For example, Lucas and Baird (2004) used clips of stand-up comedy to induce positive emotions and did not find that extraversion scores predicted a larger positive response (at least not in two out of four studies, whereas the fourth study did find the extraversion effect). Recently, Smillie and colleagues (2012) argued that the positive affect induction must involve a rewarding stimuli, such as winning a lottery or finding some money. Smillie and colleagues (2012) went on to demonstrate that, across five experiments, extraverts are more reactive to rewards (money) or situations involving desired outcomes (success feedback) or appetitive stimuli (delicious food). Having subjects do something that is merely pleasant, such as imagine they are relaxing at the beach or watch a “feel-good” movie clip, although enjoyable, does not involve rewards or appetitive stimuli and hence does not produce the larger positive emotional response in extraverts compared to introverts. Application A program to increase happiness. Psychologists know a great deal about what correlates with hap- piness, but what can they recommend for the average person who wants to maintain or increase levels of trait happiness? Buss (2000b) has identified several strategies for improving one’s chances of being happy. In addition, Fordyce (1988) (see also Swanbrow, 1989) has developed a practical program for applying what is known about happiness in everyday life. And Larsen (2000a; Larsen & Prizmic, 2004) proposes a collection of strategies for coping and improving one’s emotional life. Most psychologists believe that happiness is something that people must work at (Csikszentmih- alyi, 1999, 2000). The following is a summary of much of the advice given by these psychologists: 1. Spend time with other people, particularly friends, family, and loved ones. The one characteristic common to most happy people is a disposition to be sociable, to draw satisfaction from being with other people. Cultivate an interest in other people. Go out of your way to spend time with friends and loved ones. Try to get to know those around you. 2. Seek challenge and meaning in work. If satisfying relationships are the first priority, the second is having work that you find enjoyable. Happy people enjoy their work and work hard at what they do. If you do not find your current work (or university major) rewarding, then consider switching to something that you find more worthwhile. Work that is challenging, but within your skill level, is usually the most satisfying. 3. Look for ways to be helpful to others. Helping others can make you feel good about yourself and give you the feeling that your life is meaningful. Helping others thereby provides a boost in self- esteem. Helping has a second benefit as well; helping someone else can take your mind off your own problems or can make your problems seem little by comparison. There are plenty of wor- thy causes and plenty of organizations that welcome volunteers. 4. Take time out for yourself; enjoy the activities that give you pleasure. Don’t wait to find time for your favourite hobby or activity. Instead, make time. Many people learn to keep a calendar while in university to schedule work and other obligations. Use it to schedule fun things as well. Set aside time to read a book, take in a movie, exercise regularly, or do whatever else you enjoy. Think about what gives you pleasure, and build time into your busy schedule for those activities. 5. Stay in shape. Exercise is positively associated with emotional well-being. Exercise need not be intense or all that frequent to provide the emotional benefit. Playing team sports, dancing, bik- ing, swimming, gardening, or even walking, if done at a brisk pace, is about all it takes. It doesn’t seem to matter what the activity is, as long as you move around enough to keep in shape. 420 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 420 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Chapter 13 Emotion and Personality 6. Have a plan, but be open to new experiences. Having an organized life allows a person to accom- plish much. However, sometimes the most fun moments in life are unplanned. Be open to try- ing different things or having different experiences—try going somewhere you have never been, try doing a routine activity a little differently, or try doing something on the spur of the moment. Be flexible, rather than rigid, and try to avoid getting stuck in any ruts. 7. Be optimistic. Put on a smiling face, whistle a happy tune, look for the silver lining in every cloud. Sure, it sounds too good to be true, but acting happy and trying to look on the bright side of things can go a long way toward making you feel happy. Try to avoid negative thinking. Don’t make pessimistic statements, even to yourself. Convince yourself that the cup really is half full. 8. Don’t let things get blown out of proportion. Sometimes when something bad happens, it seems like the end of the world. Happy people have the ability to step back and see things in perspec- tive. Happy people think about their options and about the other things in their lives that are going well. They think about what they can do to work on their problems or what to avoid in the future. But they don’t think it is the end of the world. Often asking yourself “What’s the worst that can come of this?” will help put things in perspective. Just wishing for happiness is not likely to make it so. Psychologists agree that people have to work at being happy; they have to work at overcoming the unpleasant events of life, the losses and fail- ures that happen to everyone. The strategies in the previous list can be thought of as a personal program for working on happiness. Unpleasant Emotions Unlike pleasant emotions, the unpleasant emotions come in several distinct varieties. We discuss three impor- tant unpleasant emotions that are viewed by psychologists as having dispositional characteristics: anxiety, depression, and anger. Trait Anxiety and Neuroticism Recall that people who exhibit the trait of neuroticism are vulnerable to negative emotions. As discussed in Chapter 3, neuroticism is one of the Big Five dimensions of personality, and it is present, in some form, in every major trait theory of personality. Different researchers have used different terms for neuroticism, such as emotional instability, anxiety- proneness, and negative affectivity (Watson & Clark, 1984). Adjectives useful for describing people high on the trait of neuroticism include moody, touchy, irrita- ble, anxious, unstable, pessimistic, and complaining. Hans Eysenck (1967, 1990; Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985) suggested that individuals high on the neuroticism di- mension tend to overreact to unpleasant events, such as frustrations or problems, and that they take longer to return to a normal state after being upset. They are People high on the personality trait of neuroticism tend to worry frequently. They may worry about their easily irritated, worry about many things, and seem to health, their social interactions, their work, their be constantly complaining. You may have heard the future, or just about anything. Worrying and phrase “She is not happy unless she has something to complaining takes up a great proportion of their time. worry about.” Well, it is unlikely that worrying ©Shutterstock/tab62 421 lar65774_ch13_402-437.indd 421 1/17/20 6:51 PM  Part Four The Cognitive/Experiential Domain actually makes a person happy. But the fact that some people worry almost all the time might suggest that wor- rying fulfills a need for them. Some people worry about their health (“Is this nagging cough really a sign that I have lung cancer? Could this headache really be a brain tumour?”). Others worry about their social relations (“When that person smiled at me, was it really a smirk?”). And still others worry about their work (“Why can’t I