Positive Psychology PDF

POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY — Rona Hart ★ Positive Psychology Positive psychology is a scientific approach to studying human thoughts, feelings, and behavior, with a focus on strengths instead of weaknesses, building the good in life instead of repairing the bad, and taking the lives of average people up t...

POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY — Rona Hart ★ Positive Psychology Positive psychology is a scientific approach to studying human thoughts, feelings, and behavior, with a focus on strengths instead of weaknesses, building the good in life instead of repairing the bad, and taking the lives of average people up to “great” instead of focusing solely on moving those who are struggling up to “normal” (Peterson, 2008). CHAPTER 2: HAPPINESS The pursuit of happiness is a valued and celebrated life-goal for many people today. In the USA, the Declaration of Independence (1776) granted citizens certain constitutional rights that governments are committed to protect. Among these, the key rights are “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. Since then, surveys across a variety of cultures and across generations found that people rate happiness as a highly desired commodity that is worth pursuing, and perceive happiness as attainable and sustainable (Diener, Suh, Smith, & Shao, 1995). However, some authors considered the prominence of happiness in the political and public spheres and people’s desire for it a modern obsession (Burnett, 2011). Unfortunately, the theory and research into happiness advanced by positive psychology scholars have been accused of inadvertently reinforcing this obsession (Held, 2005). With this critique in mind, this chapter opens with a definition of happiness, and considers why happiness matters. The chapter then briefly reviews the research into happiness, particularly the factors that can increase or diminish happiness. Defining happiness Happiness is often referred to as hedonic or subjective wellbeing (SWB) in the academic literature. SWB consists of: A cognitive component: Our general satisfaction with life (SWL), in which we evaluate how well we are faring in the key domains of our lives (for example, health, relationships, work and money). An emotional component: The frequency of positive affect (such as excitement, joy or love) and negative affect (such as fear, anger or disgust) that we experience during a defined period of time. The following formula is often used to represent SWB: SWB = SWL + Positive affect – Negative affect By definition, people with high levels of SWB will likely be satisfied with their lives, experience pleasant emotions frequently and experience negative emotions infrequently (Diener, 2000). Research on SWB has begun more than 30 years ago, but has shown an exponential increase recently. Diener, Lucas, and Oishi (2018a) estimated that about 170,000 articles and books were published on the topic just in the past 15 years.  What do people mean when they say “I’m happy”? There are three different associations that people commonly attach to the phrase “I’m happy” (McMahan & Estes, 2011): Happy in the moment: This indicates that a person is experiencing particular positive emotions in this moment, that they interpret as happiness. Happy with life: When people use this connotation of happiness, they are giving an indication that they are generally doing well in terms of their wellbeing and SWL. Much of the research on happiness has explored this interpretation of happiness. Happy person: This use of the term refers to happiness as a personality trait that suggests that a person is typically cheerful and upbeat. MOST PEOPLE ARE HAPPY In an early paper titled “Most people are happy”, Diener and Diener (1996) reviewed substantial research evidence (916 large-scale surveys involving more than a million participants from 45 countries), which showed that in most countries the majority of people (70%+) reported positive levels of happiness (the average score was 6.7 on a scale from 0 to 10). These happiness levels remained stable for several decades, and included disadvantaged groups, who showed similar levels of happiness to others. The authors therefore concluded that most people are “pretty happy”. Later the authors noted that “the data do not indicate that everyone is ecstatic. Instead, most people are mildly happy and satisfied” (Biswas-Diener, Vittersø, & Diener, 2005, p. 205). Two decades later the authors updated their data (Diener, Diener, Choi, & Oishi, 2018b). They concluded that, in economically developed countries, most people continue to be modestly happy on average; however, in countries where basic needs are not met, both SWL and emotional states are negatively affected. This indicates that macro-level circumstances indeed matter and can impact happiness levels under conditions of privation. However, once needs are met at a basic level, personal circumstances ranging from illness to income seem to have a fairly modest impact on happiness. Measuring happiness Research into happiness often uses self-report questionnaires to measure the two components of SWB: SWL and people’s emotional experience. The Cantril Self-Anchoring Scale (Cantril, 1965) and the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffen, 1985) are often used for measuring life satisfaction. The Cantril scale features a single life satisfaction question, and the SWLS includes five items. To measure participants’ emotional experience researchers often use the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS: Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) or the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience (SPANE: Diener et al., 2010). The PANAS requires participants to assess to what extent they experienced 20 emotions (10 positive and 10 negative) in a defined period. Similarly, the SPANE contains 12 broader emotions. An important point to note is that in some studies happiness is assessed by using only one of these scales – either SWL or a measure of emotions.  An additional scale developed by Lyubomirsky and Lepper (1999) directly measures subjective happiness. The scale has four items. Another way to measure happiness is to gather similar information from participants’ family and friends, which provides external validation for the self-reported measures (Diener et al., 2018a). An alternative method to measure happiness that avoids the usual drawbacks of questionnaires is the Experience Sampling Method (ESM) (Pavot, 2018). It prompts research participants at random times to record their thoughts and emotions on a mobile device. By sampling people’s ongoing experiences, ESM can offer an average score for each person, and can analyse changes in people’s happiness across time, locations and circumstances. Other methodologies for measuring happiness include interviews, physiological measures (brain activity and hormone levels) and ratings of emotional experiences as these are manifested in people’s facial expressions (Diener et al., 2018a). All the above-mentioned measures have been widely used and show robust psychometric capacities (Pavot, 2018). THE BENEFITS OF HAPPINESS: DOES HAPPINESS LEAD TO SUCCESS? A substantial body of research has examined the benefits of happiness by comparing between people with varying levels of SWB, conducting longitudinal studies on the outcomes of earlier levels of happiness, and through the use of experimental research designs that examine the effectiveness of positive psychology activities that can enhance happiness. Pavot and Diener (2004) underscored the importance of this body of research: if the research does not show any significant, distinct beneficial outcomes that derive from experiencing happiness, which extend beyond merely feeling good, “then the importance of SWB as a desirable goal is significantly diminished” (p. 684). In summarising the findings of these studies Lyubomirsky, King, and Diener (2005b) queried: does happiness lead to success? Drawing on our own life experiences, many of us would likely argue that success leads to happiness, and contest the opposite direction of causality. Yet as the review below demonstrates, happiness is beneficial and can lead to numerous successful outcomes in key life domains, including longevity, physical and mental health, work, income, family and social life. ★ Health and Longevity Happy people consistently report better health and fewer ailments compared to less happy individuals, and therefore require fewer doctor appointments and hospital visits, fewer medications and fewer sick leave days. Happy people are also more health-conscious, and tend to engage with physical activity, and less likely to engage in unhealthy behaviours. These lifestyle choices seem to pay off: happiness is associated with better quality of life and physical functioning. It is also correlated with longevity (Steptoe, 2019). The nuns’ study In one of the most renowned studies that linked happiness and longevity, Danner, Snowdon, and Friesen (2001) assessed whether the life expectancy of 180 elderly Catholic nuns could be predicted by the levels of happiness that they had expressed nearly six decades earlier. To measure their early levels of happiness, researchers analysed autobiographical essays that the nuns wrote in their 20s, upon entering the convent. Strikingly, the authors found that happier nuns lived nearly 10 years longer on average than unhappy nuns, thus providing an indication that happiness levels can impact longevity. These findings are given further credibility due to the fact that nuns lead a relatively uniform lifestyle, whereby their diets, daily  routines, physical and social activities and exposure to risks are fairly similar, hence removing environmental differences that can impact longevity. ★ Wellbeing Happiness is considered a strong criterion for assessing people’s mental health. This is because a number of mental illnesses (such as depression and anxiety) are diagnosed through the prolonged presence of negative emotions. Therefore, by definition the experience of sustained SWB can offer a sound indication of the absence of mental illness. Accordingly, people at the top of the happiness scale show fewer symptoms of psychopathology compared to others. They also score high on other measures of wellbeing, including low levels of stress and rumination. On the positive side they report feeling rested, experiencing personal growth and having personal autonomy and free time (Diener, Seligman, Choi, & Oishi, 2018c). During difficult times happy individuals tend to experience lower levels of stress, and use more adaptive coping mechanisms (such as solution-focused strategies) compared to others. They also show higher levels of hardiness and resilience, and maintain their positive attitude (Luhmann, Hofmann, Eid, & Lucas, 2012). ★ Personality In terms of personality traits, happy people seem to display positive temperament, conscientiousness, self-esteem, confidence and self-efficacy, and low levels of neuroticism. They seem to set higher goals for themselves compared to their less happy peers, and display more optimism, competence, self-control and perseverance when pursuing these goals. They also make better decisions, and tend to optimise (look for a good-enough option), rather than maximise (aiming to achieve the best result). They also tend to be more grateful, savour life pleasures and are often spiritual or religious (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005b). ★ Work and Income When seeking employment, happier individuals are more likely to apply to more positions, be invited to more job interviews and secure higher-paying and prestigious jobs, compared to unhappy job seekers. Once employed, they perform well (in most, though not all, types of tasks), often beyond the call of duty, and display high levels of engagement, effort and productivity. They also demonstrate creativity and flexibility, and experience flow frequently (Walsh, Boehm, & Lyubomirsky, 2018). When working on long-term goals they show persistence, and resilience when facing hurdles. They also exhibit less counterproductive, risky or retaliatory work behaviours, and seem to show high standards of work in terms of attendance, punctuality, usage of resources and time, and adherence to rules. Hence, they are evaluated more positively by their managers and customers, and are less likely to lose their jobs and become unemployed. They are also more satisfied with their jobs, experience less job burnout, absenteeism or other withdrawal behaviours compared to their unhappy colleagues, and hence show high commitment to their organisations and are less likely to leave (Walsh et al., 2018). In their work relationships, happy employees show goodwill, citizenship and prosocial behaviours, and are more altruistic, cooperative, helpful and courteous towards others. They also experience more cohesion and trust, and engage in fewer conflicts. In return they seem to receive both emotional and tangible assistance from colleagues and managers compared to their less happy peers (Walsh et al., 2018). Happy leaders and managers seem to receive high ratings from their employees, who assess their workplace climate positively, and report being happier and healthier than those working with unhappy leaders. There is also evidence to suggest that companies with happy employees are more profitable (Walsh et al., 2018). These findings gave rise to the “happy–productive employee” assertion, which posits that it is worthwhile for organisations to invest in their employees’ happiness, as this can lead to a more productive and profitable work environment (Cropanzano & Wright, 2001). Do happy doctors make a better diagnosis? Research suggests that experiencing positive emotions, even briefly, can impact performance. Estrada, Isen, and Young (1997) attempted to explore this association by inducing positive emotions in 44 medical doctors prior to making a diagnosis. The researchers aimed to assess whether positive emotions could influence the accuracy of the diagnosis, and anchoring (a thinking mode that can lead to errors due to decreased flexibility). Participants in the study were randomly assigned to two experimental groups and a control group, all of which received materials describing a case that they were required to diagnose. One experimental group received a small pack of chocolates and candies tied in a bag, with a thank you note. They were asked to put the candy away however and not eat it. The second experimental group were asked to read phrases related to sources of satisfaction in medical practice, such as: “I can relieve my patients’ anxiety.” The control group received only the materials. Transcripts of their diagnoses were then scored. The findings indicated that doctors in the candy and statement groups achieved a correct hypothesis significantly earlier, and showed less anchoring compared to controls. This suggests that positive emotions briefly induced in several ways can improve cognitive organisation, flexibility, reasoning and decision making. “What good is happiness? It can’t buy money.” This pun made by comedian Youngman (1998) is in fact incorrect: studies suggest that happier people are able to meet their basic financial needs, and more. In fact, the majority of them fare better than their less happy peers financially. Longitudinal studies have shown that happier young adults were more likely to earn higher income decades later, compared to less happy individuals. Ultimately their constructive work ethic and performance lead to enhanced employability and stronger career profiles, which can explain the higher income (Walsh et al., 2018). ★ Social Life Studies have reported on strong associations between happiness and social life. Happier people are more likely to be extroverts, and have relatively larger networks of close, high-quality social ties and organisational affiliations compared to their less happy peers. They engage more often in social activities, are more sociable and report higher levels of satisfaction and value from the companionship and support that their social ties offer them. Hence, they rate their family and friends more positively, are less jealous of others and feel that they are treated with respect. Happiness can also affect the trajectory of relationships: young adults who are highly satisfied with their life are more likely to get married in the following years, and be more satisfied with their partnerships, and therefore less likely to separate or divorce (Pavot & Diener, 2004). In contrast to the common myth, happy individuals are not selfish. In fact research suggests that happy people are interested in current affairs, view others more positively, hold a prosocial outlook and are likely to be more cooperative, altruistic, compassionate and charitable than unhappy individuals. In turn, others tend to rate happy individuals as more intelligent, competent, confident, assertive, energetic, friendly, socially skilled, articulate, well mannered, socially active, warm, moral and supportive, and even physically attractive and likeable, and less selfish. Research has also shown that happiness is infectious: happy people seem to spread happiness to others, resulting in happier communities, organisations and nations (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005b). In sum, happiness is not just a pleasurable experience. In fact, in becoming happier, we can improve key aspects of our lives, including our health and longevity, psychological wellbeing, our work, career, income, and our relationships. Importantly, when we become happier, we also benefit others – our families, communities and societies. In view of these impressive findings, there is a strong argument to be made that understanding happiness, its determinants and outcomes, and developing interventions that can increase people’s happiness levels is a worthy scientific objective (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, & Schkade, 2005a). Given that most people are modestly happy, the main objective of these interventions is to lessen chronic unhappiness, to heighten happiness when it is consistently low and to help individuals recover from testing life events and regain their positive outlook and emotional balance. On this note, Diener et al. (2018a) cautioned that “more is not always better. Just because high SWB is associated with benefits in some domains does not mean that increasingly high levels of SWB will always result in gains” (p. 27). Another caveat to bear in mind regarding the research on the benefits of happiness is that some (though not all) of the findings cited above are drawn from correlational studies. These can show a relationship between variables but cannot detect causation. WHAT DETERMINES HAPPINESS? An intriguing question that researchers endeavoured to answer is: why are some people happier than others? In other words, what are the factors that determine people’s happiness, and what accounts for the variations between them? In an early paper Lyubomirsky et al. (2005a) drew on the extent research to present the Sustainable Happiness Model, which outlined the main determinants of enduring happiness. Recently several papers (Diener et al., 2018a; Nes & Roysamb, 2015; Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2019) revisited the model and both endorsed and challenged different aspects of it. In the summary that follows, the original model and some of the recent updates on it are presented. ★ The Sustainable Happiness Model According to Lyubomirsky et al.’s (2005a) Sustainable Happiness Model (also known as the Happiness Pie), three key factors can explain individuals’ levels of happiness: 1. Genetics and personality 2. Life circumstances 3. Intentional activities. ★ Genetics & Personality Research suggests that a substantial proportion of people’s happiness levels can be explained by their genetic lineage. In recent reports the percentage was estimated to be around 30–40% (Nes & Roysamb, 2015) (while the earlier model proposed a higher figure, around 50%). This suggests that we have a happy or unhappy hereditary predisposition, which can explain some of the variations between individuals in happiness levels. Research evidence, mainly obtained from twin studies, suggests that this genetic imprint is difficult to deviate from. The inborn factors that shape happiness are manifested in people’s temperament and affectivity, as well as in several happiness-relevant personality traits, such as extraversion, optimism, hope and neuroticism.  Happiness set point Ample research has indicated that most people show considerable stability in their happiness over time. Consistent with the notion that happiness is partly hereditary, researchers suggested that people may have a “happiness set point” (or set range) which can explain the observed stability in their happiness. The set point can be described as a person’s typical level of happiness. Lyubomirsky et al. (2005a) noted that it is “genetically determined and is assumed to be fixed, stable over time, and immune to influence or control” (p. 13). Although life events can trigger temporary increases or decreases in people’s happiness, research suggests that most people show an involuntary tendency to return to their baseline sooner or later. It is worth noting that some scholars challenged the merit of set-point theory (Diener et al., 2018a) in the face of evidence which revealed that some people change their set point over the life course, and do not always return to set point, particularly following adverse events. On the other hand, recent genetic research seems to provide more robust evidence for the hereditary component of happiness, though the authors noted that “genetic and environmental factors transact and interplay” in the development of happiness (Røysamb, & Nes, 2018, p. 13). ★ Life Circumstances According to Lyubomirsky et al.’s (2005a) model, a fairly modest percentage of happiness can be explained by life circumstances (on average 10%, but with significant variability around this figure). Circumstances include a wide array of factors that can impact happiness: demographic factors (such as age, gender and ethnicity), people’s personal history and life events that can impinge on happiness, whether people’s basic needs are met, macro-social structures (such as country and culture), as well as circumstances that people have some control over (such as health, education, marital status, occupation and work, income and lifestyle). Although circumstances certainly influence happiness, the small percentage of SWB that these account for suggests that achieving desired changes in circumstances (such as getting a rise in income, moving to a warmer climate, getting married or having a child) may not bring about the lasting happiness that people desire. These findings puzzled researchers and prompted them to conduct further inquiries into this point. One explanation for the weak impact of circumstances on happiness levels is the process of hedonic adaptation. Hedonic adaptation Consider the experience of buying your first car. You worked hard to pay for it, and after weeks of shopping around and completing the required paperwork, the car was parked in your driveway. The first days of driving it were filled with excitement as you explored the new car and appreciated the benefits of owning a car. However, what happened to your happiness level a few months down the line? For the majority of people the answer is: the initial happiness levels dwindled as they got used to having a car. This phenomenon is known as “hedonic adaptation” (or habituation). It suggests that when we experience positive or negative events in our lives, these typically bring about a temporary increase or decrease in our happiness levels. However, over time, we become accustomed to our new circumstances, and eventually we return to our happiness set point. This suggests that any gains in happiness that people may achieve following a positive change in their circumstances are short-lived. In due course people will adapt to it and no longer derive the same amount of happiness  that they experienced initially. Research has also suggested that the “hedonic adaptation is faster and more likely to be ‘complete’ in response to positive than negative experiences” (Lyubomirsky, 2011, p. 203). The process of habituation provides some explanation as to why circumstances often show a marginal impact on people’s long-term level of happiness. It also became a source of pessimism for researchers who are searching for interventions that can generate enduring ‐ happiness: The notion of an individual fighting against the effects of adaptation brings to mind an image of a pedestrian walking up a descending escalator. Although the improving circumstances of her life may propel her upward toward ever greater happiness, the process of adaptation forces her back to her initial state. (Layous, Sheldon, & Lyubomirsky, 2015, p. 186). This can lead to a perpetual search for the next, short-lived happiness-boosting event, which is known as the “hedonic treadmill”. Similar to the critique on the set-point theory, the universality of the hedonic adaptation model has been challenged, since researchers observed that some events typically take longer to adapt to, while other events commonly result in quicker adaptation. Circumstances that are prone to quicker adaptation include marriage, gaining higher income and making lifestyle changes. Circumstances that show slower pace of adaptation include immigration and cosmetic surgery. Some life circumstances, particularly adverse events (such as the onset of disability and widowhood) can exert a long-term negative impact on SWB, indicating a slower adaptation process. Among these, unemployment seems to have a detrimental long- term impact on people’s happiness. The “scarring effect” of unemployment can persist even after becoming re-employed. Researchers also found that people differ in the ways in which they perceive and interpret life events, which shape their initial reaction to the event. They also vary in their propensity to adapt to events. This indicates that life circumstances can impact happiness, but the strength and duration of their effect vary depending on people’s personality and the events considered. ★ Intentional Activities The last component in Lyubomirsky et al.’s (2005a) model refers to people’s day-to-day choices of thoughts, activities and behaviours. The authors claimed that this component is “arguably the most promising means of altering one’s happiness level” (p. 15), since these activities and behaviours are in people’s control. The term “intentional” suggests these activities require a degree of will, deliberate effort and commitment. Examples of intentional behaviours include engaging in physical exercises, socialising and being kind to others. Examples of cognitive activities include setting and pursuing life goals, expressing optimism or gratitude and avoiding social comparison. Some of these intentional activities have been examined in the form of structured positive psychology interventions to assess their impact, and the results suggested that these exercises can produce moderate improvements in SWB (see further details in Chapter 13). In the original model the authors approximated that these intentional positive activities can predict about 40% of people’s happiness. However, in a later paper (Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2019), drawing mainly on experimental research that tested the efficacy of happiness interventions, they considered that this figure could be lower (around 15% but with significant variation around this figure). ★ Happiness Interventions Positive psychology interventions that are geared to increase happiness are exercises that have been tested for their efficacy in empirical research, and hence they are considered evidence-based. They are designed to increase positive emotions, life satisfaction or both. They may include brief, ad hoc exercises such as writing about your best possible self, or setting life goals. Some activities necessitate some repetition to maintain their impact for longer, such as writing a gratitude diary, engaging in physical activity, savouring, or conducting acts of kindness. There are also some happiness group-based programmes involving several meetings. Examples include the Fundamentals for Happiness Programme (Fordyce, 1983) and The Happy Life: Voyages to Wellbeing programme (Cloninger, 2006) (see details in Chapter 13). Sheldon and Lyubomirsky (2019) developed several models that can help boost and sustain happiness levels over the long term: The Eudaimonic Activity Model suggests that engaging in intentional behaviours that are eudaimonic in nature can increase our happiness levels as a byproduct. Eudaimonic activities are geared to satisfy our basic needs and increase our psychological wellbeing through optimal functioning. They may include activities such as the pursuit of valued life goals, engaging in meaningful undertakings, connecting with others, and seeking growth-promoting activities. The Positive Activity Model aims to facilitate the choice of activities and behaviours that can enhance happiness levels, and more importantly, it offers several ways to help maintain these happiness levels with some consistency. The model identifies evidence-based interventions that can reliably raise happiness levels, and suggests how best to enact them. It also offers the person–activity fit diagnostic – a tool to help us assess which intervention may suit us best (see Chapter 13). The Hedonic Adaptation Prevention Model posits that hedonic adaptation is not inevitable. One way to prevent or slow down the adaptation process is to continue to interact with new positive life circumstances, appreciate and savour them. Another way to slow adaptation is to avoid social comparison and the desire to acquire more or a better version of what we have, which may trigger the “hedonic treadmill” phenomenon. Prioritising positivity: Another way to habituate volitional happiness- boosting techniques is by “prioritising positivity” (Catalino, Algoe, & Fredrickson, 2014). It requires people to organise their day-to-day lives in a way that naturally increases opportunities to experience positive emotions. It involves spending time doing things that we genuinely enjoy, such as walking, gardening or socialising. It also involves considering the emotional implications of actions and decisions. The authors reported that people who pursued happiness in this way were indeed happier than those who did not, hence suggesting that habituating and weaving happiness- raising activities in daily life are worthwhile endeavours. Social comparison Social comparisons, or “keeping up with the Jones”, are highly common and are weaved into the way that we judge and interpret life events and circumstances (Gerber, Wheeler, & Suls, 2018). At times we may compare our current situation to previous circumstances, and in other times, we may compare ourselves to others. The comparisons can pertain to a variety of aspects, from health and marital situation to income and lifestyle. Upward social comparison occurs when people compare themselves to others who are doing better than they are, while downward comparisons take the opposite direction. Researchers have observed that some upward comparison is useful as it may inspire us to take action, for example to pursue an ambitious goal. However persistent upward social comparison can be self-defeating and can lead to jealousy, insecurity and unhappiness. In line with this observation, research has reported that happy people engage more in downward social comparisons. PREDICTORS OF HAPPINESS A sizable body of knowledge has accumulated over the years regarding the key predictors of happiness, some of which fit into the “circumstances” or “intentional activities” categories in Lyubomirsky et al.’s (2005a) happiness pie. Among these, six predictors have received the majority of researchers’ attention. These are: social ties, wealth and lifestyle, education and work, health, demography, and macro-social structures (country and culture). ★ Relationships A theme that has repeatedly featured in the happiness literature is that social relationships can strongly impact people’s happiness (Diener et al., 2018a). Close and supportive family, friendships and collegial relationships are considered a key source of happiness. Research on the happiest individuals revealed that having a close, positive and supportive social circle, and spending a substantial portion of their time socialising, was a distinctive feature of this group. Longitudinal studies on marriage revealed that newly married people experience initially a significant rise in their happiness; however they seem to return to baseline after 2 years on average due to adaptation. Despite this decline, research on the association between marriage and happiness consistently reveals that happily married people show higher SWB levels compared to unmarried, divorced or separated people. This was found across all age groups, educational levels, racial groups and different cultures. Moreover, those who described their marriages as unhappy showed the lowest levels of happiness, suggesting that the quality of marriage heavily influences happiness levels. Both married and single people show a decrease in their happiness in their 30s (that is considered to be age-related); however, single people showed steeper decreases in their SWB. This suggests that marriage can buffer against the age-related declines in happiness (Grover & Helliwell, 2019). In the past decades the correlation between happiness and marriage has been weakening in the West, and researchers considered that this is due to the decrease in marriage rates, as more couples choose to cohabit instead. However, the data on cohabitation suggests that it does not increase happiness as much as marriage does (Mikucka, 2016). Research on friendships shows that they significantly impact happiness. However here too, relational quality is the key predictor of happiness, and matters much more than quantity (Demir & Weitekamp, 2007). Rath and Harter (2010) provided evidence that happiness spreads through social networks: the odds of a person being happy increase by 15% if their friends are happy. More compellingly, the odds increase even more if their friends are surrounded by other happy friends. The authors concluded that access to happy social networks has more influence on our happiness than a $10,000 pay rise! Are children truly “bundles of joy”? Research on the association between parenthood and happiness shows mixed findings (Nelson, Kushlev, & Lyubomirsky, 2014). Some studies suggested that parents are slightly happier than non-parents, while others found no difference. Research that followed parents over long periods reported increased happiness prior to the birth of the first child, which returned to baseline shortly after. However, other studies found that happiness decreased with the birth of each child. This is explained by the stresses of parenthood (sleep deprivation, worry and decrease in marital satisfaction). The relationship between children and marital satisfaction is described as curvilinear, which in turn impacts SWB. A significant drop has been registered in marital satisfaction at the birth of the first child, which further declines when children reach adolescence, but it increases once children have left home (Gorchoff, John, & Helson, 2008). A study by Kahneman, Krueger, Schkade, Schwarz, and Stone (2004) reported that working mums had fewer positive emotions and rated taking care of their children as slightly more enjoyable than commuting and chores. Further research suggested that parents’ happiness is linked to the child’s characteristics (such as temperament), while others suggested that the parent’s age, gender and attachment style can affect their happiness. Socioeconomic status and the support available for parents are also factors that impinge on parents’ SWB (Nelson et al., 2014).  Do we know what makes us happy? Wilson and Gilbert (2005) argued that people find it difficult to accurately judge what can make them happy or unhappy. The concept of “affective forecasting” suggests that people tend to predict how much a life event is likely to impact them. However the authors found that people are not very accurate in their predictions. They recover much quicker from negative events than the prediction, and don’t derive as much happiness from positive events compared to the prediction. The conclusion is that we may not really know what makes us happy, increasing the chances that the pursuit of happiness will be misdirected. ★ Wealth and Lifestyle Can money buy happiness? Many people associate money and happiness and often consider wealth as a key source of happiness. Lyubomirsky (2014) claimed that this perception is one of the biggest myths around happiness, but is it a myth? A robust body of research indeed shows a moderate relationship between happiness and money – in particular income, cash availability, spending and giving (Tay, Zyphur, & Batz, 2018). However more thorough exploration of these findings revealed that there is a positive association between earnings and happiness, but it ceases to exist once a certain (fairly modest) level of income is reached. That is, money can lead to an increase in happiness levels, but mainly for those who are on the poor side of the scale. Once elementary needs are met, more monetary assets do not make people happier. Higher income is associated with lower occurrence of negative emotions, in particular sadness, fear, worry and stress, but this effect also fades once a certain (basic) level of income is reached. Interestingly, cash in the bank was strongly associated with happiness (Ruberton, Gladstone, & Lyubomirsky, 2016). Going from 0 to $1,000 (from nothing to sufficiency) was associated with significant gains in happiness, but increasing financial assets from $1,000 to $10,000 produced fewer increases in happiness and therefore appears to be subjected to diminishing returns. The findings highlight the importance of holding a minimal monetary buffer that can be used in times of urgency or hardship, but also the relative unimportance of having wealth above sufficiency levels. In line with these findings, financial losses seem to have a larger effect on happiness than income gains (Tay et al., 2018). Higher incomes are associated with more time spent at work or in managing assets and less time in doing activities that boost happiness, such as socialising. According to the research, money can also impede prosocial behaviour (Vohs, Mead, & Goode, 2008) and can increase attention to oneself, hence undermining social connection. More money brings the luxury of choice because a person can afford a larger variety of items. While it may seem that having more options to choose from is more enjoyable, research has demonstrated that too much choice may impede happiness (Lyengar & Lepper, 2000). On the poor side, the inability to meet one’s economic responsibilities and basic needs is often accompanied by stress, depression and anxiety. Money struggles reduce self-worth, sense of personal control, independence and self- determination (Haushofer & Fehr, 2014) which in turn undermine happiness. Additionally, money is a source of conflict for many families, which hampers social relations, adding more stress to financial worries, and weakens social support. Financial difficulties predict reduced marital satisfaction, intensified marital conflict and higher prospects of divorce (Papp, Cummings, & Goeke- Morey, 2009).  Does living in California make people happier? Many people hold a perception that living in a sunny location will make them happier. But would it? Schkade and Kahneman (1998) examined this question by comparing the life satisfaction levels of 1,993 students studying at universities located in Midwest USA and in Southern California. The participants were asked to rate their SWL for themselves and for students living in one of the two regions, as well as to rate how important certain factors are for their happiness. The results revealed that overall life satisfaction was similar in both regions. However participants expected students residing in California to be happier than students residing in colder climates. Climate was rated as an important factor for life satisfaction, although Midwestern students attached higher levels of importance to it than those living in California. The authors concluded that, although living in a sunny location is a seductive idea, it does not seem to improve happiness in the long run. Similar to other domains of life, hedonic adaptation indeed occurs in the financial and life-style domains. Research has shown that, after an income rise people experience a short-term boost in their happiness, although they tend to rapidly adapt to their new income and their new standard of living. There is also evidence to suggest that, as people earn more money, they tend to consume more, which may lead to increases in materialism (Tay et al., 2018). To mitigate the effects of adaptation researchers suggest spending money on things that are resistant to adaptation. Spending money on ourselves (bills, mortgage, material goods) makes people less happy than spending money on others (family, friends, charity). Happiness from buying stems from how and on whom we spend money, not how much money we have or spend. Spending money on possessions makes us less happy than spending money on experiences and memories. When shopping, focusing on products that either meet basic needs or alleviate pain or discomfort could be a more effective acquisition than purchasing luxury items. Importantly, happiness seems to be less about life’s costly highs (expensive gifts, vacations or celebrations) and more about enjoying small everyday pleasures (Dunn & Norton, 2013). Lottery studies In a renowned study Brickman, Coates, and Janoff-Bulman (1978) examined retrospectively the effects of a lottery win on happiness. They reported that, after an initial brief increase in happiness, lottery winners returned to baseline and were not significantly happier than a comparison group. However, a common critique on this study is that it included few lottery winners. A larger-scale study reported that lottery winners and people receiving substantial inheritances showed higher levels of happiness than others (Gardner & Oswald, 2007), which remained stable for about 2 years and then diminished. ★ Materialism Materialism is defined as the belief that the acquisition of material goods leads to life satisfaction (Richins & Dawson, 1992). A meta-analysis conducted by Dittmar, Bond, Hurst, and Kasser (2014) found a modest negative association between materialism and happiness, and more. Individuals who are more materialistic  reported decreased sense of security, poor need satisfaction and lower physical and psychological health (compulsive buying, anxiety, depression and substance abuse). Diener and Oishi (2000) conducted a study among 7,000 college students in 41 countries, and found that placing high importance on wealth correlated negatively with life satisfaction, while placing high value on love correlated positively with life satisfaction. Financial security and sensible money management (living within means) correlated with happiness more strongly than income. The Easterlin paradox The Easterlin paradox (Easterlin, 1974) has captured considerable attention across social sciences. The paradox suggests that over the past decades people (particularly in the West) have become richer, yet happiness levels have remained stable. Easterlin (2005) suggested that this is mainly due to hedonic adaptation and social comparison. Accordingly, Tay et al. (2018) reported that income inequality was associated with lower happiness and this association was particularly strong for poorer respondents. ★ Demographic Factors Significant research has focused on patterns of happiness over a lifetime. Research has suggested that there is a U-shaped association between happiness and age (Blanchflower & Oswald, 2008): young adults are relatively happy, but happiness reaches a low point around the age of 30–40, which improves in older adults, but then declines again in very old age. However there is some controversy around the U-shaped trajectory, with some authors (Steptoe, Deaton, & Stone, 2015) suggesting that the U-shaped curve occurs mainly in the West and that in other countries SWB declines with age. Reports on gender differences in happiness suggest that these are small, though there are some differences between genders in the emotional component of happiness: women show higher levels of both happiness and unhappiness compared to men. However in countries with high levels of gender equality, smaller gender differences in happiness were found (Zuckerman, Li, & Diener, 2017). ★ Education and work Levels of education are moderately associated with happiness, as well as with work and income, both of which moderately impact happiness (Michalos, 2008). However analyses at country level suggested that national averages in educational attainment were one of the strongest predictors of happiness (Lawless & Lucas, 2011). Employment is a strong predictor of happiness, with employed people showing higher happiness than unemployed people, and those holding skilled professional jobs being happier than those who perform unskilled jobs (Argyle, 2013). In a large-scale review McKee-Ryan, Song, Wanberg, and Kinicki (2005) found that unemployed people showed lower psychological and physical health and had suicidality risk. Similarly, Lucas, Clark, Georgellis, and Diener (2004) reported that the impact of job loss on wellbeing and happiness lasted years after the event, and the unemployed did not return to their earlier levels of SWB. The authors therefore suggested that unemployment has a “scarring effect”, that can alter the happiness set point. Additionally, unhappiness due to unemployment seems to spill over to other people – notably the unemployed person’s significant others. However, the unemployed were not equally unhappy. Those who were healthier and wealthier and had good social support and weaker desire to work were found to be slightly happier than others. Country-level unemployment can predict the nation’s average levels of happiness (Argyle, 2013). Among employed people, job satisfaction and overall happiness were found to be moderately linked (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999) and this is explained by the fact that work provides not only financial rewards but also purpose and meaning, affiliation, interest and opportunities to perform, achieve and develop, which are predictors of happiness. Warr (2007) reported that jobs that offer a good person–job fit are more satisfying. However, a long commute to work seems to decrease happiness (Stutzer & Frey, 2008). ★ Health Intuitively many of us would predict that health plays a prominent role in happiness. However research suggested that, with the exception of extreme circumstances, most objective health measures correlate weakly with happiness, apart from sleep quality, which shows a strong correlation with happiness. People’s subjective assessments of their health is strongly associated with SWB (Diener et al., 2018a). Studies have also shown that people adapt to some acquired disabilities and return to their happiness set point in time, with the exception of severely disabling conditions (Lucas, 2007). ★ Macro-level factors Over the last 20 years, national and cultural differences have become a major focus of happiness research (Diener et al., 2018a), supported by large-scale national and international surveys that routinely collect data on happiness. Culture shapes how people define happiness, what values they hold and what expectations they have from life, and also how they convey emotional experiences. Nations also vary in their capacity to provide services and support their citizens, hence influencing life priorities and lifestyles. Studies which examined differences between nations in SWB found that people are happier in richer and economically developed nations (most of which tend to be individualistic) compared to less developed countries. Countries that are lawful, with lower corruption, crime, discrimination and unemployment and higher government efficiency, equality, progressive taxation, effective welfare systems, stronger social bonds, higher levels of trust, freedom, autonomy and choice, and stronger environmental control (clean air and water and green spaces) show higher levels of happiness. Scholars also noted that religious individuals have higher SWB than the non- religious (Hackney & Sanders, 2003). These findings can be explained by the sense of meaning and spirituality that people derive from religious beliefs, the psychological benefits of praying or attending religious services and the sense of belonging, identity and social support that comes from affiliation to a religious community. In a global study, Tay, Li, Myers, and Diener (2014) found that all four major religions were related to higher happiness, but this effect was stronger in poorer countries. They also found that non-religious people experienced lower happiness levels than their religious peers if they lived in a highly religious nation. CONCLUSION: IS THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS FUTILE? Research on happiness has exploded since positive psychology was established. As the review provided in this chapter shows, happiness is much more than just a pleasant experience; it is in fact highly beneficial and, as Lyubomirsky et al. (2005a) argued, can lead to success in several life domains. According to the research, there are three core determinants of happiness: genetics and personality, which shape people’s happiness set range; life circumstances, many of which are prone to hedonic adaptation; and volitional activities. Given that relative stability of the happiness set point, and the potency of hedonic adaptation, researchers have been debating a critical point: is the pursuit of happiness worthwhile or is it “as futile as trying to become taller” (Lykken & Tellegen, 1996, p. 189)? Some scholars argued that pursuing happiness can backfire, resulting in disappointment, which indicates that a better strategy might be to accept our happiness levels (Gruber, Mauss, & Tamir, 2011). In contrast, Sheldon and Lyubomirsky (2019) argued that, with some attention to our thinking habits and the choices that we make regarding how we spend our time, and the activities that we engage with, and indeed with some intentional effort, attaining higher happiness levels is possible, and these can be maintained over the long term.