PSYC 3302 Week 1-7 Lecture Notes PDF

Week 1 + 2 (Chapter 1) Week 1 Lecture What is Positive Psychology? ● Self actualization ● Self efficacy and motivation ● Discovering what optimum mental wellbeing looks like ● Promote behaviour → health, wellness, wellbeing ● Achievement ● Positive affect ● Decreasing negative feeling ● NOT: ○ “What...

Week 1 + 2 (Chapter 1) Week 1 Lecture What is Positive Psychology? ● Self actualization ● Self efficacy and motivation ● Discovering what optimum mental wellbeing looks like ● Promote behaviour → health, wellness, wellbeing ● Achievement ● Positive affect ● Decreasing negative feeling ● NOT: ○ “What makes you happy” too impersonal ○ Solving problems Definitions of Positive Psychology ● Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000 ○ Subjective Level: about value subjective experiences: wellbeing, contentment, satisfaction (in the past); hope and optimism (for the future); flow and happiness (in the present). ○ Individual Level: about positive individual traits: the capacity for love and vocation, courage, interpersonal skill, aesthetic sensibility, perseverance, forgiveness, originality, future-mindedness, spirituality, high talent, wisdom. ○ Group Level: the civic virtues and the institutions that move individuals toward better citizenship: moderation, tolerance + work ethic ● ● ● ● ● Gable & Haidt, 2006 ○ study of conditions and processes that contribute to the flourishing or optimal functioning of people, groups and institutions. Sheldon & King, 2001: ○ scientific study of ordinary human strengths and virtues. Linley, Joseph, Harrington & Wood, 2006: ○ the study of human strengths and virtues/study of health, fulfilment and well-being Peterson, 2006 ○ What goes right in life, from birth to death and at all stops in between Zelenski, 2015-ish ○ Parts of psych that deal with (positive) experiences, dispositions, contexts, and processes, in individuals and groups, that facilitate well-being, achievement, and harmony How do we know that something is positive? ● Many refer to Diener & Suh (1997): ‘Quality of Life’ Indicators ○ 3 Criteria for Positivity ○ Choice ■ Is one option consistently selected? ■ Indicates a preference, what is positive ○ ○ ○ ■ Compare to ‘revealed preference’ in economics Values ■ Can be based on: religion, law, logic, etc. ■ Psychologists list (s): not the purview of science to decide Subjective Experience ■ If it feels good, it is positive ● Pleasure, emotions, evaluation ■ Positivity is in mind of ‘experiencer’ ■ May or may not be ‘meaningful’ These do not always agree Positive Psychology in Context ● Obvious overlap w/ other areas ○ Consider pre-reqs, others too ● Especially humanistic psychology ○ Positive human nature, well-being ● Especially health psych ○ Prevention, beyond absence of illness Positive Psychology as a SCIENCE ● Helps distinguish PP from humanistic ○ Quantitative vs qualitative (indv.) ● Science and practice often has some tension ● Helps distinguish from other advice + self help ○ Scientific method as our way of knowing ● Scepticism is good; cynicism goes too far Summary ● Positive psych movement has been valuable in rebalancing psych's preoccupation with dysfunction ● The area of positive psychology continues to grow and gain recognition ● The focus scientific method is key feature ● As positive psych matures, it has become more balanced itself and has started to integrate the potential dark sides of certain positive phenomena Week 2 Lecture 2 Research Methods Correlational Approach ● Used to find associations between 2 things (or more w/ fancier statistics) ● Assess thing ‘as they are’, so more naturalistic ○ No experimental manipulation Correlation ● Correlation coefficient ( r ) indicates size and direction ○ 1. The directions of the relationship ○ ○ 2. Strength of the relationship ○ Correlation Visualizer ● ● The Correlational Approach ● Directionality problem ○ Does one variable cause the other? Which way? ○ Timing sometimes helps (longitudinal, ESM, historical record) ● The Third Variable Problem ○ Other, unknown things that may account for correlation when no causal link actually exists Experimental Approach ● The experimental manipulation ○ Independent variable ● Random assignment to conditions ○ Balances out individual differences (w/ enough participants) ● Confident causal direction (cf. correlations) ● Assess dependent variable scores across conditions (independent variable) ● (Condition) Differences Visualizer ○ ● ● Independent-groups & within-groups designs Limitations ○ Often artificial; the manipulation changes things ■ Generalizable results? ○ ‘Confounds’ like the third variable problem ■ Has study manipulated (only) what was intended? ■ Clear manipulations difficult for psychological variables Credibility Revolution Replication: a brief history ● 2011 ○ Some high-profile fraud (e.g., Stapel) ■ How undetected for so long? ○ Multi-stuy paper on ESP in top journal (Bem) Researcher Incentives ● Pressure/rewards for publication (bias) ○ More is better ○ new/novel is better ○ Null results not welcome ○ Replications seen as ‘boring’ ● Jobs, funding, status at stake Research Cycle ● ● ● ● Idea/Hypothesis ○ Biased literature ■ Confirmation bias ○ Wasted resources ■ File drawer problem Research Design/Data Collection ○ Low statistical power ○ Poor design Data analysis ○ P-hacking ○ Outliers ○ Control variables ○ Collect more data un props under .05 Data Inference/Reporting ○ Transparency ■ Decision tree ■ Methods: enough info for reproducibility ○ HARKing ○ ○ ■ Hypothesizing after you already for reproducibility ■ Confirmatory vs exploratory Strong conclusions ■ Generalizability ■ Making larger claims that you should Publication ■ Publication bias/file drawer Questionable Research Practices ● Multiple (unreported) dependent variables ● Adding statistical controls (depending on p) ● Adding participants (depending on p) ● Dropping experimental conditions ● Simulations say doing all of these can create false positive results ( P < .05) 60% of the time ● Small samples make false positives more likely Open Science ● To make scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to everyone ● Advantages ○ Enhances research quality ○ Transparency ○ Reusability of data ○ Efficiency in collaboration ○ Increase citations ○ Public availability ○ Speeds up science ● Disadvantages ○ Time investment ○ Scary Open Science: Ways forward (solutions) ● More cautious view of published findings ● Test potential moderators in new studies ○ I.e., discover what result ‘depends on’ ● More open science practices ○ Make materials, procedures, data available ○ Pre-registers study & analysis plans Open Science Badges ● Open Data ○ Criteria ■ Publicly available data ■ ■ ○ Advantages ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ● ○ ● Quality control Meta-analyses Future collaborations Good data documentation Code: no re-inventing the wheel ○ Sensitive personal data ○ Not openly accessible, but description on how to obtain data Pre-Registration ○ Specifying your research plan BEFORE knowing research outcome ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ● A data dictionary Only need to include the variables tested in the paper Hypothesis/Research Questions Design (e.g., sample size justification, experiment conditions, measures) Data cleaning plan (e.g., removing outliers) Data analysis (e.g., to test your hyp or RQ) Submitted a public registry Time stamped Read only: never edited, deleted, or withdrawn Does not stifle exploration ○ Replication ○ Direct/Exact ■ As close as possible ■ Do the same procedures produce the same result? ○ Conceptual ■ Some strategic changes to method ■ Is the underlying idea supported w/ new procedures? ○ What is a non-replication? ■ Original result was fraudulent (infrequent) ■ Original result due to chance (p < 0.05) ■ Original result inflated, (partly) due to questionable practices ■ Mistake or bias in replication attempt ■ Different context, culture, psychological situation, or other boundary condition Open Materials ○ Criteria ■ Digitally-sharable materials that are publicly available ■ Materials that can not be shared digitally are well described ■ “Sufficient explanation for an independent researcher to understand how the materials related to the reported methodology” ○ Advantages ■ Replication !! ■ Understanding methods of academic articles ■ No need to reinvent the wheel ● Programming stroop task Open Code/Syntax ● Data analysis coe publicly available ● Advantages ○ Can I replicate your results from your dataset and your code? ○ Not reinventing the wheel ■ Reduce duplicate efforts ■ Citations ○ Enables other to scrutinize an validate your work ● Disadvantages ○ Time ■ Comments, clearly labelled ■ Understandable Pre-Prints ● Academic manuscript that precede formal peer review and publication ● Advantages ○ Informal peer review ○ Credit ○ visibility/citations ● Disadvantages ○ Journal you plan to submit to doesn’t allow pre-prints ○ Time ○ Negative comments ○ Idea scooping Chapter 1 Key Concepts: Distinguishing Positive Psychology: Positive psychology focuses on strengths, well-being, and empirical research. It differentiates from popular psychology by relying on scientific evidence. Scientific Nature of Positive Psychology: Positive psychology emphasizes the use of the scientific method. Empirical research helps distinguish evidence-based findings from pseudoscience. Progress in Positive Psychology: Positive psychology has debunked some popular claims through empirical research. Acknowledges ongoing debates and the need for further research. Methodological Approaches: Positive psychology utilizes both correlational and experimental approaches. The correlational approach examines associations, while experiments test causal relationships. Correlational Approach: Focuses on associations between variables but does not imply causation. Addresses the directionality problem and effect size in correlation coefficients. Interpreting Correlation Coefficients: Correlation coefficients range from -1.0 to +1.0. The strength and direction of the correlation inform about the association's significance. Experimental Approach: Involves manipulating independent variables and observing their effects. Random assignment helps control for confounding variables. Strengths and Limitations of Experimental Studies: Strengths include establishing causality through manipulation and control. Limitations include potential artificiality and confounds. Evolution of Positive Psychology: Positive psychology balanced the focus on dysfunction in psychology. It continues to evolve, integrating nuance and addressing potential downsides. Critical Examination of Core Ideas: The text critically explores positive psychology's foundational concepts. It goes beyond endorsing original messages, incorporating diverse perspectives. Exam Preparation: Correlational Approach: Understand the nature of correlational studies. Be aware of the directionality problem and effect size interpretation. Experimental Approach: Comprehend the principles of experimental design, random assignment, and manipulation. Recognize the strengths and limitations of experimental studies. Interpretation of Correlation Coefficients: Know the range of correlation coefficients and their implications. Understand the significance of effect size in correlations. Positive Psychology Principles: Emphasize the scientific nature of positive psychology. Recognize the ongoing debates within positive psychology. Critical Thinking: Develop a critical stance when evaluating psychological studies. Consider potential biases and limitations in research findings. Evolution of Positive Psychology: Summarize the historical context and purpose of positive psychology. Appreciate the ongoing relevance and growth of the field. Week 3 + Chapter 2 Sept 25 - Lecture 3 Attendance - Starling Positive Emotions are Common ● Notion of ‘positivity offset’ ○ Yet, ‘bad is stronger’ in some ways ○ Positive emotions have received less attention, historically ● Positive emotions have received less attention, historically ○ E.g., ekman’s ‘basic emotions’ based on facial expressions What is an emotion? ● Contrasting is an emotion w/ ○ Sensations or bodily pleasure ■ Lacking appraisal; moe about physical stimuli ● Moods ○ Lacking ‘aboutness’ ; different timeframe ○ But this can get blurry in research ● Contrasting emotions w/ ○ Dispositions ■ Timeframe, even more so ■ Yet, can be conceptually linked to emotion states ○ “Affect” A more general term; can include all ● Multiple, loosely coupled components: ○ Appraisal (cognition) ○ Physiological change (body & brain) ○ Expression (facial, posture, etc.) ○ Subjective experience ○ Action tendency (motivation shifts) ● Functional, evolutionary perspective prominent ○ ‘Positive’ as pleasant, yet ‘negative’ still useful ● Two broad approaches: ○ Basic emotions view (s) ■ Distinct things: clear anf relatively strict criteria ■ Omits some ‘affect’ ○ Dimensional view (s) ■ More about organising affect (feelings) based on similarity ■ Few clear divisions Basic Emotions View (s) ● Distinct facial expression, appraisals, physiology, etc. ● Universality, cross-culture (& even species) ● Clear lists, e.g., joy, sadness, fear, anger, disgust… ● Perhaps ‘natural kinds’ ● ● ● ● E.g., inside out Much longer lists of emotion-related words Often statistically based More general ‘causes’ ○ Approach & avoidance; pleasantness & activation ■ E.g., affect circumplex Expanding list of Positive Emotions ● joy ● Love ● Pride ● Contentment ● Interest ● Amusement ● Awe ● Gratitude ● Inspiration, elevation What is an emotion? ● The components ○ Appraisal ○ Physiological change ○ Expression ○ Subjective experience ○ Action tendency Appraisal ● Cognitive component ● Quick assessment ○ Good or bad for me? ○ Can I cope? ○ Who/what is responsible? ● Can explain individual differences in experience ● Provides ‘core themes’ for distinguishing emotions Physiological Change ● Peripheral autonomic nervous system ○ Often assessed w/ polygraph ○ E.g., electrodermal activity, heart rate, breathing rate. ● Cf. James-Lange Theory ○ Do we experience emotions based on perceived bodily arousal? ○ Distinct signatures are elusive ● Brain ○ Eeg and hemispheric asymmetry ■ Left and approach, right and avoidance ■ fMRI & PET correlates ● Typically assessing blood flow to infer activity ■ Distinct signatures are elusive ● I.e., not a clear ‘joy’ region or ‘anger’ region Wanting vs. Liking in the Brain ● Dopamine: ○ Wanting, motivation ● Opioids & Cannabinoids: ○ Liking, enjoyment Expressions ● Face ● Posture ● Sounds & vocalisations ● Touch Facial Feedback ● Facial expression affect emotional experience ● Pen in mouth methods ● Facial mimicry Subjective Experience ● Typically relies on self-reports ○ Phenomenological experience is key ○ E.g., adjectives as in “try it” text box ● Which emotion terms to choose? ○ Theory (e.g., of basic emotions) ○ Subjective similarity (e.g., circumplex) ■ Summarising longer lists of affect terms Time sn Subjective Emotional Experience ● ‘Online’ experience vs. recalled experience ○ Or, the experiencing self vs. remembering self ○ Colonoscopy ○ The ‘James Dean Effect’ scenarios ○ Spring Break Trips ● Peak & end emphasised ● Duration neglect Spring Break Study Results ● Predictions and recall ‘better’ than experience ○ But consider the same NA pattern too… ● Remembered affect most related to future choice Action Tendencies ● Motivation to do… Seems to work better for unpleasant emotions ● ○ E.g., disgust prompts spitting out, avoidance Motivates the broaden & build theory ○ What are positive emotions good for? Broaden & Build Theory ● Whereas action tendencies of unpleasant emotions narrow focus… ● …positive emotions broaden focus ● This then builds resources for the future ● Early examples ○ Joy (play, creativity) ○ Interest (exploration, new info) ○ Contentment (savouring, applying to future) ○ Love (focuses on other) ● With more research, other positive emotions explored Global vs Local Processing Study ● Which of the bottom two images is more like the top image? ○ Small details vs. overall pattern Building: Suggestive Evidence ● Occurs over time ○ Often correlational ○ Many correlations between positive emotions and skills, social bonds, etc. ● Loving kindness meditation experiment ○ (Fredickdon, et al., 2008) ○ Uses LKM to increase positive emotions (vs control) ○ Find some ‘resources’ increase too (vs control) Building: Positive Emotions & Social Bonds ● New university roommates over time ○ Pre, post, and daily positive emotions ○ Assess closeness, over time ○ Positive emotions predict closer relationships ● Lab studies at Carleton ○ Brief emotion inductions w/ film clips ○ More desire to socialise w/ positive (vs. neutral negative) Broad and Build Theory ● In sum, pleasant emotions often broaden attention ‘in the moment’ ○ In contrast to unpleasant emotions that tend to narrow ○ However, specific positive emotions might direct towards particular themes, or even narrow (e.g., desire) ● Positive emotions seem to build resources over time Chapter 2 - Positive Emotions Note 1: Rats and Pleasure Research Insights from Rat Studies: Rats exhibit pleasure-like behaviors, including playing and producing ultrasonic laughs. Ultrasonic trills at 50 kHz in rats are associated with pleasure, observed in various rewarding situations. Researchers elicited trills through tickling, suggesting pleasurable experiences. Neuroscience of Pleasure in Rats: Dopamine is traditionally associated with pleasure but doesn't exclusively determine it. Pleasure is more linked to opioids and cannabinoids in the brain. Distinction between "wanting" and "liking" in the brain; dopamine affects the former, while opioids and cannabinoids affect the latter. Human Connection: Understanding rat pleasure circuits may shed light on human pleasures. Evolutionarily ancient pleasure circuits in rats may relate to complex human pleasures. Note 2: Subjective Experience Evolutionary Perspective: Emotion research often considers evolutionary aspects. Animals, like rats, express emotions without verbal communication, making study methods challenging. Human and Animal Emotion Comparisons: Non-human animals, like pets, express emotions akin to humans. Infants and animals share similarities in expressing pleasure through observable behaviors. Rat "Laughter" and Pleasure: Rats produce distinctive trill vocalizations associated with pleasure. Pleasurable experiences, including tickling, result in similar trill responses. Neuroscience of Pleasure in Rats: Pleasure is not solely dependent on dopamine; opioids and cannabinoids play significant roles. Dopamine influences motivation ("wanting") but doesn't exclusively define pleasure ("liking"). Note 3: Memory and Reports of Experience Subjective Experience Measurement: Subjective experience is crucial in emotion research. Self-reports are commonly used, but context and individual characteristics can affect accuracy. Self-Reports and Rating Scales: Rating scales quantify subjective experiences, allowing for quantitative comparisons. The PANAS questionnaire is an example of a self-report measure for positive and negative affect. Dimensional Approach to Affect: Statistical approaches help reduce emotion words and define a conceptual space (circumplex) for emotions. Two-dimensional models, like pleasantness-unpleasantness and arousal, provide a framework for understanding emotions. Note 4: Memory and Reports of Experience Challenges in Recalling Emotions: Time affects the accuracy of recalling emotions; memories fade over time. Mental averages of emotions over time rely on general beliefs more than specific episodic memories. Memory Biases: Distant memories are prone to biases, conforming to stereotypes. Recent memories are susceptible to distortions, influenced by peak moments and how experiences end. Distinguishing Experiencing Self and Remembering Self: The experiencing self feels emotions in the moment, while the remembering self constructs self-reports of past experiences. Memories are constructed from available information and include more general beliefs over time. Note 5: Savouring Positive Experience Savouring Positive Experiences: Savouring enhances positive experiences. Techniques include sharpening perception, taking mental souvenirs, planning, immersion, and sharing. Action Tendencies: Action tendencies represent the motivational aspect of emotions. Positive emotions prompt action tendencies that broaden and build resources over time. Note 6: Broaden and Build Model Cognitive Processes and Broadening: Positive emotions, according to the broaden-and-build model, enhance cognitive processes, such as attention, leading to momentary broadening. Creativity and Social Bonds: Positive emotions improve creativity and promote social bonds. Participants induced with positive emotions report a desire for more social activities. Building Resources Over Time: Experimental studies show positive emotions can build resources over time. Longitudinal correlations indicate positive emotions precede the development of coping skills, relationships, resilience, work performance, and physical health. Note 7: Limitations of Broaden and Build Model Differentiation Among Positive Emotions: Different positive emotions may have distinct effects; joy may facilitate physical learning, while gratitude may drive social bonds. Contradictory Effects of Approach Motivation: Positive states associated with approach motivation may narrow attention, focusing on specific rewards, contradicting the broadening hypothesis. Exceptions and Nuances: Broaden-and-build is a useful rule of thumb, but there are exceptions. Positive emotions may not universally broaden; some may have specific and narrowing effects. Week 4 and 6 - Chapter 3 Week 4 Lecture Oct 2 - Lecture 4 Attendance - Red Tailed Hawk Happiness Basics Happiness: ● State vs. ‘trait’ ○ Momentary emotions vs. features of person ● Subjective well-being ○ Positive affect ○ Negative affect ○ Life satisfaction (overall vs. domains) The Affect Circumplex How much have you experienced these feelings in the last week? ● Positive ○ 1. Positive ○ 2. Good ○ 3. Pleasant ○ 4. Happy ● ○ 5. Joyful ○ 6. Contented Negative ○ 7. Negative ○ 8. Bad ○ 9. Unpleasant ○ 10. Sad ○ 11. Afraid ○ 12. Angry Cantril Ladder (Cantril, 1965) Life Satisfaction -Domains ● Job satisfaction ● School/Education Satisfaction ● Relationship Satisfaction ● Body Satisfaction ● Leisure-Time Satisfaction Subjective Well-Being ● Positive Affect ● Negative Affect ● Life Satisfaction Assessing Subjective Well-Being ● Typically self-reports, for a good reason ● Can we trust these? ○ Willingness and ability (in general) ○ Possible order effects ○ Possible mood effects ● Corroborate by other methods ○ E.g., peer reports, memory tasks, physiological indicators, etc. Towards Eudaimonia ● SWB often described as the ‘hedonic approach’ ○ About positivity ○ Many view this as insufficient ● Consensus that psychological health is broader ● BUT, much less consensus on what eudaimonia is, exactly Aristotle’s Eudaimonia ● Living up to true potential ○ Based on virtue & efforts ○ Includes society’s values ● ‘Objective’ good life ○ E.g., assessed by others at end ○ Skepticism about subjective experience ● Sometimes only loosely related to modern approaches ○ Especially RE subjective experience Ryff’s Psychological Well-being ● Six scales: ○ Self acceptance ○ Purpose in life ○ Environmental mastery ○ Positive relationships with others ○ Autonomy ○ Personal growth Huta’s Motives (HEMA) ● Hedonia, seeking… ○ Good feelings: relaxation, pleasure, enjoyment, fun ● Eudaimonia, seeking to… ○ Develop a skill, learn, or gain insight into something ○ Do what you believe in ○ Pursue excellence or a personal ideal ○ Use the best in yourself Hedonia vs. Eudaimonia ● Thought experiment #1: ○ Happiness Machine (Nozick) ○ People value things beyond feeling good ● Thought Experiment #2 ○ Authenticity MAchine (Zelenski) ○ Feeling good is better than feeling bad ● Satisfied and unsatisfied pigs and humans (Mill) ● Why not both? ○ Research suggests less tensions than philosophers ● Hedonia vs. ‘Hedonistic Stereotype” ○ Pleasure is not inconsistent with eudaimonia ○ Hedonia is not necessarily short-term ● Correlations high among constructs ○ Though possible to distinguish ● Causes and consequences ○ Positive affect and meaning, authenticity ● ○ Pro-social sources of pleasure ○ ‘Happiness’ vs. its causes & consequences ○ There are distinctions, but also links Importance if using more specific terms for indicators Who is Happy? ● Most people ○ Especially in Canada ○ Example of ‘locked in’ patients ● Yet, substantial variation ○ Especially across nations Predicting SWB: Genetics ● Substantial heritability ○ 40-50% ○ Plenty of room for change ■ Cf., height (and other happiness research) Understanding Heritability Estimates ● Many individual genes ○ And poorly understood ● Only applies to groups (not individuals) ● The estimates vary (for good reasons) ○ Tradeoff between genes and environment ○ E.g., single nation vs. multi-nation study Basics of SWB ● Relatively stable over time ● Moderate associations with personality ○ Broader aspects of well-being ■ Authenticity, meaning, self-acceptance, etc. ○ Hundreds of other characteristics ○ The ‘Big Five’ model as a summary ● Smaller associations with demographics ○ Gender, age, intelligence, education, physical health, marriage, parenting, (more on religion & money coming) ○ Collectively, 10 - 15% of variation within nations Big Five-Factor Personality Model ● C: Conscientiousness ● A: Agreeableness ● N: Neuroticism ● O: Openness ● E: Extraversion ○ Big means Broad Very Happy People Study ● ● ● Goal: describe VHPs; necessary or sufficient factor? Methods ○ Extensive SWB measurements to find top 10% ○ COmpare happiness to others (low and medium) with ■ Personality measures ■ Social life measures ■ Other lifestyle measures & activities Results ○ Personality ■ E, N, A: MMPI pathology ○ Daily emotions: full range of all ○ No major effects of circumstances/activites ○ Social relationships ■ Friend, family, romantic; peer rating; time use ■ These seem necessary, but not sufficient ○ All with caveat of study limitations Beyond Dispositions ● SWB is not all ‘fixed’ dispositions ○ Cross national differences are large ○ Major life events matters ○ Goals and efforts matter ■ “Well-doing” vs. “well-being” ■ Working on intrinsically value projects Happiness Benefits and Adaptation Is it good to be happy? ● ● Consider (some) demographics and causal direction ○ Marriage, health, income Other correlates ○ Productivity, pro-social behaviours, creativity, delay of gratification ○ State and trait suggestions here Is it possible to be too happy? ● ● Mood/emotions states ○ Some tasks and poor momentary Long-term longitudinal ○ Social bonds vs productivity Does happiness change? ● Consider substantial role of personality ● Consider rank order stability over time ● But what about major life events? Notion of adaptation ○ E.g., salt on food Adaptation or ‘Hedonic Treadmill” ● Lotto winners, controls, accident victims ○ Brickman, Coates & Janoff-Bulman (1978) ○ Not a large sample (22, 58, 29), but huge impact ○ Rated past, present and future happiness ○ Rated pleasure from everyday activities ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Study might contradict intuitions YEt, results often overstated ■ Spinal cord injury is not easy Issues around remembered and predicted happiness People seem to adapt to even major events Modern View of Adaptation ● ‘Set points’ that are not neutral (above midpoint) ● SWB responds to big events, and there is adaptation ○ Yet, can take years, on average ● Substantial individual differences in trajectories ● Probably multiple set points ○ PA, NA, SWLS, stability & trajectory differences ● Individual differences in SWB set points Did COVID change well-being? ● ● ● Aknin et al. (2021) review Approach: ○ Pre-post representative surveys (e.g., Gallup polls) ○ Longitudinal (i.e., same people over time) ○ Satisfaction, anxiety, depression, suicide Trends: ○ SOme higher distress, at first (spring 2020) ○ Resilience of many (recall coping) ○ Yet difficulty for ill, poor, some parents Additional COnsideration ● Cross-national happiness differences ● Intentional change ○ Happiness exercises, therapy Oct 16 - Lecture 5 (Week 6) Attendance - Missed Happiness Across Nations Money and Happiness ● Must keep in mind considerable complexity ● Within the nation vs. Between nation ● COmponents of subjective well-being ○ Positive affect, negative affect, satisfaction ● What gets done with money is also important ● MOney has diminishing returns ○ Log, rather than linear positive relationship ● Money more strongly linked to satisfaction than emotions GWP (Gallup World Poll): Money & Happiness ● Representative sample of >95% world population ● Survey approach ● SWB ○ PA, NA, ‘ladder’ satisfaction ○ Social resources (respect, using skills, learning) GWP Major Money Findings ● Money predicts SWB, more for satisfaction ○ Increasing standard of living with higher satisfaction ● Feelings more impacted predicts above individual income ○ Its nice to live in a richs society ● Rising incomes over time seem to increase SWB Money & Happiness ● Generally, money has benefits ○ What nations do with it seems important ○ Policy implications for nations ○ Implications for individual choices ● Consider materialism ○ Negative association with SWB Experimental Approach ● Randomly assign participants to receive $10, 000 ○ Brazil, Indonesia, KEnya, Australia, Canada, USA, UK ○ Spend in 3 months, monthly measures of SWB ● Results: ○ PA, NA, Satisfaction increase (exp group), 6 months ○ Gains larger for people/nations with less money (to ~$123k) ● Would redistribution of wealth improve SWB? ● Prosocial Spending ● Spending money on others boosts happiness ● Initial study in Science (Dunn et al., 2008) ● More Research on Prosocial spending ● Correlations observed in much of the world ● Experiments: India, Uganda, South Africa, Canada ● More recent, large-sample replications of experiments (mostly western nations here) Why does Prosocial Spending work? ● Self determination Theory as guide to when spending on others boosts moods ○ Relatedness (close vs. distant others) ○ Competence (specific impact) ○ Autonomy (choice) Religion & SWB: Previous Research ● Particular religion not important to SWB ○ Though could consider specific teachings empirically ● Participation has been associated with SWB Diener et al. Religion Paradox Article ● Is religion actually associated with SWB? ○ consider atheist critics, counter arguments ● • When/where are the benefits of religion greater? ● Why are many in developed nations leaving religion? ● Perhaps religion helps SWB more in difficult circumstances? ● Potential mediators: respect, support, meaning ● Different forms of SWB ○ PA, NA, satisfaction (again) ● Different religious traditions/regions ● ● U.S. as an atypical example? Person-society fit? ○ cf. self-esteem Diener et al. Religion Paradox: Study 1 USA ● Study 1: USA ○ Like the GAllup World Poll, but USA states only ○ Representative samples, nationwide ○ Survey (Self report) methods ■ SWB (Cantril’s ladder, PA and NA) ■ Religious importance ■ Circumstances (basic needs, safety, income, education, state life expectancy) ● Results ○ Religious importance 44% to 88% (states) ○ Difficult circumstances associated with more religion ○ Difficult circumstances associated with lower SWB (as expected), but religion seemed to help ○ Associations stronger at state (vs. individual) level Diener et al. Religion Paradox: Study 2 Gallup World Poll ● Study 2 Method: Gallup World Poll ○ Representative sample of >95% world population ○ Survey approach ○ SWB (PA, NA, Ladder) ○ Religion important? ATtendance? ○ Difficult circumstances ● Results ○ About 78% of world finds religion important daily ○ Much variation across world (99% to 16%) ■ CANADA at 45%; below mean, below USA (66%) ○ About 55% indicated that they had attended worship or religious service within the last week ○ Difficult circumstances associated with more religion ○ Stronger at nation (vs. individual) level ■ National circumstances seem to produce religiosity more than individual circumstances ○ Religiosity predicts lower evaluations ■ E.g., Togo vs. Denmark ○ BUT, this eliminated or reversed when controlling for circumstances ○ Thus, religion seems to be helping with bad circumstances ○ Religion less important in good circumstances Diender et al. Religion Paradox ● Social support, meaning, and respect associated with religion & SWB ● Support, respect, & SWB generally high in good circumstances (regardless) ● Support, respect, & SWB boosted by religion in poor circumstances ● Anomaly: meaning and purpose higher with religion even in good circumstances (but without the SWB ‘gain’ ) ● Person-environment (society) fit supported ○ Religious people happier in religious societies ○ Not much benefit of religion in some societies ● Different religions have similar results ○ (a few minor variations, e.g., in demographic predictors of religiosity, details not essential here) ● Discussion ○ Why the anomaly with purpose & meaning? ○ Issues of causal direction ■ Wealth, circumstances, religion, SWB ○ Other, unmeasured mediators? ○ General strengths & limitations of GWP Purpose/Meaning (Oishi & Diener, 2014) ● Unlike SWB indicators, meaning is higher in poor nations ○ Life satisfaction correlates negatively with meaning across nations ○ This is opposite the ‘within nation’ positive link ● Religion like responsible for high meaning (in poor countries) ● Low education and high fertility may play a role too ● ● Chapter 3 Introduction to Happiness: Definitions: Various terms like happiness, subjective well-being, and eudaimonia describe different facets of the good life. Measurement: Psychologists use subjective well-being to encompass positive life evaluations and emotional balance. 2. Factors Influencing Happiness: Genetic and Personality Influences: Genes, personality traits, and outlook contribute significantly to an individual's baseline happiness. Circumstances: Basic demographic features and life events have a surprisingly small impact on long-term happiness. Societal circumstances, such as meeting material needs and social connections, play a crucial role in well-being. 3. Happiness Around the World: International Comparisons: Living conditions, social cohesion, wealth, political stability, liberty, etc., significantly impact happiness globally. Countries with good living conditions tend to have higher subjective well-being. Gallup World Poll (GWP): Annual survey covering 160 nations, representing about 98% of the world's population. Surveys encompass subjective well-being and correlate with country-level statistics. 4. Comparing Individual Countries: Factors Influencing Well-being: Subjective well-being is influenced by economic and material well-being, health, environmental quality, social quality, and equality. Indicators of quality tend to positively correlate across countries. Instructive Profiles: Examples of individual nations' well-being profiles demonstrate intriguing divergences among different well-being aspects. 5. Changes over Time: GWP Trends: Changes in well-being over time, seen through GWP, reflect societal and economic circumstances. Economic development tends to improve life satisfaction, democracy, social tolerance, and financial satisfaction. 6. Beyond Satisfaction: Meaning and Religion: Meaning in Life: Poorer countries report more meaning than rich countries, possibly influenced by factors like fertility rates and religiosity. Religion is closely tied to meaning and provides some benefit to subjective well-being. 7. A Few Lingering Questions: Self-Report Measures: Self-reports of happiness are generally valid, with small influences from order of questions and context. Decades of corroborating research support the validity of happiness questionnaires. Can We Trust Self-Reports? Philosophical debates exist about whether it is possible to be wrong about one's happiness. Self-reports remain essential for assessing subjective well-being. 8. Is It Good to Be Happy? Associations with Happiness: Happiness is associated with pleasant experiences and correlates with health, success, and prosocial behavior. Happiness is considered morally good, given its positive associations with various life outcomes. Happiness as a Cause and Consequence: Happiness is both a cause and a consequence of success and well-being, supported by longitudinal studies and experimental manipulations. 9. Is It Possible to Be Too Happy? Optimal Levels of Happiness: Extreme levels of happiness may not always be associated with optimal achievement, but maximum happiness appears beneficial for fostering good relationships. Some examples suggest that high-intensity positive emotions may have downsides, and emotions serve functional purposes. 10. Summing Up: Complex Nature of Happiness: Happiness involves a complex interplay of internal and external factors, including genes, personality, circumstances, and individual choices. While certain factors may be challenging to change, individual efforts and choices provide opportunities for enhancing happiness. Potential for Improvement: Optimism about potential improvement in happiness is grounded in the understanding of personal efforts and choices contributing to well-being. Conclusion: Preparation for the final exam should focus on understanding the multifaceted nature of happiness, the influence of various factors, international comparisons, changes over time, and the ongoing debates and research questions in the field of positive psychology. Emphasizing the connections between happiness and individual, societal, and global well-being will contribute to a comprehensive exam preparation.