Journal of Counseling Psychology

1977, Vol. 24, No. 6, 511-521

Development of a Program to Increase Personal Happiness

Michael W. Fordyce
Edison Community College

Three studies were reported in which a self-study program, designed to

increase felt personal happiness and life satisfaction, was developed. The
program was based on the literature of happiness, and it was hypothesized
that normal community college students could become happier if they could
modify their behaviors and attitudes to approximate more closely the
characteristics of happier people. In the first study, two of three pilot
programs produced statistically significant happiness boosts compared to a
placebo control. A single program was then designed that combined the best
aspects of the pilot programs. In the second study, an experimental group
receiving this combined program showed significant boosts in happiness
compared to a placebo control. In the third study, the combined program
was presented to subjects on a take-it-or-leave-it basis-those applying it
showing significant boosts in happiness compared to those who did not. The
studies suggest that the resulting self-study program may be helpful to
individuals wishing to increase the emotional satisfaction they derive from
living.

Personal happiness, as defined in psy- to develop a program that might increase

chological literature, is much broader in
scope than a temporary mood state. It is
an overriding emotional sense of well-
being and serves as a global index of life
satisfaction. Research into the nature of
happiness has developed a substantial
body of knowledge concerning the attri-
butes, personality characteristics, and ob-
jective situations of those individuals who
have achieved high levels of happiness (cf.
Fellows, 1966; Fordyce, 1972; Robinson &
Shaver, 1968; Wessman, 1957; Wessman
& Ricks, 1966; Wilson, 1960, for reviews1),
and new reports are continuously being
published that amplify and solidify the
findings in this area (e.g., Freedman &
Shaver, 1976; Harry, 1976).
There is, however, one very important
area of happiness research that has not
yet received attention—attempts to in-
crease personal happiness. No experimen-
tal work has been conducted to see if it is
possible to boost individuals' overall, long-
term sense of felt happiness and well-
being. The present article reports a series
of three experiments that were designed
Requests for reprints should be sent to Michael
W. Fordyce, Edison Community College, Ft. Myers,
Florida 33901.
511
the happiness levels of normal college stu-
dents. The significance of such study is
manifest: The achievement of happiness
is one of the most important goals of hu-
mankind, and the ability for psychology
to provide counselors, clinicians, mental
health professionals, and the general pub-
lic with information and self-study pro-
grams that could increase everyday hap-
pinesa and satisfaction with life would be
most desirable and beneficial.
The happiness program developed and
reported here was a natural outgrowth of
past research into the nature of happy
people, and the investigator is indebted to
the efforts of those researchers upon whose
collective efforts this research was based.
Previous research has clearly delineated
the characteristics of those individuals
who have already achieved high levels of
happiness, so the question explored in the
present series of studies was to see if
average community college students, es-
pecially unhappy ones, could (a) develop
such characteristics and (b) thereby en-
hance their own happiness.
1
These reviews are only partial; a more thorough
review of happiness research is available from the
author in book form (see Note 1).
512 MICHAEL W. FORDYCE

Study 1 also given information about happiness.

In this case, however, the information was
In the first experiment, the following much more specific than the book given to
three pilot programs were designed by the subjects in the insight program. The infor-
investigator to increase personal happi- mation consisted of instruction in the
ness: the insight program, the fundamen- "nifty nine": nine specific activities that
tals program, and the activities program, they could do on a daily basis to increase
A different program was given to each of their personal happiness. The nine items
three intact classes of community college were based on the investigator's distilla-
students enrolled in personal and social tion of research into the personality and
adjustment psychology classes as part of life-style of happy people, and each item
the course requirements. A fourth adjust- is highly typical of characteristics found
ment class served as a control group, thus in the happiest individuals psychologists
creating a four-condition experiment. Con- have studied. It was hypothesized that the
ditions were assigned randomly to the four subjects might increase their own happi-
available classes that were used intact as ness if they could adopt such attitudes
the basis of analysis to provide unobtru- and life-style patterns. Briefly, the nine
sive experimental manipulation. As is typ- items were: (a) spend more time socializ-
ical of the more "normal" populations ing, (b) develop an outgoing, social person-
found in community colleges, the subjects ality, (c) become more active, (d) lower
(N = 202; 110 females and 92 males) varied expectations and aspirations, (e) develop
greatly in age (M = 23.2 years; range = positive, optimistic thinking, (f) get better
17-50 years), background, and academic organized and plan things out, (g) elimi-
ability. nate negative problems (especially stop
worrying), (h) become more present ori-
Conditions
ented, and (i) value happiness. Subjects
1. The insight program. The insight were instructed in detail on each of the
program was essentially an education in items and given numerous practical steps
happiness. It was based on the investiga- with which to carry out each of the points.
tor's book, Human Happiness: the Find- On each day of the experimental period,
ings of Psychological Research (Fordyce, subjects were required to select at least
Note 1), a complete resource of research three items from the nine to work on.
findings regarding the nature of human 3. The activities program. Subjects
happiness, the experience of happy moods, here received no specific information re-
and the life-style, personality characteris- garding research into happiness. Instead,
tics, and attitudes of happy people. It was this program relied on their own naive
hypothesized that research information understanding of their personal happi-
about the nature of happiness provided in ness. Numerous assignments were given
the book might be used by subjects to help to help the subjects think about their hap-
them increase their own happiness. To piness and the kinds of activities and situ-
test this hypothesis, subjects receiving the ations that consistently brought them sat-
insight program were required to read isfaction and enjoyment. Data from these
selected chapters from Human Happiness assignments were gathered by each sub-
and take notes on information in the book ject and used to develop an individualized
that they themselves might adopt in their list of some 10 or more activities that (a)
own daily living. Subjects then developed usually made them happy, (b) they could
an individualized list of activities and do almost any day, and (c) they normally
habits typical of happy people that they did not take the time to do. Subjects were
would attempt to employ on a daily basis. then instructed to select and perform at
During each day of the experiment, the least three activities from their list on
subjects were required to do any three each day of the experimental period. This
things from their list. program was also founded on past research
2. The fundamentals program. Subjects with happy people, who characteristically
receiving the fundamentals program were spend more time in activities they enjoy.
 INCREASING HAPPINESS 513

It was hypothesized that subjects could when persons realize they are "subjects of
increase their own happiness by spending an experiment" (cf. Campbell & Stanley,
more time than normal in enjoyable activ- 1963).
ities. All four adjustment classes were taught
Control: The suggestion group. The by the present investigator, and other
use of a standard control group (i.e., one than the few days devoted to instruction
receiving no treatment) was not deemed in the happiness programs, the activities
adequate, for the nature of the experiment in all classes were the same. After the
necessitated a control for suggestion ef- instruction period, the subjects were re-
fects. Because the experimental subjects quired to apply their particular program
knew that their particular happiness pro- on a daily basis for a period of 2 weeks,
gram "might make them happier," it was keeping nightly records each evening be-
likely that they would develop expecta- fore retiring on (a) what items they had
tions of increased happiness, and though tried, (b) how successful they felt they
the subjects were instructed that "neither had been on the items, and (c) any notice-
success nor failure should be expected, able effects the program was generating.
because the program(s) had not been tried The 2-week experimental period was se-
before," the suggestion of greater happi- lected in this pilot study because of the
ness implicit in their assignments might rigorous nature of the programs: They
create significant outcomes as a result of required an increased activity load and
suggestion alone. the necessity of daily participation, evalu-
To control for this effect, subjects in the
ation, and rating, and it was felt that a
suggestion class, though receiving no hap- shorter period of time would provide the
piness program, were specifically told on best opportunity for full cooperation of the
several occasions that their participation subjects and produce fewer program drop-
in (placebo) course activities "would help outs. However, at the end of the required
them become much happier people." Thus, 2 weeks, subjects were encouraged to con-
they too were given an equally high, if tinue applying the programs for the re-
not higher, anticipation of reaching mainder of the semester, though partici-
greater happiness. pation was not required. Two months
later, it was discovered that 50 of the
Procedure and Analysis original subjects had, on their own, contin-
ued with their program, providing data
The use of intact adjustment psychology on long-term effects of the experiment.
classes provided an optimal environment
for experimentation with the happiness Analysis
programs that might not have been af-
forded in other situations. Because the The intact-group design involved pre-
adjustment classes normally include many testing of subject happiness levels (for use
required exercises, take-home assign- in covariate analysis) to control for initial
ments, and personality tests that are de- class differences. However, pretesting can
signed to help students better understand systematically bias posttest responses and
themselves and the psychology of adjust- invalidate the analysis of covariance. Thus
ment, the classes provided a medium in a Solomon four-group design was used to
which the experimental happiness pro- check for this bias. In each class, a ran-
grams and criterion testing could be intro- domly selected half of the subjects were
duced unobtrusively. Thus, the subjects' pretested for their happiness; at the end of
perceived the programs and testing ses- the experiment all subjects were post-
sions as simply part of the normal and tested. The resulting data, analyzed in a 2
expected class activities; indeed, until the x 2 factorial analysis of variance, would
end of the semester, the students were show if such presensitization bias had oc-
unaware that an experiment was taking curred and thus determine if the data
place. The design therefore helped control could be used in a valid analysis of covari-
for reactive arrangements that can occur ance (cf. Campbell & Stanley, 1963).
514 MICHAEL W. FORDYCE
Happiness Measurement
Happiness measurement has not reached
standardization, and researchers in the
past have developed numerous scale and
questionnaire procedures to provide hap-
piness criteria. The measurement of hap-
piness in the present study was an instru-
ment of the investigator's own construc-
tion, based on the best validated procedure
used in the past (that of Wessman &
Ricks, 1966). Called the happiness mea-
sures, the procedure consists of an 11-point
happiness scale (with descriptive phrases
at each of the points) measuring the sub-
ject's perceived quality of his general hap-
piness, along with the subject's estimate
of the percentage of time generally spent
in happy, unhappy, and neutral moods (a
quantitative measure of happiness). The
scale score, the happy and unhappy per-
centage estimates, and a combination
score (combining the scale score and the
happy percentage estimate in equal
weights) were used as criteria.
It has been my aim to develop and refine
the happiness measures to produce a stan-
dard measure of achieved personal happi-
ness. To date, the happiness measures
have been administered over 1,500 times
in a number of studies and findings show
(a) good test-retest reliability (e.g., for
the combination score: .86 over a 2-week
interval; .67 over a 4-month interval, p <
.01); (b) significant validity coefficients
with measures of personality characteris-
tics, long associated with happiness, con-
tained in some 15 popularly used invento-
ries; (c) nonsignificant correlations with
measures of "social desirability" bias (the
validity scale of the Minnesota Counseling
Inventory, the Response Bias scale of the
Comrey Personality Scales, and the Lie
scale of the Eysenck Personality Question-
naire); and most importantly, (d) signifi-
cant validity coefficients with measures of
mood like the Depression Adjective Check
List, the Profile of Mood States, and the
Multiple Adjective Affective Check List
and with emotional morale subscales of
the Comrey Personality Scales, the Min-
nesota Counseling Inventory, and the 16
Factor Personality Questionnaire. A full
report on the happiness measures and
their characteristics is available (Fordyce,
Note 2). Compared to alternatives, they
appear to be the best validated, most thor-
oughly tested measures of happiness and
thus were selected as the criterion for this
study.
Results
Computer analysis of the data showed
that the happiness programs significantly
increased the measured happiness levels
of the subjects.
Two-week period. A 2 x 2 analysis of
variance comparing experimental versus
control subjects and pretested versus non-
pretested subjects was done for each of the
happiness measures. The results were sig-
nificant in all analyses concerning treat-
ment effects. The analyses were nonsignif-
icant for presensitization effects, indicat-
ing that pretesting with the happiness
measures had no systematic biasing effect
on posttest responses; thus, analyses of
covariance were conducted with the data
from subjects who had received both pre-
and posttesting (n = 95). Again, the re-
sults showed significant differences be-
tween groups on each of the happiness
measures. A priori analysis was then con-
ducted among the adjusted treatment
means to determine the relative effective-
ness of each experimental program to the
control group (see Table 1 for F ratios and
Table 2 for a comparison of means and
standard deviations). Comparisons among
the individual treatment means was also
conducted using the unadjusted data from
all subjects (N = 202); however, these
results (also shown in Tables 1 and 2)
were only suggestive because we must
assume an initial equality of happiness
levels among the groups. (There were
grounds for such an assumption because a
randomly selected half of each group were
pretested and the means of those random
subsamples did not differ appreciably, the
control group showing the higher initial
level.)
Both sets of data showed similar results.
Compared to the control group, the funda-
mentals program and the activities pro-
gram showed significant increases on most
happiness measures criterion scores. The
 INCREASING HAPPINESS 515

Table 1
Pastiest Mean Comparisons (F Ratios) on Happiness Measures Between the Treatment Groups
and the Control
Happiness measure
Treatment group
Combination Scale Happy % Unhappy %
Poattest comparisons from the analysis of covariance (n = 95)"
Insight program .88 4.83* .20 4.88*
Fundamentals program 7.01** 9.46** 4.65* 2.80
Activities program 9.91** 14.52** 6.72* 5.62*
Posttest comparisons from the analysis of variance (all Ss; N = 202)"
Insight program 2.61 6.92** 1.15 4.12*
Fundamentals program 11.76** 13.74** 9.68** 8.68**
Activities program 12.96** 18.00** 9.31** 9.94**
- df = 1/91.
> df = 1/198.
*p < .05.
**p < .01.

statistics on the insight program were not subjects who had not experienced a boost
significant in every case, though a review in happiness did not negate the programs'
of the means showed happiness differences potential, since most failures were (a) sub-
in the predicted direction on all scores. jects who had simply not done their re-
Subjective evaluation of program suc^ quired assignments (and thus in effect had
cess made by the subjects in debriefing not been treated); (b) subjects who had
sessions supported the statistical data. initially been very happy and thus little
Sixty-four percent of students in the in- improvement was possible (these subjects
sight condition, 73% in the fundamentals in fact reported, as past research on happy
condition, and 52% in the activities condi- people would predict, that they already
tion felt that the programs had noticeably did what the programs suggested); and (c)
improved their happiness. Of the subjects subjects who had coincidentally experi-
who felt they were originally unhappy enced unusually bad situations and events
people, over 90% in the activities and during the test weeks that counteracted
fundamentals programs and 40% in the any possible gains. Thus, only a few of
insight program felt their attempts had the subjects felt the programs had failed
been successful. None of the subjects felt to work for them, and many of these felt
the programs had been counterproductive that the cause was a bad selection of
or detrimental in any way. Reports from things with which to work (this was most
Table 2
Posttest Means and Standard Deviations on Happiness Measures for Experimental
and Control Groups
Happiness measure
Groups Combination Scale Happy % Unhappy %
M SO M SD M SD M SD
Adjusted data from the analysis of covariance (re = 95)
Insight program (n = 26) 63.4 17.0 7.18 1.44 55. 8 21.8 15. 2 10.7
Fundamentals program (n = 16) 72.4 10.8 7.73 .96 66. 7 16 .3 16. 3 13.9
Activities program (n - 26) 72.9 10.2 7.85 .80 67. 4 16 .3 14. 5 11.2
Control group (re = 27) 59.3 24.4 6.27 2.37 53. 3 28 .2 24. 2 23.8
Unadjusted data from the analysis of variance (all Ss; N = 202)
Insight program (n = 48) 65.6 16,6 7.30 1.44 58. 3 21.5 17. 3 12.2
Fundamentals program (n = 44) 71.9 10.8 7.66 1.03 67. 2 14 .6 14. 2 11.4
Activities program (n = 50) 72.1 12.4 7.78 .97 66. 5 18 .9 14. 2 10.8
Control group (re = 60) 60.2 23.7 6.49 2.26 53. 7 27 .6 23. 2 21.8
516 MICHAEL W. FORDYCE
true of subjects in the insight and activi-
ties programs, which relied primarily on
the subjects' developing their own pro-
gram).
Two months. At the end of 2 months,
the 50 subjects who had, on their own
initiative, continued with their program
were again tested with the happiness mea-
sures and debriefed. Because continued,
long-term work with the programs had
not been anticipated in the initial plan-
ning of the experiment and because so few
of the continuing subjects had received
pretesting, the resulting data could only
receive informal analysis.
Subjective reactions of the subjects in
debriefing were encouraging. The subjects
were unanimously positive about the felt
effects it had on their happiness. Further-
more, instead of merely maintaining the
happiness they had achieved during the
first 2 weeks, the subjects felt that contin-
ued application of their programs had pro-
duced even greater gains in happiness.
The subjects also felt that they had, by
the end of 2 months' application, more or
less incorporated the programs into their
personality, and they were highly optimis-
tic about maintaining their happiness in
the future because of the training they
had received.
A review of means on the happiness
measures confirmed their subjective re-
ports: the subjects had grown in their
measured happiness to a level higher than
the group means achieved at the end of
the 2-week period, and when the scores
from the experimental subjects were com-
pared to happiness measures scores ob-
tained from a random, equivilantly sized
sample of control group subjects, signifi-
cant growth differences resulted on all
happiness measures criteria. The highest
individual mean was achieved by subjects
working with the fundamentals program.
Because initial subject happiness levels
could not be assumed equal, these results
were inconclusive, but when taken to-
gether with the subjective reports and the
statistical outcomes of the 2-week experi-
ment, it was concluded that the happiness-
increasing potential of the programs had
merit and deserved refinement and fur-
ther study.
Study 2
Using data gathered from the first
study, an attempt was made to combine
the best aspects of the pilot programs
previously used into a single happiness-
increasing program. From the statistical
data and debriefing reactions provided by
the subjects in Study 1, a new program
called the "14 fundamentals" was devel-
oped. The program most closely followed
the more successful program used previ-
ously (the fundamentals program) but was
expanded and refined to include successful
elements of the other programs as indi-
cated by the subjects.
An experiment was designed to test the
ability of the 14 fundamentals to increase
personal happiness on a different group of
subjects, and the experimental period was
expanded to 6 weeks.
Design and Procedure
A simple pretest-posttest design was
selected using two groups: an experimen-
tal group (ra = 39) who received instruc-
tion in the program designed to increase
happiness and a control group (n = 29)
who did not receive the program. Two
intact classes of community college stu-
dents (32 males and 36 females, with a
mean age of 24.5 years) enrolled in Per-
sonal and Social Adjustment psychology,
were used in the study. As before, random-
ization of subjects into the two experi-
mental groups was not considered as desir-
able as using classes intact, and since the
results of Study 1 indicated that the hap-
piness measures were free of systematic
biasing of posttest responses due to pretest
sensitization, covariate analysis on all
pre- and posttest scores was chosen over
randomization to control for initial group
differences in happiness.
As before, this created a situation in
which the testing procedures, as well as
the happiness program given to the exper-
imental group, could be presented to the
subjects as a natural part of the academic
course work in the classes, providing treat-
ments that were unobtrusive, nonreactive
additions to what the subjects normally
anticipate as being part of such an adjust-
 INCREASING HAPPINESS
merit course. Both courses were taught by
the investigator, and other than the exper-
imental and placebo programs given to
the subjects, the content of the two classes
was the same.
The experimental class. The experi-
mental group received instruction in the
14 fundamentals personal happiness pro-
gram. As, before, each of the fundamen-
tals were specific behavioral and attitudi-
nal objectives, characteristic of happier
people studied in past research, that ordi-
nary individuals could employ on any
given day. Briefly, these "happiness fun-
damentals" were (a) spend more time so-
cializing, (b) strengthen your closest rela-
tionships, (c) develop an outgoing, social
personality, (d) be a better friend, (e) work
on a healthy personality, (f) lower expec-
tations and aspirations, (g) develop posi-
tive, optimistic thinking, (h) value happi-
ness, (i) become more active, (j) become
involved with meaningful work, (k) get
better organized and plan things out, (1)
develop your "present orientation," (m)
reduce negative feelings, and (n) stop wor-
rying.
Detailed instruction regarding specific
ways one could initiate and employ these
14 principles was given to the subjects.2
The subjects were required to select 1 of
the 14 each day for the 6-week experimen-
tal period and to try to employ the various
techniques suggested for the principle dur-
ing the entire day. A diary was used for
the subjects to record their success or fail-
ure at the end of each day and to provide
an opportunity for them to reflect on their
happiness. Subjects were asked to try all
of the fundamentals for the first week or
so (choosing a different one each day).
Beyond that, it was suggested that they
concentrate on the fundamentals that
were least typical of their normal behav-
ior. The subjects were asked to go beyond
their normal behavior in applying the
principles and that no success with the
program could be expected unless their
behavior showed significant additions and
changes in their ordinary life-style.
The control class. Subjects in the con-
trol group received no instruction in the
happiness program. However, as in the
previous study, subjects in the control
517
class were instructed on several occasions
that they would become "much happier
and satisfied with their lives" as a result
of the (normal) assignments and course
work in the personal and social adjust-
ment class they were taking. As before,
this was done to control the possibility
that any success demonstrated by the ex-
perimental group would not be an artifact
of suggestion.
Measurement. Happiness in both the
pretests and posttests was measured by
the happiness measures (previously de-
scribed). At the beginning of the semester,
the subjects were asked to rate the happi-
ness measures in two ways: (a) in terms of
their general, or average, happiness and
(b) in terms of their happiness level during
the previous month. At the end of the 6-
week semester, the subjects were post-
tested with the happiness measures and
asked to rate their happiness level over
the period of the course. The resulting
scores were subjected to an analysis of
covariance, by computer, to determine if
the happiness program had shown any
effect.
Results
The analysis of covariance showed that
the group that received the happiness pro-
gram increased their happiness to levels
that were significantly higher than those
reached by the suggestion control group.
As Table 3 shows, all but one of the F
ratios was significant beyond the .01 level.
The significant happiness increases ap-
peared in both the comparison to the "in
general" pretest and to the pretest meas-
uring the subjects' happiness during the
month previous to the course. The results
were especially significant because a re-
view of unadjusted pre- and posttest
means for the control group also showed a
growth in happiness over the semester.
Such growth may be due to the suggestion
effect, but it is also likely due to the basic
2
A full description of the fundamentals program,
including behavioral goals, techniques, and proce-
dures, is being prepared in a standard form (to be
available from the author) for further research uses
suggested in the Discussion section of this article.
518 MICHAEL W. FORDYCE
Table 3
Results of the Analysis of Covariance
Experimental group
Happiness measure"
M SD
"In general" pretest used as covariate
Scale 7.86 1.33
% of time happy 69.05 20.29
% of time unhappy 15.12 18.07
"Last month" pretest used as covariate
Scale 7.74 1.33
% of time happy 69.25 20.29
% of time unhappy 17.27 18.07
Note. Means are adjusted; standard deviations are based on unadjusted data.
" Combination score was not calculated.
*p < .01.
content of the adjustment course itself, a
course that is designed to promote thera-
peutic growth.
In addition to the significant statistical
verification of the experiment were the
comments of the subjects themselves made
in several debriefing periods. Ninety-
seven percent of the subjects felt subjec-
tively that the program had been highly
successful for them. Three percent felt
that the program was unsuccessful, most
of whom had failed to work with the pro-
gram, and had not changed their happi-
ness level.
The greater significant statistical out-
comes and subjective reporting of success
in this second study suggested that the
refinement of the happiness-increasing
program, based on the results of Study 1
and the longer time period, had enhanced
the program and substantiated its capacity
to increase experienced happiness. Be-
cause the program seemed relatively effec-
tive in its present form, further replication
of its usefulness was planned using a dif-
ferent research format.
Study 3
A third study was conducted to study
the effectiveness of the 14 fundamentals
happiness-increasing program. In this
study, the experiment was approached
with a different strategy. Instead of the
required participation on the part of the
subjects employed in the previous studies,
subject participation in the third study
Control group
F (1, 65)
M SD
6.03 2.50 24.205*
54.12 26.64 8.960*
25.42 24.83 7.115*
6.20 2.50 13.265*
53.86 26.64 9.490*
22.52 24.83 1.502
was totally at the option of the students.
A new sample of 68 community college
students (36 males and 32 females with a
mean age of 23.1 years) enrolled in two
sections of a personal and social adjust-
ment course taught by the investigator
were all given complete instruction in the
14 fundamentals happiness-increasing
program. The material was presented to
the students as a part of the ordinary
academic content in the course. Students
were told that "some research had been
done on the 14 fundamentals" indicating
that the program could possibly increase
their happiness if they worked with it
regularly on their own. The program was
presented as being "just one of the many
interesting new findings in the psychology
of adjustment" and that they might try it
if they wished (though students were un-
der no academic pressure to work with, or
even take notes on, the program). The
fundamentals were presented at the begin-
ning of the semester, and after their pres-
entation no attempt was made to encour-
age students to work with the program
nor to discover if any students were trying
to employ it.
At the end of the 6-week semester, stu-
dents were given an anonymous question-
naire that gave them a chance to evaluate
the course. It was presented as a way for
the instructor to determine how effective
the course had been and to help improve
the instructor's teaching methods. Stu-
dents were instructed to be as candid in
their evaluations as possible. Among the
 INCREASING HAPPINESS
questions concerning the course were sev-
eral dealing with the effects of the 14
fundamentals.
The results of the questionnaire pro-
vided an informal design for the analysis
of the study. One multiple-choice question
asked students whether or not they had
attempted to work with the program.
From their responses, the subjects were
divided into two groups of self-appointed
volunteers, one group who had attempted
to work "rigorously" or "occasionally" with
the program (the treatment group; n =
42) and one group who had "thought about
the fundamentals but didn't really work
with them" or "ignored information com-
pletely" (a control group; n = 26).
Results
In a computerized analysis of variance,
the two groups were compared on two
criterion questions from the question-
naire. The first question was, "To what
degree did the 14 fundamentals affect your
personal happiness?" The group of subjects
who had chosen to work with the program
claimed boosts in happiness significantly
higher than those reported by the group
of subjects who had learned about the
fundamentals but had not worked with
them,F(l, 65) = 17.035,p < .01. Likewise,
the treated group showed significantly
higher estimates concerning the degree to
which the fundamentals would help main-
tain and increase their happiness in the
future, F(l, 65) = 15.566, p < .01.
The raw score responses to the anony-
mous questionnaire provided even more
information about the self-reported bene-
fits of the fundamentals. The results
showed that a surprisingly high number
of subjects, considering the optional na-
ture of the program, had chosen to work
with the fundamentals. Eleven percent
worked with the program on a rigorous,
regular basis, and 50% on an occasional
basis; only 5% completely disregard the
program. Regarding the effects of the fun-
damentals, 4% felt the program had
helped them become extremely happy,
29% felt they had become much happier,
44% felt they had been helped to become
somewhat happier, and 22% felt the pro-
519
gram had no effect. No one felt the funda-
mentals had made them more unhappy.
These results were especially interesting
because 37% of the subjects didn't really
try to apply the principles, indicating that
the information about personal happiness,
even when not applied rigorously, had
positive effects for many subjects.
The fundamentals also had a positive
educational effect: 22% of the respondents
felt they had learned a great deal of infor-
mation about their own happiness, 30% a
good deal, and 38% some new aspects.
Only 8% felt they had learned little or
nothing of value. Other results of the
questionnaire indicated that only 8% of
the subjects would not work with the fun-
damentals in the future and that only 2%
felt that learning about the fundamentals
would have no effects on their happiness
in the future.
Discussion
The data from these studies suggest that
behavioral programs for the enhancement
of personal happiness can be developed
and that the fundamentals program re-
ported here appears to be a first step in
this direction.
On a statistical level, the results indi-
cate that the 14 fundamentals have the
capacity to increase group-level happiness
significantly and that the increase is due
to the content of the program per se, and
not to suggestions of better happiness.
However, this conclusion must be consid-
ered in the framework of the pilot nature
of these experiments, since the present
studies have shortcomings that warrant
correction in future replications.
Adequate measurement, of course, has
always been a problem to research in hap-
piness, and though the instrument used
in the present studies is perhaps the best
happiness measure available, future re-
search would be more conclusive if several
additional criteria were also included. An-
other problem area involves the standard-
ization of the fundamentals program itself.
In the present studies, all instruction was
given by this investigator, and most of it
in verbal form. Obviously, future research
efforts with the program would require
520 MICHAEL W. FORDYCE
that the fundamentals be presented in a
standard form, a self-study workbook for
example, to be presented as is, or through
oral instruction by a variety of instructors
to ensure that no personal factor is in-
volved as in the outcomes indicated here.
Replication would, of course, be desira-
ble, and studies are being planned by this
investigator that should provide sounder
conclusions regarding the effectiveness of
the fundamentals.
However, even with sounder methodol-
ogy, statistical outcomes in and of them-
selves cannot fully determine the actual
success of such experiments, since per-
sonal happiness is so subjective an experi-
ence. Felt happiness is truly known only
to the subjects themselves, and thus we
are forced in studies like this to rely heav-
ily on the subjects' own feelings regarding
the success or failure of the program. Such
reports from subjects, both from the stud-
ies included here and from over 500 other
individuals who have received instruction
in the fundamentals in college classes and
public lectures, have been very positive.
Many individuals feel the program truly
helps and such positive reports about suc-
cess with the program have led this inves-
tigator to cautiously conclude that the
statistical outcomes reported herein dem-
onstrate a genuine, not artifactual, effect.
Further, it suggests that the program may
be as useful and relevant to adults as to
college-age students, since many adults
were included in the original samples of
subjects studied and many more have been
instructed with the program in public lec-
tures.
If the fundamentals program works as
well as subjects claim it does, what is it
about the fundamentals program that
helps individuals become happier? De-
briefing sessions with the subjects in the
present investigations provided a great
deal of information about the aspects of
the program that were considered the most
helpful.
First, it appears that the most basic
effect of the fundamentals is an educa-
tional one. Because the program was
based on past research on happiness, an
area of psychological knowledge that has
received very little public or professional
dissemination, the fundamentals provided
the subjects with a basic education on the
general nature and causes of personal hap-
piness; thus it helped them learn about,
and better understand, their own happi-
ness. Knowledge in any area can be en-
lightening and useful, and it appears that
knowledge about human happiness is no
different: those who are educated about it
have a greater opportunity for control over
it.
Second, beyond having an educational
effect, working with the fundamentals on
a daily basis had a strong effect on the
subjects' awareness of and sensitivity to
their own happiness, and such increased
awareness was considered by most sub-
jects the greatest single benefit of the
program. Subjects reported that working
with the program on a daily basis had
helped them become more sensitive to
their general happiness and to their happy
moods. They came to value happiness
more and realize to a keener degree the
importance it had in their lives. And by
continually reflecting on their happiness,
they were able to better understand its
causes and thereby use the fundamentals
in an individualized manner more suited
to their own happiness needs. This
heightened sensitivity to happiness con-
tradicts the often quoted folkwisdom that
"pursuing happiness directly is the surest
way to lose it;" on the contrary, the sub-
jects in these studies found that thinking
regularly about their happiness, pursuing
it actively, and placing it as a top priority
was one of the major causes of their suc-
cess with the program.
Finally, if the 14 specific fundamentals
are taken separately, debriefing indicated
that the particular fundamentals consid-
ered the most happiness producing varied
greatly from subject to subject and
seemed to be determined by each individ-
ual's needs and areas of specific weakness.
Each of the fundamentals, for example,
was mentioned by at least one subject as
the most helpful of all. Nevertheless, on a
group basis, the following fundamentals
were most often cited by the subjects as
being more instrumental in boosting their
happiness: (a) the development of a posi-
tive, optimistic thinking pattern, (b)
 INCREASING HAPPINESS
trying new activities and living a more
active life, (c) being more social (especially
increasing quality time with their families
and friends), (d) developing a more extro-
verted, outgoing personality, and (e) re-
ducing negative thought patterns (espe-
cially important here was the subjects'
ability to greatly minimize their worrying).
In a broader view, the studies reported
here suggest a number of more general
conclusions regarding the nature of per-
sonal happiness.
First, there appears to be a greater
potential for happiness in many individ-
uals than they are generally able to
achieve, and it would appear that the
happiness levels achieved by most individ-
uals is primarily "accidental," that is, oc-
curring as a result of undirected and un-
educated trial and error.
Second, happiness appears amenable to
training and development. Given the
proper informational background and
guidance, individuals can better direct
their efforts toward happiness, greatly re-
ducing the "accidental happiness" factor.
This is due in part to the fact that there
appears to be much about the achievement
of personal happiness that anyone can
develop, despite situational constraints or
without fundamental changes in their eco-
nomic status or social condition. It has
long been established that personal hap-
piness is strongly related to high income,
job satisfaction and status, good health, a
satisfying family situation, and many
other outside factors that most individuals
have little realistic hope of changing dra-
matically. Yet fortunately, the findings
here indicate that there are some things
that relate to happiness requiring only
simple attitudinal and behavioral changes
to achieve, and it is most encouraging to
find that there may be things anyone, in
any situation, can do to increase his or
her satisfaction with life.
Third, work toward happiness can occur
on a self-study basis, and individuals can,
especially when motivated, achieve much
positive change on their own. This ability
for self-change shows that self-study pro-
grams, such as the one described herein,
can become a widely useful ally to psychol-
ogists. Used as an adjunct to counseling
521
and therapy or as an educational tool,
such programs can greatly increase the
efficiency of psychologists by allowing
them to help greater numbers of individ-
uals with minimal guidance by relying,
when it is deemed appropriate, on the
individual's own ability for self-directed
growth. The fundamentals program shows
a tentative potential for such use and is
available from the author for the inter-
ested researcher.
Finally, there is the indication that psy-
chology may be able to make a substantial
contribution to the increase of human hap-
piness. Happiness is, of course, among the
most highly prized goals of life, and the
possibility that psychological research
may be able to contribute to its attainment
is the most significant implication of the
present studies.
Reference Notes
1. Fordyce, M. W. Human happiness: The findings
of psychological research (chaps. 2-4). Unpub-
lished book, 1974. Revised version in prepara-
tion. (Available from the author, Edison Com-
munity College, Ft. Myers, Florida 33901).
2. Fordyce, M. W. The happiness measures: A sixty-
second index of emotional well-being and mental
health. Manuscript submitted for publication,
1977.
References
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. Experimental
and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chi-
cago: Rand McNally, 1963.
Fellows, E. W. Happiness: A survey of research.
Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 1966, 6,17-30.
Fordyce, M. W. Happiness: Its daily variation and
its relation to values. (Doctoral dissertation,
United States International University, 1972).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1972, 33,
1266B. (University Microfilms No. 72-23, 491).
Freedman, J., & Shaver, P. Your pursuit of happi-
ness. Psychology Today, August 1976, pp. 26-32;
75.
Harry, J. Evolving sources of happiness for men
over the life cycle: A structural analysis. Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 1976, 38(2), 289-296.
Robinson, J., & Shaver, P. Measures of social psy-
chological attitudes. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Survey
Research Center, Institute for Social Research,
1968.
Wessman, A. E. A psychological inquiry into satis-
faction and happiness. Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, Princeton University, 1956.
Wessman, A. E., & Ricks, D. F. Moods and person-
ality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1966.
Wilson, W. R. Correlates of avowed happiness.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1967,23, 295-305.
Received December 28, 1976 •