LA1020: Psychology of Well being

LA1020: Determinants of well being

Determinants of well being may be discussed with regard to Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade (2005)
Architecture of Sustainable Happiness Model, that is:
I. Life events
II. Genetics
III. Intentional Activity

I. Life events/circumstances denote aspects of one’s life over which one has little or no control
 Both negative and positive changes in life can cause unhappiness
 Early research that focused on assessment of stress caused by life events required participants to
report life changes experienced in the past six months and the stress experienced as a result of it.
Both positive and negative changes included in these scales. Example: Holmes and Rahe’s (1967)
The Social Re-adjustment Rating Scale

Life Circumstances include:

 Objective data: Demographic details such as age, gender, ethnicity, income, and religious
affiliation
 Subjective data: Life status conditions such as health, location of residence, material
possessions, satisfaction with financial condition

Major investigations conducted

 Lottery Winners and Accident Victims – Brickman et al. (1978)
 Children of the Great Depression – Elder (1974)
 Easterlin Paradox – Easterlin (1974)
 Recent studies by – Diener, Lubomirsky, Powdthavee, Boniwell and others

Studying happiness of Lottery Winners & Accident Victims

Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is
happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 917-927
 3 groups of people were interviewed in the original study - 22 lottery winners from Illinois State
Lottery, 29 paralyzed accident victims from a rehabilitation institute, 22 controls selected from a
phone book out of a basic list of 88 people
 Questions on change in lifestyle after the event, general happiness measure before the event, at
present and expected happiness in future, measure of pleasure derived from everyday activities
such as talking with a friend, watching television, eating breakfast, hearing a funny joke, and
getting a compliment.

 Main findings:
Lottery Winners
 Despite the initial euphoria, they were “not happier” than controls
 Decreased pleasure in ordinary events as compared to controls
 No significant difference between future happiness predictions of lottery winners and controls
Accident victims
 Were not as unhappy as expected; reported lower happiness than lottery winners, but well above
the midpoint of the scale
 Ordinary events of the past was perceived as very positive as compared to controls

1
 LA1020: Psychology of Well being

Summary
 Severe outcomes do not have as great an impact as might be expected
 Events of everyday life are compared to extreme reference points, also called Contrast effect.
Thus everyday life events do not generate as much happiness as before after an extremely
positive event
 Thus everyday life events do not generate as much unhappiness as before after an extremely
negative event - Nostalgia effect.
 Individuals can get accustomed to nearly anything, no matter how good or bad. Habituation
effect/ Hedonic adaptation (Lyubomirsky, 2008)

Limitations of the study and criticism

 Research conducted in a more controlled manner would have yielded generalizable results -
longitudinal studies, more follow ups, demographic variables
 Subject loss; Brickman’s study had a 50% drop out rate
 Change in the environment of the individuals was not adequately explored
 Occurrence of other events following the main event: Since these events are largely random,
predicting their contribution to happiness would be difficult

Elder (1974): Happier after hard times

 Elder’s (1974) famous investigation among Children of the Great Depression (1929-1939)
 Retrospective interviews about conditions in youth and a follow-up during adulthood, also known
as life course studies
 Individuals reported happiness at various stages of life
 Respondents who remembered most hardship in their youth: reported their youth as less happy,
increase in happiness in the later years … and were “most-happy” in middle age
 “Memories of the Great Depression functioned as a standard for evaluating subsequent life-
experiences” (Elder, 1974, p.259)

What kind of life events have a long lasting impact on happiness?

 According to set-point theory, individuals react to circumstances and then return to a level of
happiness
 However, some studies have shown that a few circumstances have a sustained impact on one’s
happiness in adult life (Lucas, et al, 2004): (a) Loss of spouse and (b) Continued unemployment
 Individuals who experience such events may not return to their earlier level of happiness

Unemployment and happiness

 Unemployment has a significant impact on one’s happiness levels
 Lucas (2004) tracked changes in life satisfaction before, during, and after the experiences of job
loss that had a significant impact on lifestyle
 Reported less satisfied in the years following unemployment; this decline in happiness continued
even though individuals ultimately obtained employment again
 Did not return to their original levels of happiness for many years after the unemployment
struggle

Diener and Seligman (2004):

 Unemployed individuals had significantly lower levels of well-being than the employed and they
also tend to have higher levels of suicidal behaviour as well
 Attributed to a lack of a sense of purpose in their life

2
 LA1020: Psychology of Well being

Loss by death/divorce and happiness

 Lucas et. al. (2003) - Loss of a spouse (by death/divorce) has been “rated as being more stressful
than going to jail”
 Easterlin (2006) - Individuals who are divorced, separated or widowed are significantly less
happy than individuals who remain in happy relationships for the rest of their lives
 Michael & Ben-Zur (2007) – Financial difficulties, change in social status, adjustment to new
household roles and responsibilities. Effects individuals’ emotions, behavior and health and could
lead to depression and anxiety symptoms

Richard Easterlin paradox: Income and Happiness

 Easterlin (1974): Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot? Some Empirical Evidence
 Within a given country people with higher incomes are more likely to report being happy as
compared to those with lower incomes
 However, the rate of growth of happiness did not correspond with the rate of growth of income
 After the individual reaches the income required to meet basic needs, the rate of growth of
happiness was found to decline. Referred to as Easterlin paradox

Reasons explaining this paradox:

 Habituation: People get used to money very quickly
 Fulfilling limited needs versus fulfilling unlimited wants: Needs are basic, wants are endless
 Social comparison: The richer one gets, more likely it is that they will compare themselves to
others
 Other factors that are positively correlated with income, but are associated negatively with
happiness: More responsibility, more working hours, more commuting time, less time spent with
family/friends or in leisure activities (Ed Diener, Richard Easterlin)

What is more important for happiness – money or social relationships?

 Using regression equations, economists have been able to work out the “prices” of social
relationships. In other words, they were able to put a financial value on friendships. For eg:
seeing friends once a month = 57500 pounds p. a. while losing a job = 143000 p.a. (Powdthavee,
2006; The happiness equation). This approach of comparing money to relationships has received
more criticism than acceptance
 Dunn, Gilbert, & Wilson (2011). If money doesn’t make you happy then you probably aren’t
spending it right. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(2), 115–125: The authors recommend
buying experiences instead of things, use money to benefit others rather than themselves, to
beware of comparison shopping, among other things.

Demographic variables and happiness in the world: Global findings from pioneering work
 Majority of the population (including many developing countries) claims to enjoy life
 Only in very poor countries the number of unhappy citizens equals that of the happy ones
(Veenhoven, 1984)
 In developed nations positive affect typically outbalances negative affect (Bless & Schwartz
1984; Veenhoven 1984)

II. Genetics - Heritability of happiness

 Researchers wanted to explore if life events and environment are the only determinants of
individual’s reactions to situations that lead to happiness/unhappiness or if personality traits
associated with happiness could be a result of one’s genetic makeup
 Most studies centered around: personality and happiness, genetics and happiness

3
 LA1020: Psychology of Well being

 While genetics theorists such as David Lykken and Auke Tellegen gather genetic evidence and
analyze data, life events research theorists such as Richard Lucas and Sonja Lyubomirsky use
qualitative methods as sociologists do
 Although these two approaches are different, findings from both can be put together to derive
explanations

According to these investigations, dispositions such as cheerfulness, contentment and psychological

satisfaction are largely a matter of heredity
 Lykken & Tellegen (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon, Psychological Science:
Involving unpredictable, random elements. The unpredictability of happiness can be related to the
fact that this model comprises of random elements. This explains the lack of a stable pattern or
order despite the heritable trait
 Jang, Livesley, & Vernon (1996). Twin study on big five personality traits & subjective well
being; subjective well being is largely heritable
 Weiss, Bates, Luciano (2008) Happiness is a personal(ity) thing, Psychological Science. N = 973
twin pairs; differences in SWB were accounted for by the difference in the genetic architecture of
the Five-Factor personality domains
 De-Neve, et al. (2012, Genes, Economics, and Happiness): examined over 1,000 pairs of twins –
all American adolescents. The finding that variation in people’s happiness could be heritable was
proved to be significant. This study reported that individuals who inherit two long alleles of the
serotonin-transporter gene are more likely to be satisfied with life as compared to those who
inherit other versions of the serotonin-transporter gene
 Minkov and Bond (2016) reported a strong correlation between the happiness of a nation and the
prevalence of a particular variant of the FAAH (fatty acid amide hydrolase) gene

The Neurochemical Basis of well being

 Neurotransmitters: Chemicals which allow the transmission of signals from one neuron to the
next across synapses
 The neurotransmitter Serotonin (also called 5-hydroxytryptamine contributes to feelings of well-
being; low levels are associated with feelings of sadness, anxiety, sleeplessness, depression
 Brain scans reveal that normal brains show more activity while low-serotonin brains display less
activity, reduced size and poor function of hippocampus including impairment in memory
 Serotonin is found in chocolates, milk, cheese, potatoes, rice, cashew, almond, chicken, eggs
 Location: Mostly found in the gastrintestinal tract and neural pathways of brain
 Most antidepressants focus on increasing production of serotonin

Other neurochemicals associated with positive emotions and well being

 Dopamine: Related to goals, desires, and needs, feeling of pleasure after achievement; low levels
linked to procrastination, low enthusiasm; ; lab rats low in dopamine can starve to death even
with easy access to palatable food (Szczypka, 1999)
 Oxytocin: Intimacy, trust, social interaction, relationships; oxytocin blocks alcohol from reaching
brain receptors in lab rats (King et al, 2017). Prevents alcohol induced intoxication, supports
resistance to relapse; one trial on human subjects so far.
 Endorphins: Helps to deal with pain and stress; low levels result in anxiety, depression; laughter
releases endorphins

III. Intentional Activities

Actions -both behavioral and cognitive, which people choose to engage in. They are understood to
have the effect of changing one’s levels of happiness (Lyubomirsky & Sheldon, 2005).

4
 LA1020: Psychology of Well being

Choices and Happiness

 Research by Barry Shwartz , Sheena Iyengar: The researchers question if more choice and more
freedom imply more well being. In certain situations, more choices might lead to development of
more expectations, confusion, regret, or self blame.
 Shwartz comments that “choices can be good or bad” and categorizes individuals into maximisers
and satisficers.
 Schwartz, B., Ward, A. Monterosso, J., Lyubomirsky, S., White, K. Lehman, & D. R. (2002).
Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 83(5), 1178-1197.
 Maximizers compare thoroughly among alternatives. For instance while watching TV they surf
through all channels to find the best thing to watch. Satisficers settle for the first suitable option
they come across i.e. what is “good enough”
 Maximizers versus satisficers: “only the best will do” versus “what fits my criteria will do”
 Maximizers suffer most in situations that provide too many choices; striving for perfection causes
unhappiness

Choosing a profession: Meaning and Engagement in Work: Jobs, Careers, and Callings - Wrzesniewski,
McCauley, Rozin, & Schwartz (1997)
Job Career Calling
Works for money Enjoys work Work is one of the most important parts of
life
Look forward to weekends and Goals for the future, look Takes work home and on vacations
later retirement forward to promotions
Do not encourage others in Encourage friends and children to do the
opting for this profession same work

Intentional activities: Research on this has led to development of several positive psychology
interventions that are recommended for practice.

Integrating Biology, Life Events and Intentional Activities

 Age old controversy in understanding psychological outcomes: Nature versus nurture
 Contemporary researchers: Nature with nurture
 Today many theorists refer to the Gene-Environment Correlation approach in their research
 Genetically fixed level of happiness + certain life events + positive intentional activities = best
possible outcome
 Genetically fixed level of happiness + the same life events + negative intentional activities =
worst possible outcome

Conclusion
 Happiness is a complex phenomena
 Subjective interpretation is important along with objective indicators
 Focus on intentional positive activities will help to maximize happiness under all circumstances