LA1020: Psychology of Well-being

LA1020: Well-being after adversity

Recent studies on well being after adversity

 Research by George Bonnano, Michael Rutter, Emmy Werner, Ruth Smith, Dan McAdams (post
2000 – till date) investigates how and why individuals recover from negative events and emotions
o Making sense of the event – benefit finding, closure
o Manifested through resilience, Post Traumatic Growth, defensive pessimism
o Real life examples: Victor Frankl, Charlie Chaplin, Abraham Maslow

What are negative emotions?

 Any sensation which causes an individual to feel miserable, undermines their confidence, or feel
negatively towards themselves or others. Eg: Hate, jealousy, sadness, anger, fear
 A combination of these emotions may also be felt towards an event/stimulus

The deficit based approach prevalent earlier focused largely on;

 The study of negative consequences of negative emotions such as outcomes related to behavioral
problems and clinical disorders. For example: the emotion of anger may result in externalized as
temper tantrum or sadness/fear maybe internalized as withdrawal from social interaction
 Within themselves, negative emotions are highly related. So one unpleasant feeling may give rise
to another
 Sometimes, sadness may also be disguised as anger. Example: as in case of children mostly

After the positive psychology movement, attention was drawn towards the following:
 Negative emotions are not unnatural. Example: bereavement, grief, anger, failure &
disappointment
 But how we express them and their outcome often leads to problems
 Eg: Strong negative emotions can impair people’s ability to think rationally.
 Cognitive distortion such as magnification, all-or-none thinking, generalization may lead to
pathological symptoms, which may finally result in clinical disorders
 While it is true that negative emotions generally have a stronger impact as compared to positive
emotions and may eventually lead to symptoms, it is not necessary for every negative experience
to lead to maladaptive outcomes
 Positive psychology does not help individuals to avoid negative events as stressful experiences
are inevitable. Positive psychology studies how to display positive adaptation despite adversity

Functional and Dysfunctional Emotions

 Both positive and negative emotions can be functional or dysfunctional (Ekman & Davidson,
1994)
 Functional emotions are those that are appropriate to: place, time, situation
 Very often only the expression of an emotion can be dysfunctional

How harmful can negative emotions be?

 Negative emotions are harmful if expressed in a maladaptive manner. For instance anger can lead
to externalizing problems and sadness could lead to internalizing problems
 Otherwise, negative emotions are not necessarily dysfunctional
 Sometimes they may even have positive consequences. Example:
 Anger maybe expressed through violence or creativity (defense mechanism of
sublimation)
 Depression may result in central focus that enhances attention, concentration and better
memory (versus peripheral focus associated with a state of positive emotions/euphoria)

1
 LA1020: Psychology of Well-being

 Trauma may result in psychological growth after the event through the process of
‘benefit-finding’ i.e. finding the silver lining in an otherwise challenging situation

“Is bad, good?” – Supporting evidence

Sad mood/bad weather – better memory:
 Randomly selected shoppers saw 10 unusual objects in a suburban shop; later their recall and
recognition memory were tested. Shoppers in a negative mood showed better memory and higher
discrimination ability - Forgas, Goldenberg, Unkelbach (2009)
Happy and Gullible; Sad but Alert:
 Positive and negative moods were induced through video films. Later subjects were shown
deceptive or truthful interviews of individuals who denied committing a theft. Negative mood
increased judges’ skepticism towards the targets, and improved their accuracy in detecting
deceptive communications, while judges in a positive mood were more trusting and gullible –
Forgas & East (2008)
Happiness makes us selfish, but sadness makes us fair:
 Lottery tickets to be divided after keeping some for self. Those in positive mood were unfair in
distribution as compared to those in sad mood - Bing Tan & Forgas (2010)
Negative Emotion Enhances Memory Accuracy - Kensinger (2007)
 Behavioral and Neuroimaging Evidence: Negative emotion enhances not only the subjective
vividness of a memory but also the likelihood of remembering specific (but not all) event details
 This helps to explain why patients with PTSD vividly replay particular aspects of highly
emotional events but often fail to remember other experiences vividly.
 Practical application: in the field of law - eyewitness testimony

These findings display the beneficial facet of negative emotions that is generally not considered.

From Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) to Post Traumatic Growth (PTG)
 Traditionally post disaster studies focused on negative mental health consequences such as cases
of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

What is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder?

 The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychological Disorders (DSM) V describes PTSD as a
distressful condition characterized by the following:
 The condition results after the person has been exposed to a traumatic event in which he
experienced/ witnessed an event/events that involved actual/ threatened death, serious injury;
resulting is intense fear, helplessness
 After this, the person experiences recurrent recollections of the event, such as images & thoughts
(a sense of reliving the experience, illusions, hallucinations, flashback episodes). He/she also
experiences physiological reactivity at exposure to cues that symbolize/ resemble some aspect of
that traumatic event
 Symptoms include: difficulty falling/staying asleep, outbursts of anger, difficulty concentrating,
hypervigilance, exaggerated startle response, efforts to avoid activities, places, or people that give
rise to recollections of the trauma, markedly diminished interest in significant activities,
detachment from others, restricted emotions, sense of a shortened future and at times, even
inability to recall an important aspect of the trauma (repression)
 These disturbances cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational,
areas of functioning
 If a certain number of symptoms persist for more than one month, the individual is diagnosed
with PTSD

2
 LA1020: Psychology of Well-being

While PTSD studies distress in the aftermath of trauma, PTG refers to growth in the aftermath of trauma/
significant improvement in functioning or other positive outcomes reported by survivors. This new
branch of study is called Psychotraumatology

 Research on positive changes among victims of trauma:

o Physical assault (Borja, Callahan, & Long, 2006)
o Domestic violence (Cobb, Tedeschi, Calhoun, & Cann, 2006)
o Natural disaster (Cryder, Kilmer, Tedeschi, & Calhoun, 2006)
o Life-threatening disease (Bellizi & Blank, 2006)
o War exposure (Solomon & Dekel, 2007)

The controversy surrounding PTG

Critics have expressed doubts about the methodology and findings of PTG research: (Wortman)
 Can the small significant positive changes reported by individuals be in anyway considered to be
of greater significance than a whole host of other negative feelings they experience?
 Are the positive self reports, an exaggeration by the individuals to show that they are on the path
of recovery?
 Also, studies conducted mostly on bereavement have showed that not a single respondent
reported that if they had a chance to turn back time, they would go through the experience of
losing a loved one again

Conclusion from PTG research

PTG is not common; however it maybe regarded as a universal phenomenon

Negative emotions and well-being: Pessimism

• Socially and culturally, positive thinking is valued more than pessimism
• Unrestricted optimism/positive thinking is not always helpful just as extreme pessimism can have
fatal consequences
• Well-being researchers do not consider pessimism to be as bad as traditional psychologists did
• Defensive pessimism is understood to be a better cognitive strategy as compared to dispositional
pessimism (not applicable to optimists as their preferred cognitive style is positive thinking)

Defensive Pessimism
Two goals:
• Self protective: Less disappointment in case of failure
• Motivational: Fear of failure motivates the individual, not lure of success

Research findings:
• Defensive pessimists have poor mental health (anxiety and depression symptoms) as compared to
optimists
• Defensive pessimists have a better chance of success as compared to dispositional pessimists as
the former do not give up despite fear of failure
• Defensive pessimists are always ready with a second option, which is helpful in most difficult
situations
• Defensive Pessimism versus Dispositional Pessimism: Similar levels of anxiety reported by both;
however the former are more likely to work towards their goals as opposed to succumbing to
stress

Defensive Pessimism works better than Optimism:

• When stress becomes unavoidable, such as the transition to a novel environment (eg. from school
to university) - Eronen (2000)
3
 LA1020: Psychology of Well-being

• In maintaining motivation during the pursuit of long-term, difficult goals - Langens & Schmalt
(2002)

Resilience from adversity

• Term derived from the area of physical sciences, wherein it was typically used to refer to the
capacity to withstand stress without breaking, or to recover to original form, like a spring
• Wright, Masten & Narayan (2013): Two criteria for judgement of resilience
A. Exposure to significant adversity
B. Displaying positive adaptation (internal such as good mental health or external such as
excellent performance at work)
• Resilient individuals achieve a high level of well-being even after having experienced what seem
like insurmountable difficulties
• Widely acknowledged that psychological resiliency plays an important role in how individuals
adapt to stressful life events (Wald, Taylor, Asmundson, Jang, & Stapleton, 2006)

Early research:
 Investigators and journalists referred to children who functioned well despite the odds as
“invulnerable” (Anthony, 1974 ; Pines, 1975 ); terms used in literature: “invincible” and
“invulnerable”
Current research:
• As research extended across time and, across types of trauma endured, the term “invulnerability”
came to be replaced with terms such as resilience
• Research in recent times on a variety of samples, different cultures, focusing on a range of
adversities (natural calamity, war, prison environment, learning disability, bereavement, 9/11
attacks)
• Resilience at the neural level: Brain plasticity; eg: case of Emma who became blind in her 40’s,
uses Kurzweil Educational Systems that reads books aloud to her, Emma’s ability to listen has
increased with time, currently 340 words a minute, her massive visual cortex, no longer
processing sight, had been taken over for auditory processing

Key Concepts- Wright, Masten & Narayan (2013)

• Adversity: Stressful life experiences that threaten adaptation or development
• Protective Factors: Measurable characteristics of individuals associated with positive outcomes
particularly in the context of high risk or adversity. Maybe internal or external
• Cumulative Protection: The presence of multiple protective factors or influences in an
individual’s life
• Cumulative Risk: The summation of all risk factors that the individual has experienced; multiple
separate risk events or repeated occurrences of the same
• Developmental Tasks: Psychosocial milestones or accomplishments expected of members in a
given society or culture in different age periods
• Positive adaptation: Using personal or contextual resources to respond positively to challenges.
May be internal or external adaptation.

From landmark studies to latest propositions

Longitudinal studies:
• Rutter’s longitudinal investigation in the Isle of Wight on schizophrenia in parents & children-
unbelievable results
• Similar findings by Werner and Smith in Hawaiian island; multiple risk factors
Later research

4
 LA1020: Psychology of Well-being

• Earlier described as “bouncing back” from adversity (Constantine, Benard, & Diaz, 1999)
whereas in recent times the idea of “bouncing forward” in response to adversity has been
proposed (Walsh, 2002)
• Latest revolution in research, studies resilience at the cellular and neural levels – genes, biological
sensitivity to context, immune system (Masten, 2007; Wright, Masten, & Narayan, 2013)
• Resilience research in India – real life examples, stories, folklore, initial studies on natural
calamity, current status and future directions– areas of work, assessment techniques

Seery, Holman, & Silver (2010): “Whatever does not kill us may indeed make us stronger” (N=1994)
• People are not doomed to be damaged by cumulative adversity. Some recover to past levels of
functioning, some might benefit from the experience of past adversity. Those with some prior
lifetime adversity were the least affected by recent adverse events.
Seery (2011):
• Low-to-moderate levels of adversity may contribute to development of resilience in the face of
difficulties major life events or relatively mundane hassles.
• For example, potentially stressful physical pain or workplace demands could seem manageable
rather than overwhelming.
• This could be the case due to a variety of mechanisms, including generating individual toughness,
creating a sense of mastery over past adversity, fostering perceived control and belief in ability to
cope successfully, teaching coping skills, establishing effective social-support networks, and
promoting cell growth in brain areas relevant for coping (e.g., Dienstbier, 1989; Lyons et al.,
2010; Mineka & Zinbarg, 2006; Silver & Wortman, 1980).
• Without any adversity exposure, these resources may have little opportunity to develop;
comparably, higher levels of adversity could prove overwhelming and disrupt them (e.g.,
fostering perceived helplessness, lack of toughness)
• Rutter (2012): Steeling effect – past adversities strengthen individuals to face future challenges
• Masten (2001): Ordinary magic – resilience is a universal phenomena but is largely perceived to
be an unexpected outcome

Conclusion
• Good and bad sides to both positive and negative experiences/emotions
• Getting chronically trapped in any one emotion leads to maladaptive outcomes
• Individuals cannot get rid of negative events and emotions altogether; it is important to respond to
them in an adaptive manner
• Consequently, it is not necessary that negative experiences will leave an individual scarred for
life
• Favorable outcomes from negative events: resilience, post traumatic growth