Researchers from Great Britain and the U.S. analyzed data of more than two million people and spanning 35 years. They analyzed them for depression, anxiety, happiness and life satisfaction.

They found a U-shaped curve in which people reported being happiest in their 20s and in their 50s and older, but that both men and women were more likely to be depressed and were generally less happy in their 40s.

In fact, they discovered that for both sexes, the probability of depression peaks around the age of 44.

Not everybody is convinced the “slump” is all about age or other demographics. Previous happiness studies have suggested that demographics play a small role in overall happiness. For example, past studies have shown no significant differences in subjective well-being based on gender. In addition, some researchers have noted some differences in the age curve based on a particular culture or country.

One of the co-authors of the study, Andrew Oswald, an economics professor at the University of Warwick in Britain, thinks that this U-shaped curve of happiness occurs because people begin to confront their limitations and unrealistic dreams in their 30s and hit a low-point in their 40s. After that, they move past their disappointments and go on to feel more satisfied as they age. Other researchers have suggested that happiness improves with age because of some adaptation mechanism, which allows people to adjust better to changing circumstances.

A third potential explanation is that watching friends and family die off makes people more grateful and satisfied as they age.

Whatever the reasons, the study does point towards paying careful attention to people in the 40s for signs of psychological or mental distress. Mid-life blues could have serious and long-lasting damaging effects to not only the individuals themselves, but to family, friends, and business colleagues as well.

Maybe what’s needed is a mental checkup when one turns 40. We do it for our physical health. Why not do it for our psychological health as well?

That was the theory leading to a series of preliminary studies by renowned psychologist Martin E. P. Seligman a few years ago. Seligman and his team wanted to know if they could use a more proactive approach than just targeting depression’s symptoms to get better results.

As a result, they studied the lives of more than 300 college students at the University of Pennsylvania, some of whom were categorized as clinically depressed.

Specifically, the researchers wanted to know if three intervention components would make much of a difference. Those components were having positive emotions, being engaged, and having a “meaningful” life.

Positive emotions included attitudes about the past, present and future and learning skills to amplify both the intensity and duration of these emotions. The idea of engagement came from another researchers idea of “flow” — that state of mind in which a person is totally involved and absorbed in something important to him or her. And finally, a “meaningful life” meant a person was using his or her signature strengths and talents to serve something that was bigger than themselves, such as church or their family.

Using several different exercises, the researchers followed the attitudes of the participants over a period of one year.

They found that the positive psychology exercises relieved depression symptoms for at least six months compared with no intervention, and they decreased levels of mild-to-moderate depression over a one year period.

The researchers would be the first to note that the study sample was small and may not reflect larger populations. And no one is saying these techniques are the best and only way to relieve depression symptoms. In fact, pharmaceutical interventions continue to have the most dramatic improvement in the lives of millions of depressed individuals.

Still, the results show promise. Positive psychology interventions could very well make a difference to people in dire need of treatment.

Source: Positive Psychotherapy. Seligman, Martin E. P., Rashid, Tayyab, Parks, Acacia C., American Psychologist, Vol. 61, Issue 8

Researchers have demonstrated convincingly that friendships matter when it comes to happiness. In fact, some studies have suggested that the number of friends was positively related to happiness. Implicit in these findings is that a person would be happier if he or she had more friends.

But other researchers took a different look — not at quantity, but quality. They wanted to know if there were different kinds of friendships that contributed to one’s happiness and which feature was the strongest predictor.

To learn more, they surveyed 280 college students (192 women and 88 men). They ran them through a variety of questionnaires to better understand their feelings and attitudes about friendships.

What they found may or may not surprise you.

First, they found that a “best friendship” environment significantly predicted happiness compared to the overall number of friends. Thus, even though one might have several friendships, it is the best friend that contributes most to one’s happiness.

They also found that if the best friendship was low in quality, the high quality of the other close friends did not make a difference in the happiness of that person. In other words, best friends matter more, even if the relationship is not as strong as it could be.

Third, they found that intimacy is not the reason best friendships matter in terms of happiness. It’s companionship that matters. This makes sense since other studies show that activities contribute to a person’s happiness and they are often the result of some companionship, not necessarily intimacy.

What does all of this mean?

It means a person doesn’t need a large number of friends to be happy, nor do those friendships require intimacy. Instead, combine companionship with a best friend and the result will likely be greater overall well-being.

Source:  Looking to happy tomorrows with friends: Best and close friendships as they predict happiness. Melikşah Demir, Metin Özdemir and Lesley A. Weitekamp. Journal of Happiness Studies. Vol. 8. No. 2, June 2007

That deceptively simple and obvious observation has now been backed up by research conducted last year in England at the University of Nottingham.

Researchers wanted to compare the happiness “levels” of lottery jackpot winners with a control group. Using what’s called the “Satisfaction with Life Scale,” people in both groups were asked how satisfied they were in comparison to different elements in their life, their different moods, and how often they treated themselves .

Despite how we all think we would act, the reserachers found that it wasn’t the flashy cars that dramatically increase one’s happiness level. Instead, it was reading a book, enjoying a bottle of wine or listening to music that really made a difference.

The results are interesting for one other interesting fact — lottery jackpot winners were on the whole happier than non-winners (95 percent of them said they were positive about their life compared with 71 percent in the non-winner group).

Thus, even though they were happier becaue of their winnings, both groups shared a greater interest in cost-free indulgences, such as a long bath, playing games or enjoying their hobby. Those who described themselves as being less happy didn’t those the cost-free indulgences.

The researchers concluded — spending time relaxing is the secret to a happy life. “Cost-free pleasures are the ones that make the difference.”

Source: Source: Millionaires. ScienceDaily

Researchers have struggled with that question and it’s an important one. Many self-help books tell us that if we just change our thinking, then success and happiness will follow. But what if it’s the other way around? What if you must first do things to improve your overall well-being, with your initial attitude being irrelevant or minimal? Which approach is most accurate? If someone is unhappy, which path should one pursue?

To answer this question, several years ago researchers looked at both at the same time, putting nearly 200 psychology students through a series of tests. Specifically, they wanted to see what impact four areas of daily life would have on one’s perception of their happiness — their physical health, the amount of daily hassles in their lives, their overall view of the world, and their way of thinking that deals with real-world situations and problems.

What did their research lead them to conclude?

They concluded that happiness works both ways and that there is no single “secret.” For example, they found that the more daily hassles a person reported, the lower his or her reported level of happiness. Similarly, people who reported high levels of physical symptoms also tended to report high levels of daily hassles and see the world as being less benevolent — both of which contribute to less than optimal level of well-being.

At the opposite end, the research showed that if someone had a general disposition towards happiness or life satisfaction, then they tended to report fewer daily hassles, better physical health, and seemed to cope better with real-world situations. In that case, the personality caused the others to occur.

This early research in happiness is consistent with more recent studies which suggest one’s level of happiness is a combination of genes, circumstances and direct control. In other words, happiness is a combination of who you are, where you are and what you do. While psychologists debate the percentage of each one of those “slices” of the happiness pie — what is clear is this: the cause and effect works both ways. It helps to have a happy disposition, but it’s not a necessity. Doing certain things can improve one’s overall well-being, in spite of any hardships, circumstances or personality influences that may stand in the way.

Source: Integrating top-down and bottom-up structural models of subjective well-being: A longitudinal investigation. By: Feist, Gregory J., Bodner, Todd E., Jacobs, John F., Miles, Marilyn, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 68, Issue 1

In the past several years researchers have studied what many of us know intuitively — money or the pursuit of money probably won’t make us happy. And yet, the desire continues. Entrepreneurs seek the next “killer app.” Gamblers roll the dice and punch their lotto cards. We all continue to cling to the hope and fantasy that if we only had a lot of money all of our woes would end. We would be living on cloud nine.

Deep down, we know it doesn’t work that way.

But researchers wanted to confirm that gut feeling in a series of experiments. They also wanted to see to what extent intrinsic (inwardly) goals affected our well-being compared to extrinsic (external) goals, such as wealth, power and social acceptance.

Not surprisingly, they found that when people focused on external goals, there was a stronger negative relationship between those goals and their well-being. In other words, pursuing wealth, power, etc. had a more damaging effect on one’s happiness compared to pursuing intrinsic goals.

Several reasons could explain the connection.

First, researchers believe people strongly pursuing extrinsic goals tend to have more superficial relationships, engage in more social comparisons, and allow those external pursuits to crowd out enjoyable and satisfying activities.

But it could also be that people with traits such as high insecurity, low self-esteem, or low cooperativeness are attracted to extrinsic goal settings and diminished well-being. Thus, the two go hand-in-hand because of these personality traits.

What is clear is this — people’s choice of goals affects one’s overall, long-term well-being. In addition, the focus of those goals and the dynamic process with which those goals are pursued make a big difference in our lives. People who wish to be happier in their lives may be better served, for example, in focusing more on those goals that involve growth, connections and contribution, as opposed to those goals that involve money, beauty and popularity. In addition, goals that are interesting and more personally relevant to us will also contribute more to our overall well-being than goals that forced or pressured upon us.

Pursue your goals because of what they will do for you on the inside, not for what they will do for you on the outside.

Source: Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R., Deci, E., & Kasser, T. (2004). The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 475-486.

Given the opposite environment — one in which negative emotions emerge — this makes perfect sense. What do people express when they are in a funk or depressed? They say they can’t think of anything else; their thought processes narrow. Many people in that situation even say even their vision narrows — the “looking through a narrow tunnel” syndrome.

Now, researchers have confirmed that the opposite occurs when positive emotions exist. They say that people who experience positive emotions “show a style of broad-minded coping in which they step back from the current problems and consider them from multiple angles.”

Obviously, that approach comes in handy during a stressful situation. People in a positive state are more likely to reappraise the situation in a positive light and be more goal-directed. They are also more likely to infuse ordinary events with positive meaning, which in turns help them survive or thrive despite adversity.

As corny as it may sound, Norman Vincent Peale got it right — the power of positive thinking rests in its ability to broaden, not narrow, our thoughts, perceptions and actions. If you want to change your actions, change your emotions first.

Source: Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought-action repertoires. Barbara L. Fredrickson and Christine Branigan. Cognition and Emotion 19 (3), 313-332 (2005)

That appears to be the case if you believe research conducted several years ago.

The researchers looked at answers to a survey given by more than 13,000 freshman college students who entered college in 1976. Nineteen years later the researchers looked at how their lives had turned out, specifically looking at their incomes, job satisfaction and unemployment history.

Cheerfulness (or a positive outlook) generally has a positive effect on income. The better the outlook, the higher the income. Those with a more positive attitude also had less incidents of unemployment.

Why the connection?

Researchers think several dynamics are at play. First, they say cheerfulness may have a motivational element. They say that happier individuals may be more likely to anticipate success and so are more willing to tackle difficult or challenging tasks. Potential setbacks don’t have the same negative impact on them compared to other people. That may be especially useful in work environments as their “can do” attitude translates into better performance and greater rewards.

Second cheerful people may have more social skills and be more adept at the interpersonal dynamics at play in a job. Individuals with a pleasant or upbeat personality may also be offered more desirable positions or be more successful at persuading others.

A third possibility may be that upbeat people also may get more favorable performance ratings. A “halo effect” may occur where an overall general impression creeps into evaluations of specific behaviors.

The research leads to an intriguing question. If income levels can be predicted based on one’s attitude in college, should students seek out a personality/attitude survey that might give them some early feedback? While income should not be the sole criteria for a happy and successful life, it does matter. An early tool may help students evaluate their mindset before jumping into a competitive job market.

Source: Dispositional Effect and Job Outcomes. Ed Diener, Carol Nickerson, Richard E. Lucas, Ed Sandvik. Social Sciences Research.59, 229-259.

Philosophers, economists, and researchers have been pondering that question for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. One reason for the question — more money does not contribute that much to a person’s happiness.

If that is true, then why do people want more money?

There could be several explanations, according to researchers.

First, it could be that people don’t realize more money will not raise their well-being, although this is suspect since in studies most people say that money is not that important in their hierarchy of values.

It could also be that people enjoy the goal of attaining higher incomes more than the money itself and what it represents.

One other explanation, according to researchers, is that people may seek money because it produces short-terms benefits, even though a person’s long-term happiness does not move.

And finally, people may feel a strong need to acquire money, goods and services simply because of societal pressure. Individuals may feel they need to buy things to gain status and not be perceived as failures.

Whatever the reason, the research remains pretty strong — once a minimum level of existence or income occurs — higher income has only a modest impact on a person’s long-term happiness.

Source: Will money increase subjective well-being? Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. Social Indicators Research, 57, 119-169 (2002).

That seemingly innocuous and obvious statement has a lot behind it.

For example, what exactly do we value? Do we know? Is it material wealth? Is it achievement? Is it some combination? Most people assume they know what their values are. Politicians certainly talk enough about it. Is there a universal set of values most people share?

To learn more about how our values drive our well-being, researchers at the University of Illinois a number of years ago asked students to keep a journal for nearly a month straight, asking them at the end of each day to rate how good or bad a day it was and whether or not they were satisfied with certain things, like their social life.

They discovered that day-to-day satisfaction is strongly influenced by the domain we value the most. Thus, if achievement was highly valued by the students, achievement-oriented individuals tended to evaluate a day as good when they excelled in some form of achievement. Similarly, people who stressed benevolence evaluated their day as good when they had a positive social interaction.

All this means is that people find different activities more or less rewarding. No surprise there. But think about the consequences. It means, for example, that not everybody places achievement at his or her highest value level and that’s okay. We don’t all have to be high achievers or social magnets to be happy.

Find what you do value and focus on that, not on what society as a whole believes.

Source: Value as a Moderator in Subjective Well-Being. Shigehiro Oishi, Ed Diener, Eunkook Suh, Richard E. Lucas, Journal of Personality 67:1; February, 1999

The research points in that direction.

While the actual mechanism remains unclear, a number of different studies seem to suggest that on average those people labeled as “extroverted” tend to be happier both in the short-term and long-term.

But there are some interesting subtleties to the research.

For example, two researchers seemed to demonstrate that extroverts have higher average levels of positive emotions because they react more positively than introverts to the same daily stimuli and events. In other words, it’s that reaction that contributes to their overall well-being.

Meanwhile, other findings seem to contradict a long-held belief.

Many people assume that because extroverted people gain high levels of satisfaction through social interactions and relationships (think traveling salesperson or social butterfly), those social interactions are the primary reason for their happiness. Conversely, if you don’t have similar kinds of social relationships, then you won’t be as happy.

However, one study suggests that extroverts are also happier than introverts whether they live alone or with others, work in nonsocial jobs or in social jobs, or live in rural or urban areas. In fact, another study shows that extroverts do not spend more time with others, although they were still happier than introverts.

All of this research confirms the overwhelming belief in research circles that heredity plays a very strong (although not exclusive) role in one’s ongoing level of happiness or unhappiness.

What does this mean for people who are introverted?

It does not mean they can’t or won’t be happy, but it does suggest that they may need to pay a lot more attention to their needs in order to counteract the potential negative effects from hereditary forces.

Source: Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. By: Diener, Ed, Suh, Eunkook M., Lucas, Richard E., Smith, Heidi L., Psychological Bulletin, 00332909, 19990301, Vol. 125, Issue 2

Most people ascribe to that maxim, even if they’ve never seen the research backing it up. It just makes sense.

But for several years now, the research has demonstrated a clear correlation between happiness and a longer life. It first started with a follow-up study of the now famous Minnesota nuns. Comparing their essays when they first entered the order and their ages, researchers found that of those rated as writing “happier” essays — 90 percent of them lived past the age of 85 compared with only 34 percent who were rated in the least happy percentile.

Another study of Mayo Clinic patients demonstrated the same thing. As part of their admittance, 800 patients answered questions about whether their outlook was optimistic or pessimistic. Forty years later, of the 200 patients who had died, the optimists showed 19 percent greater longevity than the pessimists.

Longevity clearly results from genetics, lifestyle, and other factors (perhaps even luck). But one thing is clear — a positive attitude and happier mindset can extend one’s life and make it richer in the process.

Source: Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness and Human Strengths. Alan Carr. Brunner-Routledge. New York. 2004

Here are some of their findings:

• Older people living alone were more likely to be depressed, lonely and unhappy and to be less satisfied with life than those living with a spouse.
• Those living with a relative or friend were more likely to be lonely than those living with a spouse.
• Men living with a relative or friend were less likely to be happy or satisfied with life than those living with a wife.
• In most regions of Europe, older women who were unmarried were in general happier living with friends and family than alone. But this did not apply to women in Nordic countries where there was no significant difference in happiness levels between living alone or with other people.
• In England, older women rated their health better if they lived alone rather than with a husband. However, men and women living alone had a higher mortality risk than those who lived with a spouse.

At least that’s been the prevailing wisdom.

But now a researcher says it doesn’t quite work that way. Nathan Bowling, Ph.D., assistant professor of psychology at Wright State, says that his research shows that satisfaction does not cause performance. Instead, he says that employee personality characteristics, such as self-esteem, emotional stability, extroversion and conscientiousness determine it.

According to Bowling, the studies show that employees who have an overall negative attitude to all things in life likely won’t find job satisfaction, regardless of performance, because of their personality characteristics.

“Emotional stability matters a lot,” Bowling said. “People who are neurotic, those who tend to be anxious, depressed, regardless of the situation, typically won’t find satisfaction no matter how many jobs they try.”

What are the implications of his work?

Bowling says that workplace interventions designed to improve performance by exclusively targeting employee satisfaction are unlikely to be effective. He also suggests that the studies show that intelligence is one of the things that drives the performance. Another common denominator of solid performing employees, according to Bowling, are those who exhibit a high level of conscientiousness — those who are detail-oriented, hard workers and who set goals.

Source: Is the Job Satisfaction-Job Performance Relationship Spurious: A Meta-Analytic Examination. Source: Bowling, N.A. (2007). Journal of Vocational Behavior, 71, 167-185.

But the reverse works as well. We can often feel sad, depressed, jealous or angry when we compare ourselves “upward.”

The simple truth is — rightly or wrongly — we all learn not to judge our actions based on some internal measurement, but on the measurement of others.

A decade ago researchers took a closer look at this social comparison phenomenon and added to our knowledge of it.

They found that happy individuals seem to be less sensitive to unsolicited comparison information and less vulnerable to unfavorable comparisons than unhappy people. They also surmised that happy people tend to use such information sparingly and selectively. This approach seemed to protect a person’s well-being and self-esteem.

What was their observation?

While comparing to someone else’s success can be inspiring to us if looked at positively — focusing on one’s own outcomes, acknowledging the success of others without envy, and taking little satisfaction in the failures of others was perhaps a better prescription for happiness.

Source: Hedonic Consequences of Social Comparison: A Contrast of Happy and Unhappy People. Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1141-1157 (1997)

Based on world-wide surveys, the Danes typically rank the highest in happiness. And yet, they pay some of the highest taxes in the world — anywhere between 50 and 70 percent.

How can that be?

One possible reason — the government covers all health care and education, and it spends more on children and the elderly than any country in the world per capita. The citizens also say their system is efficient for its small population (5.5 million people).

But there may be another reason, according to this article. Since a banker can end up taking home as much money as an artist, people don’t chose careers based on income or status. Some Danes call it ‘Jante-lov,’ which translates roughly into “You’re no better then anybody else.” In other words, garbage collectors are just as valued as doctors or lawyers.

Another possible explanation for their happiness — Danes are very social. About 90 percent of them belong to some social club, many of which are paid for by the government. Shopping and consuming also is not a top priority. Along with less emphasis on “stuff” and a strong social fabric, the Danes also have a very high level of trust in each other and in their government.

All the necessary ingredients for a healthy, happy population.

That’s what researchers discovered recently when they tested the neural activity of study participants after showing them expensive and inexpensive wines.

The results showed increased brain activity in the the medial orbitofrontal cortex — an area of the brain believed to encode pleasure related to taste, odors and music — when participants tasted “pricey” wines. They also found that inflating the price of a bottle of wine enhanced a person’s experience of drinking it, based on the corresponding neural activity.

But here’s the interesting part.

It was a blind taste test. Participants never knew the quality of the wine. They were just told the price. In fact, researchers presented two of the wines twice, once with the true price tag, and again with a fake one. They also passed off a $90 bottle of wine for one they said was $10 and showed a $5 dollar bottle as one costing $45.

Researchers say that their study demonstrates how subjective beliefs come into play with respect to the quality of an experience.

“If you believe that the experience is better, even though it’s the same wine, the rewards center of the brain encodes it as feeling better,” said Antonio Rangel, associate professor of economics at the California Institute of Technology and lead researcher.

Marketers have known this for years. This just confirms it.

Researchers reached that conclusion as a result of a sweeping meta-study several years ago. They looked at approximately 150 different experimental, ambulatory and longitudinal studies studies that have been conducted over the years that tested the impact of well-being on objective health outcomes.

The results showed that happiness does indeed link to short-term health outcomes, long-term health outcomes and disease or symptom control.

Also, one of the other interesting findings — happiness may improve our recovery time from a stressful situation. Cardiovascular and endocrine activity normally increases as a result of stress. But the researchers believe well-being may disrupt the chronic activity of that potential negative effect. These findings are consistent with another study in which heart activity returned more quickly to baseline (or normal) levels after watching positive, emotion-inducing films.

In other words, happiness may not prevent us from reacting to a stressful situation, which is, after all, a natural occurrence built into our DNA. However, a state of well-being can help us bounce back more quickly to a state of normalcy and not let the negative effects of stress take their toll over the long-term.

Just remember that the next time some nutcase cuts you off in traffic.

Source: Health benefits: Meta-analytically determining the impact of well-being on objective health outcomes. Howell, R. T., Kern, M. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. Health Psychology Review, 1, 1-54 (2007)

That surprising conclusion was reached by researchers studying marital status and life satisfaction in a longitudinal sample of more than 1,500 people back in 2003. The researchers looked at how baseline levels of happiness change or don’t change based on dramatic life events, such as marriage, divorce or the death of a spouse.

For example, researchers say the study suggests that people who get married and stay married are more satisfied than average long before the marriage occurs. One possible reason — a person who is very satisfied with life prior to marriage probably already has a rich social network and thus has less to gain from the companionship of marriage. Thus, while marriage is a positive occurrence for those people, it’s not life changing. Conversely, a person who is lonely or less happy before marriage has much more to gain.

The results of this study tweak the notion that we all fall back into a “baseline” of happiness after a significant event occurs. The reality is more nuanced. Some people do resort back to previous levels of happiness after the initial phase of their marriage. In other words, they “settle in.” But others don’t. In fact, they report far lower levels of happiness after marriage than they experienced before marriage. One way researchers explain these differences is that while marriage can be very rewarding, it can also be very stressful to people and that stress may cause long-term damage to one’s overall satisfaction system.

To sum up — while marriage can be a life-changing experience (and not always for the better), it’s impact on our long-term happiness appears smaller than we realize, especially if we were pretty satisfied prior to going into it. That’s not to suggest marriage is a waste of time or not valuable. On the contrary. It’s a major satisfaction resource. But perhaps it means expectation levels should be tempered prior to this important event.

Source: Re-examining adaptation and the setpoint model of happiness: Reactions to changes in marital status. Lucas, R. E., Clark, A. E., Georgellis, Y., & Diener, E. (2003).  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 527-539.

That’s the conclusion drawn by researchers who surveyed a group of Japanese undergraduate students and women.

They also found that that happy people are more kind in the first place and that they can become even happier, kinder and more grateful following this simple intervention.

Why does kindness have such a positive effect?

One reason might be that kindness is a valuable human strength and contributes to good social relationships. Another explanation revolves around the notion that positive emotions may lead people to make and solidify new bonds and to develop optimism and senses of identity and goal orientation. Therefore, if people “experience positive emotions and optimal social conditions as a result of their own kindness, an upward spiral may be created” (the broaden-and-build theory of subjective well-being).

Bottom line — count your acts of kindness for one week and see if it doesn’t make you feel better or happier.

Source: Happy People Become Happier Through Kindness: A Counting Kindness Intervention. Otake, K., Shimai, S., Tanaka-Matsumi, J., Otsui, K, & Fredrickson, B. L. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 361-375. (2006)

We know some of them are clearly in an unhappy state. It’s estimated that two of every 10 children and youth will have had some form of mental illness and one in 10 children will have some episode of depression before their 14th birthday. But does the absence of mental illness suggest mental “healthiness?”

To answer these questions, researchers looked at data collected on more than 1,200 youth between the ages of 12-18.

They found that more youth (about one half) are moderately mentally healthy than are “flourishing” or mentally healthy (about 40 percent) , whereas a small portion are not mentally healthy and are languishing (about 6 percent). Not surprisingly, the study shows that young people between the ages of 12-14 (middle school) are flourishing the most, while the mental health in youth ages 15–18 is moderate. There appears to be about a 10 percent loss of flourishing between middle school and high school.

That’s unfortunate since the research also strongly implies that those young people who are flourishing “had the fewest depressive symptoms and conduct problems, and the highest levels of global self-concept, self-determination, closeness to other people, and school integration.” Conversely, young people who were considered “languishing” had the highest number of depressive symptoms and conduct problems.

The question is — what are we doing to evaluate whether or not a young person entering high school is more or less susceptible to the apparent “slippage” of his or her mental health? Can we prevent or retard this phenomenon?

Source: Mental Health in Adolescence: Is America’s Youth Flourishing? Keyes, Corey L. M. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol 76(3), Jul 2006. pp. 395-402.

One Canadian researcher thinks so. He argues that elevated levels of serotonin may be an alternative to drug-induced mood improvement.

What are some strategies that could elevate serotonin? The scientist looked at the research surrounding four main areas.

First, he says self-induced changes in mood itself can influence serotonin synthesis. Thinking positive and happy thoughts seem to have some effect on serotonin levels, which in turn improve mood — a kind of self-improvement “loop.”

Second, he says exposure to bright light has a positive effect on serotonin levels.

Third, he says that exercise, especially to the point of fatigue, can improve serotonin synthesis.

And finally, he says diet (specifically tryptophan) can improve one’s naturally produced levels of serotonin. The researcher cautions that just eating foods high in serotonin (such as bananas) may not improve mood. That’s because the serotonin in the bananas doesn’t cross what he calls the “blood–brain barrier.”

What does this all mean?

It means there may be viable alternatives to drugs in improving mood and ultimately adding to one’s well-being. A note of caution — that does not mean antidepressants are bad or harmful. On the contrary. Many have found them to literally be life-savers. But this thread of thinking should give some confidence to those who are averse or reluctant to take antidepressants. Some mood improvement and happiness can be achieved, it seems, without them.

Source: How to increase serotonin in the human brain without drugs. Simon N. Young. Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience 32 (6) 394-399. 2007

New research, however, is tweaking or challenging that belief.

Some say adults can show large changes in life satisfaction over time and it’s permanent.

Researchers in Australia, for example, looked at responses from a long-term German survey which seemed to show that that the people most likely to record large changes in life satisfaction are those who scored high on the personality traits of extraversion and/or neuroticism.

What can we conclude?

For most of us, happiness levels probably remain stable over time. We are who we are. However, for some people, happiness levels change dramatically and remain changed, perhaps in large part because of their personality. If you are an extroverted or neurotic person, you may be more likely to change your happiness — positively or negatively — over time. If nothing else, being aware of that potential may be an important self-discovery.

Source: The Set-Point Theory of Well-Being: Negative Results and Consequent Revisions. Bruce Heady. Social Indicators Research, Vol. 85, Number 3, (2008)

Researchers explored that important question by reviewing the survey responses of 52,000 people in 51 countries.

They found several interesting correlations. First, they found that at the individual level self-described happy people tended to have more confidence in the government and armed forces, a greater emphasis on postmaterialist values, stronger support for democracy, less intolerance of immigrants and racial groups, and a greater willingness to fight for one’s country. For example, researchers say participatory governments require individuals to trust that their fellow citizens will not abuse civil and political liberties that are a part. Thus, “by facilitating trust and cooperation, subjective well-being may have important implications for tolerance, as well as support for democracy and individual freedom.”

But these positive attitudes can be greatly affected by the conditions at the national level. Thus, the level of the GNP, violence, inequality, and a country’s overall well-being levels could dampen or diminish those attitudes at the personal level. For example, research suggests that when people perceive a threat or experience fear and anger, they are more likely to endorse punitive measures and are less politically tolerant.

The researchers (Ed Diener and William Tov) bring this all together by saying that while improving individual happiness looks to be a critical foundation for the building of lasting peace in a country, improving the political and economic foundations within a nation must be present as well.

Source: Subjective Well-Being and Peace by Ed Diener and William Tov, Journal of Social Issues 63 (2), 421–440.

Two of the leading psychologists in the field of well-being studies — Ed Diener and Martin E.P. Seligman — made that provocative suggestion several years ago in a highly detailed report.

Their observation? We should include it. They argued that income and wealth generation is only one indication of the overall state of a nation (albeit a strong one). For example, they cite that while economic output has risen steeply over the past decades, there has been no rise in life satisfaction during this period, and in fact there has been a substantial increase in depression and distrust.

In other words, we’re making more and enjoying it less. Shouldn’t we be measuring that and building policy around it?

The researchers argue that if we measured different factors, such as the well-being of workers, we would have much different outcomes and thus would be more willing to take steps to improve them. Thus, perhaps U.S. policymakers would be more inclined to consider legislation or incentives that rewarded companies for improving the overall well-being of their workers, even if it meant initially higher costs or lower profits. (Ironically, happy workers are productive workers. Thus, a business should promote well-being.)

A different perspective might also motivate policymakers to fund programs that reduce mental disorders or generate more positive social relationships.

The U.S. economy has evolved and matured. Shouldn’t we do the same with respect to our appraisal of it?

Source: Beyond Money: Toward an Economy of Well-Being, Ed Diener, Martin EP. Seligman (2004) Psychological Science in the Public Interest 5 (1), 1–31

If there’s one word that encapsulates much of the research surrounding happiness it would be flourish — to live within an optimal range of human functioning.

But what is that optimal range and can it be proven?

In 2005 two researchers concluded that the optimal level of flourishing existed when the number of genuine positive emotions outpaced the number of negative emotions by a ratio of 3-to-1 (actually 2.9). They came to that conclusion after analyzing the daily reportings of about 200 people over a period of one month.

Interestingly, the researchers said that other studies indicate that only about 20 percent of the U.S. population are flourishing at any given time. The rest, they say, are “languishing.”

Did they detect an upper limit? Researchers Frederickson and Losada believe inappropriate or non-genuine positive emotions disrupt this delicate balance of well-being. They also said that appropriate negative emotions are a critical ingredient within human flourishing.

In summary, the researchers said optimal human flourishing has four key components: goodness, generativity (meaning broad and flexible behavior), growth and resilience.

In other words, to be happy is to flourish.

Source: Positive Affect and the Complex Dynamics of Human Flourishing by Barbara L. Fredrickson and Marcial F. Losada, American Psychologist

Studies have clearly demonstrated the value of gratitude and acts of kindness as they relate to one’s well-being. Could a conscious effort to improve one’s curiosity also improve happiness levels as well?

Researchers asked about 100 study participants to keep a journal and record their levels of curiosity over time. They also measured a person’s tendency towards curiosity before their recordings began.

The results?

According to the researchers, people with greater baseline curiosity engaged in more frequent growth-oriented behaviors and experienced a greater presence of life satisfaction than those with less curiosity. Their satisfaction levels were also not just positive over time, but from day-to-day as well.

And while the study had the usual limitations (including a limited number of participants), the results make sense. As the researchers put it: “…People with greater curiosity challenge their views of self, others, and the world with an inevitable stretching of information, knowledge, and skills.”

Source: Curiosity and Pathways to Well-Being and Meaning in Life: Traits, States, and Everyday Behaviors by Todd B. Kashdan and Michael F. Steger

So what?

Studies show positive, idealized illusions about our spouse or partner often generate greater satisfaction and less conflict than thinking in terms of “reality.”

According to researchers, people apparently seem to project their image of an idealized partner on the partner they possess. They also report being happier in their relationship when they see their partner more generously than their partner see themselves, and they are happier in their relationships when their partner puts the best possible spin on them and returns the favor.

Researchers say all of these positive illusions become self-fulfilling. People seem to create the partner they desire by idealizing them. They also come to see the same virtues in themselves that their partner initially perceived in them.

Source: Reflections on the Self-Fulfilling Effects of Positive Illusions by Sandra L. Murray, John G. Holmes and Dale W. Griffin

But is there a flip side? Can goals be harmful as well?

Researchers have studied this important question, especially since so much satisfaction and happiness seems tied to goal-setting and accomplishment.

What is the trade-off?

Anxiety and worry. Researchers say that when people are highly committed to their goals, they may fear failure or worry that they won’t achieve them. This stress or anxiety can often counteract the potential positive effects of goal-setting. For example, not accomplishing one’s goals may threaten a person’s self-worth, even when that person holds positive perceptions of accomplishment.

In other words, goals are good. We must, however, always understand and appreciate the trade-offs associated with them.

Source: The Psychological Trade-Offs of Goal Investment by Eva M. Pomerantz, Jill L. Saxon, and Shigehiro Oishi

Studies suggest it has a lot to do with specific circumstances and activities.

For example, an optimal level of happiness seems to work best for relationships. That is, being at a high level of satisfaction in a relationship helps you in that kind of environment. You want joy from others, especially since relationships constitute some of the best sources of happiness in our lives. And if you’re not happy, then the relationship may experience problems or risk falling apart.

At the same time, being very happy may not work in other circumstances.

Take work. Optimal happiness may lead to complacency, whereas being moderately happy may propel you to improve, change, grow or seek a different environment and that is generally beneficial. In the domain of achievement, being at the peak of your happiness level may actually be counterproductive. The same may be said for people in college. Very happy people have been shown NOT to have the best grades (although those same people do score high with respect to social environments and relationships).

An optimal level of happiness may sound like a worthwhile goal, especially in relationships. But it may also be unnecessary in achievement-oriented environments.

Stop trying to reach the pinnacle of happiness in your job. Being moderately happy, the studies suggest, works just fine.

Source: The Optimal Level of Well-Being: Can People Be Too Happy? by Shigehiro Oishi, Ed Diener, and Richard E. Lucas

According to recent reports, about 20 percent of all male lawyers report being depressed, which is nearly three times higher than the national average for men. Female lawyers fare a little better, but not by much.

What gives?

Some experts blame it on stress, long hours, and a pessimistic personality. Others attribute it to a profession that interacts with people in typically emotional or high-stakes settings, which can tax even the most psychologically stable individuals

Lawyers, of course, don’t have a lock on professional unhappiness.

Physicians often grapple with the same issues, and as a result many are searching for less demanding environments, such as administration, teaching or consulting.

As a society, we value professional achievement. It drives much of our behavior. But it doesn’t necessarily lead to a happy or satisfying life. Just ask any unhappy lawyer or physician.

Research suggests you probably can.

Clearly, people who report being happy tend to also have high self-esteem. High self-esteem helps those people find more resources that can, in turn, help generate even more pleasurable and enjoyable experiences.

But researchers also suggest self-esteem and happiness, while often connected, are two different constructs.

For example, happiness appears to be uniquely connected to mood, temperamental traits, overall life satisfaction appraisals and social contacts. Meanwhile, self-esteem appears to be uniquely connected to feelings of optimism, sense of mastery, satisfaction with one’s education, and satisfaction associated with various needs — such as achievement, purpose, meaning and understanding.

Thus, you could assess yourself as being low in those areas and yet still feel you’re relatively happy. High self-esteem does not appear to be a necessary, fundamental requirement for happiness — but it helps.

Source: Happiness and Self-Esteem by Sonja Lyubomirsky, Chris Tkach and M. Robin Dimatteo

But what works?

Besides expressing gratitude and helping others, some research points towards thinking and replaying happier times as a key intervention technique.

One study, for example, compared feelings associated with writing about happy life experiences, talking into a tape recorder or privately thinking about them.

The findings indicated that those who thought about their happiest events had the higher life satisfaction reportings.

Similarly, in another study participants wrote or thought about their happiest day by either analyzing it or repetitively replaying it in their minds. The same result — writing and analysis was more detrimental than thinking and replaying the incident.

In other words, one technique to improving happiness might be to replay or relive positive life events “as though rewinding a videotape.”

Source: The Promise of Sustainable Happiness by Julia K. Boehm and Sonja Lyubomirsky

That’s the conclusion reached by several researchers in a recent study about childrearing. Details of the study were presented in this article in ScienceDaily.

This study suggests that the outlook for psychological well-being later in life for today’s childless women is quite good.

The researchers looked at data on women between the ages of 51 and 61 from two different national surveys that included common measures for psychological well-being.

According to their analysis, all other things being equal, the childless women were about as satisfied and happy with their lives as the on-time mothers.

Researchers also found another interesting tidbit — the highest level of well-being was among mothers who were most likely to have children still living at home or still in college. The study suggests that delaying motherhood may have some benefits for women—probably related to “being more career focused and having higher social standing.”

That’s the conclusion reached by researchers at the University of Michigan as described in this article by Science Daily.

The researchers studied 300 parents in a mid-sized district in western United States and found numerous instances of requests for teachers with with high satisfaction ratings over teachers with strong achievement ratings.

But the researchers also said families in higher poverty schools favored schools with strong student achievement scores. The reverse was true for families in wealthier schools. One possible explanation — because resources are typically limited in low-income school environments, parents may seek teachers skilled at improving achievement, even if it means sacrificing satisfaction. With resources abundant in wealthier environments, researchers believe parents don’t feel as compelled to find high-achieving teachers and are more interested in finding teachers who help their children enjoy school and learning.

For years researchers have pondered whether or not happiness is a universal trait. Many have concluded that most people across the globe do desire some form and degree of happiness.

But that pursuit of happiness varies greatly depending on one’s culture and circumstances. For example, no surprise — very poor nations and those in dramatic political change invariably report the lowest levels of subjective well-being. Conversely, many of the wealthy and democratic Scandinavian countries consistently report the highest levels of happiness.

But a culture can also be poor in resources and rich in happiness as well. Latin American nations, as an example, appear to have a more positive orientation and value happiness more than other countries. At the other end of the scale, East Asian nations often place other values ahead of happiness, such as mastery and pleasing one’s family or group.

How we define happiness has as much to do with our cultural influences as it does with our personality, goals and other individual factors.

Source: Subjective Well-Being Is Desirable, But Not the Summum Bonum by Ed Diener and Christie Scollon

Guess again.

A number of studies have consistently shown that we all incorrectly predict whether or not something in the future will make us happy.

Here’s one quick example.

Associate professors were asked to estimate their overall level of happiness if they made tenure or were denied it. The results of the study? It found (at least in the short term) that those who were given tenure were less happy than they expected, and those professors who were denied tenure were actually happier than they predicted.

Think about that the next time you consider changing jobs or buying a new car. Will you be as happy as you think you will be? Probably not.

The same is true, by the way, for overly pessimistic predictions. We tend to be both overly optimistic and pessimistic. In fact, psychology author and researcher Dan Gilbert says that most events in our lives have a small impact that don’t last very long. Whether they are good or bad, happy or sad — we get over them eventually.

Can positive emotions mitigate or reverse the cardiovascular effects of negative emotions?

Several years ago researchers sought an answer to that question. Their findings — positive emotions do indeed affect the cardiovascular system. But here’s what’s interesting — it’s not so much what positive emotions do to the system; it’s what they can undo. When negative emotions have already generated cardiovascular stress the positive emotions can bring a person’s heart levels back to its base level.

In other words, thinking positive thoughts, repeating meditative mantras or implementing calm breathing techniques during duress do work. They can bring down your stress level, thereby reducing your risk of coronary heart disease.

Source: The Undoing Effect of Positive Emotions by Barbara L. Fredrickson, Roberta A. Mancuso, Christine Branigan and Michele M. Tugade

That was the conclusion reached by researchers Michele M. Tugade and Barbara L. Fredrickson several years ago after studying how and why some people “bounce back” from stressful situations and others don’t.

The researchers looked at stress in both the laboratory setting and in daily life. They discovered that people at both ends of the resilience spectrum (high and low) both experienced frustration when faced with a problem they described. The difference between the two, however, surfaced in their emotions. High-resilient people reported higher levels of a positive mood, even while being frustrated. They also reported feeling more eagerness, excitement, happiness and interest during that same time, especially compared to low-resilient individuals.

The researchers call this effective “emotion regulation” — the ability to keep an even keel when all hell is breaking loose. Thus, they say positive emotions amidst stress can have some real advantages in the coping process.

In other words, even under the most stressful and trying situations — find a way to be positive. You can and will bounce back.

Philosophers have grappled with this question since Ancient Roman times, but recently researchers wanted to explore the question for a more practical reason — perhaps a more definitive answer could clinically help people who experience unhappiness.

The results of one study may have muddied the picture instead of clearing it up. Researchers concluded that all of these paths can lead to life satisfaction and no one single path necessarily holds greater weight than the others.

How can this be? How can hedonism hold equal promise compared to a life full of meaning or engagement? Perhaps we don’t want to believe it. Life with meaning or engagement is certainly a life worth living. Purpose drives us. It drives us to act positively, both towards ourselves and others. But what if just pursuing pleasure for pleasure sake (assuming the behavior’s ethical) can generate just as much satisfaction for some? Does that negate the other two?

No. It means life runs through many roads. The key is finding yours.

Source: Orientations to Happiness and Life Satisfaction: The Full Life Versus the Empty Life by Christopher Peterson, Nansook Park and Martin E.P. Seligman

Not so, according to researchers. Simple pleasures actually hide a complex dance between the brain, the nervous system and a host of chemical or electrical reactions — all of which might hold important keys to your overall satisfaction and happiness.

Take the desire for something pleasurable. Is that the same as the result itself? Say you want to water ski and imagine the spray on your face, the tug of the boat and the bright, blue sky above as you crisscross across the smooth, watery surface. Will the event match your expectations? Perhaps. Both may give you the same pleasure.

But “wanting” and “having” something may also have two different outcomes in the brain, according to researchers at the University of Michigan. In other words, you can gain pleasure from each independent of the other. For example, the researchers suggest that some drug addicts relapse because their changed brains make them vulnerable to wanting the drugs, even after the symptoms of withdrawal have long passed.

In practical terms, desire holds its own rewards. We can actually experience pleasure and thus some level of satisfaction by wanting something, regardless of whether or not it becomes reality.

The notion seems counterintuitive. Duties, after all, suggest obligations — having to do something not because you want to, but because you have to do it.

But research seems to point in a different direction. It suggests social duties do contribute to our happiness, especially as we get older. The key is autonomy — having the ability to choose to participate in social duties as opposed to being told to participate in them.

Take voting, for example.

As we age, we tend to want to participate more vigorously in the political process. Perhaps we have a greater appreciation for social institutions, or we are more likely to wrestle with moral and spiritual questions. Or perhaps it results from just taking more responsibility for our own actions. Whatever the reason, the research seems to say that this autonomous act of fulfilling our social responsibilities adds to our overall satisfaction and happiness.

In short, get involved. Fulfilling one’s social responsibilities can reward even the most die-hard political cynic.

Source: Doing One’s Duty: Chronological Age, Felt Autonomy, and Subjective Well-Being by Kennon M. Sheldon, Tim Kassar, Linda Houser-Marko, Taisha Jones, and Daniel Turban

People have known this for centuries. One good friend means more to us than 20 acquaintances. But now recent studies appear to back up this common knowledge, and the results could have significant implications to recent trends in online social networking.

Researchers Meliksah Demir and Lesley Weitekamp wanted to explore the interrelationships between personality, friendship and happiness. Specifically, they wanted to know whether friendship contributed to happiness if personality stayed out of the picture. After surveying more than 400 young adults, they concluded that happiness accounted for nearly 60 percent of the variance in happiness. The authors of the study suggest that even though one could be predisposed to being happy, having a friendship that is high in quality “still adds something extra to our lives and has the potential to increase one’s happiness level.” The researchers also suggest that friendship is important regardless of a person’s personality.

What were the two most important characteristics of friendship that seem to predict happiness? Companionship and self-validation. In other words, in the U.S. we want our friends to be with us. We also want them to help us maintain our self-image by being reassuring and encouraging.

Source: I Am So Happy ‘Cause Today I Found My Friend: Friendship and Personality as Predictors of Happiness by Meliksah Demir and Lesley A. Weitekamp

But recent research shows a more complex picture.

For example, one study found that the financial aspirations of those more highly educated leaned towards higher happiness levels compared to people with low educational levels. At the same time, people with high materialism and strong religious beliefs had lower subjective well-being levels compared to people with higher financial aspirations but a lower religious commitment.

Adding to the complexity — research suggests that while financial aspirations do pull life satisfaction down, household income tends to pull it up. That begs the question — how do most people achieve higher household incomes? Through financial aspirations, of course.

A classic Catch-22.

Aspiring to financial success won’t contribute to your happiness, but a higher income will. No wonder improving happiness through money often feels like a land mine.

Researchers continue to build evidence supporting that common-sense idea. One of the latest — the broaden-and-build theory proposed by Barbara Frederickson at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Ms. Frederickson and her colleagues say that unlike negative emotions, which narrow people’s thoughts and actions, positive emotions broaden them. Thus, a person begins to think and act in new and novel ways, which in turn leads to an increase in personal resources. The researchers believe that as individuals bring these new ideas and actions into their daily life, they build an even greater array of physical, intellectual, social and psychological resources. This, in turn, leads to more positive emotions — a continuous upward spiral that contributes to a person’s overall well-being.

How can this knowledge help people? It suggests that to feel happier in the long run — begin feeling positive literally one day at a time. Each day of positive emotion becomes like a deposit in the bank that over time generates enormous psychological wealth.

Source: Positive Emotions Trigger Upward Spirals Toward Positive Well-Being by Barbara L. Frederickson and Thomas Joiner

However, there may be one area where unhappy people may have a slight edge — judgment and decision making.

It’s been called the “depressive realism” effect. Research suggests depressed people (at least in laboratory settings) judge their control over events more accurately than non-depressed people.

In research studying this effect, happier people have applied successful shortcuts they’ve learned in the past, only to arrive at the wrong answer. Furthermore, the research suggests people in a positive mood tend to use stereotypes more, to be less logical and to be more biased in their judgments.

Real-life, complex settings still probably favor the happier person over the unhappy person in the long run, but it is an intriguing thought — just because you’re happy doesn’t mean you will necessarily make the right decision or move. In fact, your positive mood may cloud your judgment, causing you to believe in a potential outcome that may be unrealistic or has serious “holes” in it. In other words, our positivism could blind us to realities.

Perhaps it’s okay at times to be skeptical, negative or be in a bad mood. It may just prevent us from making a big mistake.

The idea is to set aside 20 minutes each day to think about the best-case scenario for yourself for some definitive time in the future. Even better — write down a detailed description of what that life will be like for you. Be realistic, but don’t be afraid to reach as well. Studies show that having just-out-of-reach goals greatly improves your overall feelings of well-being. To keep things fresh, try changing the topic from day to day. For example, focus on your job one week or your personal life the next. Finally, try using this technique for 30 days straight and see if that doesn’t produce a more habitual way of thinking for you, especially if you don’t typically project yourself much in the future.

This certainly doesn’t work for everybody, but if you want to feel happier today, try putting yourself in the best possible light of tomorrow.

Source: Toward a Durable Happiness by Jaime L. Kurtz and Sonja Lyubomirsky

Studies suggest that once a significant event occurs in our lives, whether it’s good or bad, we eventually adapt to the impact of that event and then return to our previous satisfaction levels. That explains, in part, why lottery winners who were studied only reported experiencing slight increases in happiness levels or why spinal cord injury victims were not as unhappy as one would think two months after their accident.

One researcher called this the “hedonic treadmill.” We revert back to our usual levels of happiness in a relatively short period of time after a spike. It’s called “treadmill” because we can never stay at this new level of well-being for very long.

But subsequent research disputed this theory. For example, the return to “normalcy’ took much longer, occurred more slowly or never happened at all for some people, such as widows and caregivers of Alzheimer’s patients. That has led researchers to question whether people fall back to their previous “average” level of well-being or do they find a different, new middle ground after their significant incident and they settle into that?

This much is known — adaptation matters. Whether it’s immediate or long-term, how we adapt to life events can have a profound effect on our happiness.

Look at the candidates running for President. Crowds of people hanging on their every word. New cities and towns to visit. Staff members who need direction and leadership. Policy statements that gain national media attention. Every moment of the candidate’s waking day is filled with endless excitement, stimulation and energy. It’s a drug of sorts, a kind of natural high.

And boy do they like it. They like it a lot.

If we’ve learned anything, though, about stimulation and excitement it’s this — it never lasts at the same level as it began. Thus, is it any wonder the media gets bored with one campaigner or our politicians become bored with the dull, seemingly routine mechanics of governing? Nothing quite compares to the race. Nothing beats a good rally.

But at what price? Do we elect people on their ability to excite us or on their ability to govern and get things done? Perhaps what we need in positions of power and national leadership are not seekers of stimulation, but men and women of quiet accomplishments, fortitude and intelligence.

But the study also found some surprising and unexpected findings.

For example, those studied (which included two groups in the U.S. and one in Calcutta) reported self-satisfaction levels above neutral. In other words, despite their dire straits, many of them felt good about themselves, including their morality, physical appearance and intelligence.

Another surprising finding revolved around food. While the homeless were on average dissatisfied with their income and housing conditions, they reported above-neutral levels with regard to food. Several explanations could explain for this finding, including a belief that their expectations were so low to begin with that any food was appreciated. It could also be explained by the fact since they were so hungry, they were more likely to enjoy the food they did receive.

Perhaps the most interesting finding was that the Calcutta groups reported high life satisfaction, despite their terrible environmental conditions. One possible reason — the Calcutta groups demonstrated strong social relationships, which may help protect them against the negative psychological effects of poverty.

The conclusion by researchers? Liking oneself may not be enough to counterbalance the psychological harm of material deprivation, but good social relationships just might.

SOURCE: The Subjective Well-Being of the Homeless, and Lessons for Happiness by Robert Biswas-Diener and Ed Diener

An individual or small group, almost always male, unleashes a torrent of violence and death that stretches far beyond the brief, but widespread notoriety that ensues. Left in its wake is the very simple observation — we seem to be at a loss as to how to stop or prevent it.

But there are clues, even if only breadcrumbs.

The Omaha young man was apparently depressed, and he had recently lost two important satisfaction resources — his job and girlfriend. There were also apparently familial conflicts and self-esteem issues. Life had no meaning. In other words, many of the things that help make the rest of us happy or satisfied (even if minimally) were missing — gone. Combine those elements with the desire for notoriety and the access to weapons and we have the perfect recipe for disaster.

Reasonably satisfied or happy young adults are less likely to randomly kill strangers. Perhaps that is where we need to look harder for answers and solutions.

In a series of experiments, researchers tested students in terms of how they handled tasks. Once the task was completed — regardless of the outcome — the researchers had the students evaluate their moods and self-confidence.

They discovered that after experiencing some kind of failure, happy people tended not to engage in negative self-reflection and were able to perform subsequent tasks without dwelling. The reverse was true for less happier people. Researchers surmise that a poor performance by less happy people led to them digging up memories of other past failures, thus further depressing the moods and self-confidence in them and impairing their present concentration and performance.

In other words, even though happy people experience failure like everyone else, they “resist giving failure more than its due amount of contemplation, thus compartmentalizing and limiting their disappointment.”

Source: The Art of Living by Dispositionally Happy People by Allison Abbe, Chris Tkach and Sonja Lyubomirsky

Research, for example, has consistently shown the relaxation benefits of quiet contemplation, and a person in a relaxed state is more likely to report being happy or satisfied.

But there’s more to religion than just prayer. In fact, the social aspects of organized religion may hold greater influence on well-being than just about anything else. Take a typical Sunday service. Families and friends come together, share pleasantries, and join in bringing meaning to their lives. All of those elements contribute to a person’s level of happiness. But even the service itself has satisfying elements, like the sound of music wafting through the facility or the heart-pumping intonation of a highly skillful preacher. The breakfast at the nearby restaurant after the service also adds to one’s satisfaction and happiness, as does the volunteer work on behalf of the church.

While certainly not the only source, the many faces of religious participation make it a powerful potential resource for improving one’s happiness.

Researchers think the answer might be related to intensity of emotions and the roles women play in society.

According to researchers, women, on average, are more likely than men to report “higher levels of positive affect.” That is, they experience more intense positive emotions, which seem to balance out the negative emotions. And because women women are more likely to be open to intense emotional experiences, one theory suggests that this intensity makes them more vulnerable to depression if they encounter bad or uncontrollable events.

Another explanation revolves around the traditional role as caregiver that’s typically prescribed to women. The theory goes — since caregivers are expected to be more emotionally responsive, women may be more willing to express those emotions. In fact, regardless of a person’s gender, in experiments where participants were encouraged to be emotionally responsive, those same participants indicated more extreme emotions.

In other words, women are just as happy as men — only more so in the extreme.

Researchers say several factors are at work.

First, just because you are self-aware doesn’t necessarily translate into psychological well-being. Second, we all tend to see ourselves as better than others, even in the face of objective observations. Third, most people believe they are less likely than their peers to experience negative events in the future. But since not everyone’s future can be fantastic, as researchers Shelley Taylor and Jonathon Brown explain it — “the extreme optimism that individuals display appears to be illusory.”

And yet, there appears to be a correlation between positive well-being and these attitudes. Researchers believe happy people are more likely to have positive conceptions of themselves, a belief in their ability to control what goes on around them, and an optimism about the future — however illusory.

So if you still think you can write the next, great Pulitzer Prize-winning play — go for it. Even if it never comes true, you’ll still likely be a whole lot happier.

Source: Illusion and Well-Being: A Social Psychological Perspective on Mental Health by Shelley E. Taylor and Jonathon Brown in Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103, Issue 2

After all, hundreds of self-help books have been written about how to pursue happiness. Five easy steps. Seven knock-out strategies. The ultimate happiness guide. Feng Shui your way to happiness.

Scientific research, however, is much less confident.

For example, in 2006 researchers Chris Tkach and Sonja Lyubomirsky reported in the Journal of Happiness Studies correlations between increased happiness levels and these strategies: direct attempts at improving happiness, social affiliation, religion, partying and active leisure. However, the researchers were quick to point out in their study that these strategies may not cause happiness; they just appear to be strongly connected in some way. Furthermore, the results of the study were based on self-reports of happiness, which may or many not reflect reality. And finally, the study was conducted on undergraduate students, which may or may not accurately reflect a large cross-section of people, thereby making any generalizations difficult.

In other words, what works is still a very inexact science.

And yet, the books keep coming. Secrets keep getting revealed.

Let the buyer beware.

Most people think it’s the other way around — that to be happy a person must first be successful.

But researchers, after looking a large number of studies, concluded that a positive mindset often precedes a successful outcome.

Why? They say the success of happy people rests on two factors.

First, because happier people experience more positive moods, they have a greater likelihood of working actively towards new goals while experiencing those moods. No surprise — this results in greater productivity. Second, happier people have built up a greater number of personal, social and professional resources while they were in their positive mood. As a result, they are more likely to tap into those resources when needed. While having a rich supply of resources doesn’t guarantee success, it can be of enormous help when one is dedicated towards achieving his or her goals.

How can this information help us?

Perhaps this research gives us permission to focus on our well-being first. All too often we focus on the end result, ignoring our mood along the way. So what if we’re not as happy while we’re climbing the ladder? We tell ourselves — find success and happiness will follow.

Now we know differently.

But are we happier for it? The research suggests otherwise. Several studies strongly point to the fact that happy people are less sensitive to feedback about other people’s performances.

For example, happy students did not change their judgments of how good they were at a particular task even in the presence of someone who did the task better, but unhappy participants did diminish their own skills.

In another study, happy students reported more positive emotions when told that their performance was excellent (even when a peer had done even better) than when told that their performance was poor (even when a peer had done even worse). Unhappy people — on the other hand — reported more positive emotions after receiving a negative expert evaluation (accompanied by news that a peer had done even worse) than after receiving a positive expert evaluation (accompanied by news that a peer had done even better).

Source: The Promise of Sustainable Happiness by Julia K. Boehm and Sonja Lyubomirsky

Several years ago, two researchers sought answers to those questions by conducting a study of 222 undergraduate college students. Using a variety of screening techniques, Ed Diener and Martin E.P. Seligman isolated 10% of the students who appeared to have the highest scores in terms of happiness.

What did they discover?

The very happy group spent the least time alone and the most time socializing, and was rated highest on good relationships by themselves and by informants. The very happy group was also more extraverted, had lower neuroticism scores, and had higher agreeableness scores compared to unhappy or students with average happiness scores.

Two other important findings from the study — very happy people never reported their mood as being “ecstatic” (although they frequently reported their mood as a 7 or 8 and a 9 on a scale of 10). They also weren’t always happy. All members of the very happy group at least occasionally reported unhappiness or neutral moods, according to Diener and Seligman.

What’s not known is whether rich, social relationships caused happiness or if happiness caused rich, social relationships or if both were caused by some third variable. What is known — very happy people have some component of social relationships as part of their happiness “mix” and the link appears pretty strong.

Note: This study can be found in Psychological Science, Vol. 13, No. 1, January 2002

Philosophers, artists, religious leaders and numerous authors of self-help books would like you to believe there is one key. In fact, they might even tell you they have that key or secret — that if you were to just follow their advice, then you will be happy.

There’s only one problem. The evidence strongly suggests just the opposite.

As science continues to probe more deeply into the origins, causations and linkages associated with what researchers call “subjective well-being,” one point becomes clear — the road to happiness consists a dizzying network of major highways, busy byways, underutilized side roads and highly individualized vehicles of transportation.

In other words, no magic elixir exists.

Many things contribute to our happiness. In fact, genetics, personality, brain chemistry, environmental conditions and a host of other factors all combine to create a unique happiness “signature.” That’s the true secret. Follow your own path, not the path of others.

That’s right. Don’t shoot for the moon. Set your sights instead on orbiting the Earth.

This advice runs smack in the face of the prevailing attitude in the U.S., which often begins in grade school. You probably heard this familiar refrain when you were growing up: “You can be anything you want to be if you put your mind to it. You can even be President of the United States!”

In the 231 year-old history of the United States, there have only been 43 Presidents. In other words — long odds.

Our dreams and fantasies can fuel positive and productive behavior. They can add tremendous value to individuals, groups and companies when the pursuit of seemingly unreachable goals results in dramatic changes, improvements and innovations.

But they won’t necessarily make you happier. High or unrealistic expectations can lead to disappointments, both in yourself and others. Add too many disappointments to life’s “plate” and you may find yourself profoundly unhappy, regardless of your accomplishments.

Happiness comes from the journey, not the destination. Try enjoying the ride more and setting modest goals or aspirations. See if that doesn’t improve your overall happiness.

For most people, that means increasing one’s income. Having more money will probably (but not always) improve your chances of being satisfied. The same can be said for finding a life partner.

But there are other resources of equal or greater value.

For example, relaxation is a significant satisfaction resource. Being relaxed usually lowers your blood pressure, which lowers your risk of a heart attack and helps you live longer. Relaxation also helps you perform better under stressful conditions, including making better decisions at work. And being relaxed means you will more likely enjoy life more. Life’s daily irritants have less potency when you enjoy a more relaxed state of mind.

Relaxation has proven to be a major satisfaction and happiness resource and the great thing about it is — it can be learned by any person at any age.

That’s the conclusion reached by researchers at the University of Iowa, who studied 291 newlyweds participating in the Iowa Marital Assessment Project.

The couples were evaluated on a broad range of personality characteristics, attitudes and relationship-quality indicators. They also had to have been married less than a year when the study began and had to have been dating each other for an average of three and a half years.

The results of the study showed that people tend to marry those who are similar in attitudes, religion and values. However, it was a similarity in personality that appeared to be more important in having a happy marriage.

“People may be attracted to those who have similar attitudes, values, and beliefs and even marry them – at least in part – on the basis of this similarity because attitudes are highly visible and salient characteristics and they are fundamental to the way people lead their lives,” said the authors in their study. Personality-related characteristics, on the other hand, take much longer to be known and to be accurately perceived and are not likely to play a more substantial role until later in the relationship, according to the authors.

Researchers said that once people are in a committed relationship, it is primarily personality similarity that influences marital happiness because “being in a committed relationship entails regular interaction and requires extensive coordination in dealing with tasks, issues and problems of daily living.”

And what about opposites? Do opposites attract? Not according the researchers. They say their data showed no evidence of it.
Source: Assortative Mating and Marital Quality in Newlyweds: A Couple-Centered Approach.  Shanhong Luo and Eva C. Klohnen, University of Iowa; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 88, No. 2.

According to a recent study, ranking — not income — determines work happiness.

A professor of economics at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom surveyed 16,266 workers from more than 800 workplaces. The results showed that when Andew Oswald looked at an employee’s worker’s position in a company, he found a strong link with job satisfaction. He says rank influenced how proud people were with their professional achievements, and rank increased happiness 50 to 60 percent when compared with bigger paychecks.

In a second experiment with students, Oswald asked how satisfied they would be with a job offering a yearly salary of $32,000 after graduation. Some were told the pay was the second lowest in the firm, while others were told it was the fifth from the bottom. The results — the higher the ranking, the more satisfied the students were with their prospective job.

Note: this post relies on information provided in an article by Psychology Today online.

Why is this trend significant? Because it’s a shift in thinking for the clinical psychology community.

Since its inception, clinical psychology has dealt mainly with trying to solve individual or group psychological problems, including mental illness. And while the end result may have been to ease suffering (and therefore move towards well-being), the focus of attention generally remained with the problem at hand.

Positive psychology attempts to flip this view. That is, instead of focusing on problems, it focuses on what makes people happy or what positive thoughts or behaviors could move them to a state of well-being.

Psychologists in the positive psychology “movement” admit problems still thwart happiness and must be dealt with, but they also argue not enough research has been done to understand happiness in general and how people can go about achieving it.

As Martha Stewart might say, “that’s a good thing.”

In his book, The Strategies and Tactics of Happiness, Dr. Maynard Shelly made that observation 30 years ago and it still rings true today.

Several years ago citizens of a major U.S. city built a first-class aquarium and it enjoyed early success with large crowds. But eventually the newness wore off and people slowly stopped coming, especially the local crowd. Had the aquarium changed? Not at all. What had changed was the use of the aquarium as a source of excitement. When that excitement wore off, which was bound to happen, people went elsewhere for the same stimulation. The result? The aquarium bordered on bankruptcy and had to be rescued by the city and eventually new owners.

It happens all the time. Unless a business can maintain that early level of excitement and stimulation, it runs the risk of being discarded and forgotten–especially in a fast-paced, overstimulated society–where excitement resources (even those costing $50 million) are discarded like gum wrappers.

According to Professor Peter Whybrow of UCLA, greed has gripped the U.S. While it’s not a new phenomenon, he argues in his book, American Mania, that’s what’s different this time is that social brakes which once held us all in check have practically vanished, resulting in a non-stop, 24/7 pursuit of affluence unprecedented in our history.

In other words — recession be damned — plow full steam ahead consumers.

But Whybrow says danger lies ahead and it’s not from overextended credit cards. He says this excessive pursuit has pushed us to our physiological limits, as evidenced by the increased levels of obesity, Type II diabetes, sleep deprivation, anxiety, and depression.

Why are we all so tempted by greed? Perhaps the simplest answer is — greed stimulates us. The pursuit, capture and use of material possessions excites us, firing neurons deep inside our brain that we find very satisfying. No wonder some people say buying is like a drug. As far as the brain is concerned — it is.

Using functional magnetic resonance imaging to measure changes in human brain activity in response to a sequence of pleasurable stimuli, researchers used a computer-controlled device to squirt fruit juice and water into the mouths of research participants. The patterns of squirts were either predictable or random.

They discovered the pleasure center of the brain (the nucleus accumbens) recorded a particularly strong response to the unexpectedness of a sequence of stimuli.

These researchers say that most scientists prior to their work assumed that the neural reward pathways responded to what people like. Now, they believe that most people respond more to the unexpectedness of the stimuli instead of its pleasurable effects.

Researchers at the Baylor School of Medicine and Emory University published their study in the Journal of Neuroscience.

But when researchers looked at whether or not women are happier during that same time period — the answer was “no.” In self-reporting their well-being women say they are less happy today than they were in the 1970s.

There are several possible explanations.

First, the societal trends of decreased social cohesion, increased anxiety and increased household risk may be contributing to the decline. Second, increased opportunity to succeed has perhaps led to an increased likelihood of believing that “one’s life is not measuring up.” Third, lower pay rates in comparison to men may be also be a factor. Fourth, the increased complexity associated with juggling family, personal and career responsibilities (trifecta that rarely existed 35 years ago) may also be having a negative effect on well-being.

Note: this theme and many of these observations were made by Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers of the The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in a paper called, The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness.

In one study, researchers at the University of Oxford put 12 people inside a functional magnetic resonance imaging machine and fed them differently textured foods through a tube. The foods were a mix of tasteless cellulose tailored to the consistencies of water, corn oil or runny syrup, as well as a mouthful of vegetable oil.

According to the study as reported in the British journal Nature, fatty mixtures fired up the brain region called the cingulate cortex, which is stimulated by other pleasurable experiences such as a caress, a perfumed scent or winning money.

Researchers say the discovery reinforces the idea that a dab of butter or dollop of cream makes dinner all the more appealing. In other words, fast foods and donuts will be around awhile longer.

According to the police, the teenagers reportedly said they killed an individual for the “thrill of it.”

As disturbing as this incident is, it also raises a ton of questions. Here are just a few.

• Is our overstimulated society propelling some individuals (especially young ones) to seek such greater and greater levels of stimulation (and risks) that the only way they can be satisfied is to break the ultimate social taboo?
• Are personal, parental and societal controls so lacking in today’s environment that there are few, if any, brakes preventing young people from thinking of and committing such acts?
• Is our society’s hypercompetitiveness (which in itself is stimulating) partly to blame for setting a foundation of constant excitement seeking?
• Can this disturbing trend be reversed or are we as a society forever cursed with this “disease?” Are we long past being thought of as a peaceful nation?
• If killing is so “easy,” how easy would it be for the U.S. society as a whole to slip into lawlessness, given the right circumstances? Does our rule of law protect us in that regard or are we just kidding ourselves?

Researchers at the University of Oregon gave 19 women participants $100 and then scanned their brains with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as they watched their money go to the food bank through mandatory taxation, and as they made choices about whether to give more money voluntarily or keep it for themselves.

They found that two regions in the brain – the caudate nucleus and the nucleus accumbens – fired when subjects saw the charity get the money. The activation was even larger when people gave the money voluntarily, instead of just paying it as taxes. These brain regions are the same ones that fire when basic needs such as food and pleasures are satisfied.

The study, according to one of the researchers, reflects the balancing act that every society must face. “What this shows to someone who designs tax policy is that taxes aren’t all bad,” Ulrich Mayr, professor of psychology, said. “Paying taxes can make citizens happy. People are, to varying degrees, pure altruists. On top of that they like that warm glow they get from charitable giving. Until now we couldn’t trace that in the brain.”

For a more complete description of the study, click here.

Numerous studies have looked at how money fits into one’s overall evaluation of happiness and the results may surprise you.

For example, one study showed that income played an insignificant role in day-to-day happiness. Researchers expected that those who made less than $20,000 a year would spend 32 percent more of their time in a bad mood than those that had an annual income greater than $100,000. In reality, the low-income group spent only 12 percent more time in a bad mood than their wealthier counterparts.

Researchers also examined Bureau of Labor Statistics data and found that those with higher incomes had more chores and less fun. According to government statistics, men who make more than $100,000 a year spend 19.9 percent of their time on passive leisure activities such as watching television and socializing. Meanwhile, men whose annual income were less than $20,000 spent more than 34 percent of their time dedicated to passive leisure.

This makes perfect sense. Humans (and other animals) tend to repeat behavior that rewards them. Get a standing ovation for a part in a play when you are in eighth grade, for example, and you are more likely to want to repeat that behavior for similar applause somewhere down the road. Or get joy from learning how to bake an apple pie with your aunt at Thanksgiving and you are highly likely to want to re-create that experience when you are an adult.

We all carve out current satisfactions from past pleasures. Called conditioned satisfactions, these can be direct or indirect depending on the past experience. For example, the red carpet you vaguely remember associated with your favorite birthday may trigger an indirect satisfaction in all things red that you don’t even consciously realize.

There is also some anecdotal evidence to suggest that the more exciting or arousing the originating source of satisfaction, the more durable that satisfaction will be over time. In other words, thrill a child with his first professional baseball game under the lights at night and you are likely to have a fan for life.

Couples (both heterosexual and homosexual) comprise a complex satisfaction system of competing and shared interests, individual stimulation needs, and reactions to societal pressures.

Huh?

Take a young couple. Sharing a life together means experiencing new adventures, sharing intimate thoughts, adding new friends and and generally exponentially increasing one’s resources. But later — when the newness wears off — does the couple “settle in” at equal satisfaction levels or does one person become dissatisfied with things? Is one person bored and needs greater stimulation? Is another person unhappy with the other person’s behavior or dissatisfied with that person’s communication skills? Does a lack of one resource — money — cause other dissatisfactions — to the point that when one adds up the pluses and minuses — the result is unhappiness?

In our society, we typically don’t spend enough time thinking through and even articulating what satisfactions we want from our partner before that partnership is consummated. We assume things will take care of themselves and, sadly, they don’t — at least for half of the U.S. population. Perhaps what we all need is a Satisfaction Audit — administered by a registered psychologist or therapist and required before we’re granted a marriage certificate. That may save a lot of heartache somewhere down the split in the road.

Now, the not-so-good news. Research suggests that divorce leaves a lasting effect on satisfaction levels. Thus, even though a rebounding effect can and does typically occur after a divorce, the level of satisfaction does not return to baseline (the level of satisfaction felt prior to the divorce).

In an article published in a 2005 issue of Psychological Science, study author Dr. Richard Lucas measured the life changes before and after divorce of people in a group of 30,000 people in Germany. His conclusion — we shouldn’t assume that time heals all wounds. “Instead, some people may never adapt to some life events, at least not without intervention,” he concludes.

Note: this post is a re-write of an article written for PsychCentral by John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

Researchers in Scotland compared results of a life-satisfaction survey with IQ (Intelligence Quotient) tests that were conducted on healthy people at age 11 and again at age 80. The results showed no correlation between happiness in old age and lifelong intelligence.

In other words, your IQ has no bearing on how satisfied or dissatisfied you will be with your life.

Researchers concluded that researchers say that intelligence has its pluses as well as its minuses.

They say, for example, that higher intelligence may lead to greater achievement, but it also brings with it greater awareness of alternatives, which may also lead to frustration.

The results of the study appear in the July 16, 2005 issue of the British Medical Journal.

Denmark shows the highest levels of happiness, followed by Finland, Iceland, Switzerland and Mexico.

The countries with the worst levels of societal happiness? That would be Armenia, Ukraine, Modova, Zimbabwe, and Tanzania.

Where the does the United States rank? It ranks 19th out of 91 nations.

Once again, as is usually the case, wealth and power don’t necessarily translate into a state of well-being.

An aging study conducted at the VA’s outpatient clinic in Boston, and funded by the NIH’s National Institute on Aging, recorded life satisfaction and personality traits of veterans starting in the late 1970s through 1999.

They found on average that life satisfaction for men peaked around 65 — meaning men who were 85 were about as happy as they were when they were in their 40s.

Researchers were quick to point out at that people varied significantly from that norm. Some men were still experiencing growth in happiness after 65, while others peaked earlier.

They also noted that high levels of extroversion correlated with overall high levels of life satisfaction and relative stability in life satisfaction; men with lower levels of extroversion had an overall lower level of life satisfaction and less stability. Researchers also found found a correlation between being in the last year of life and a steeper drop in life satisfaction — an effect that remained even when the researchers controlled for physical health.

The full study can be found in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 88, No. 1).

Researchers with the General Social Survey (GSS) of the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago looked at data collected from 1988 to 2006 in which people were asked a variety of questions during face-to-face interviews.

Which profession had the highest levels of satisfaction and happiness? Why clergy, of course. Eighty-seven per cent of them said they were satisfied with their jobs.

On average, 47 percent of people interviewed said they were very satisfied with their jobs and 33 percent said they were very happy. In addition to clergy, the other jobs rated highest in satisfaction were: firefighters (80 percent) and physical therapists (78 percent). Other top jobs in which more than 60 percent of the respondents said they were very satisfied were education administrators, painters and sculptors, teachers, authors, psychologists, special education teachers, operating engineers, office supervisors and security and financial services salespersons.

What were the least satisfying jobs?

Garage and service station attendants (13 percent reported being happy), roofers (14 percent) and molding and casting machine operators (11 percent). Other workers who said they are generally unhappy were construction laborers, welfare service aides, amusement and recreation attendants, hotel maids, pressing machine operators, electronic repairers, kitchen workers, and machine operators.

More details of the study can be read in this ScienceDaily article.