Happiness Studies

In this class, we will try to examine happiness from a cross-disciplinary perspective that will use a combination of books and movies. We will ask simple questions: To what extent does happiness depend on our inner life and on our outer circumstances? Does extra income increase happiness? Or should we work less and have more leisure? And how are we to measure happiness? To this effect, we shall examine a representative selection of works in related fields such as sociology, economics, political theory, literature, and philosophy. We begin by asking how we live today and explore next how we ought to live and what are the main ingredients of happiness and how can it be promoted in practice.
This year, the class will focus on several major themes: (1) the search for happiness in America today; (2) work, consumerism, and leisure; (3) nature, solitude, and friendship; (4) civilization, politics and happiness; (5) science and happiness; and (6) the economics and politics of happiness.
The texts that we’ll read in this class include selections from a wide array of sources such as David Brooks’s novel Bobos in Paradise, Juliet Schor’s The Overworked American, Freud’s Civilization and Its Discontents, Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, Rousseau’s Reveries of a Solitary Walker, Seneca’s Letters, Emerson’s Essays, Pascal’s Pensées, Montaigne’s Essays, and Huxley’s Brave New World. Students will also be required to watch and comment on a few relevant movies (About Schmidt, Another Woman, Road Scholar) that illuminate some of the topics discussed in class.

Happiness measures, reflecting individuals’ well-being, have received increasing attention by policy makers. Policies could target absolute happiness levels when aiming at increasing a society’s well-being. But given upper bounds of happiness measures, as well as the possibilities of decreasing returns to happiness resources, we argue that an important measure of interest is the efficiency with which individuals convert their resources into happiness. In order to examine the effects of policies on this efficiency and to better understand the trajectories of human well-being over time, we suggest an efficiency measure that is calculated via a nonparametric order-m approach borrowed from the production efficiency literature. Our approach is exemplified using micro level data from the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS). Between 20 and 27% of the British populace are efficient in attaining happiness during our sample period. A negative influence on “happiness efficiency” is being unemployed while a positive influence is cohabitation with a partner. Our results are robust with respect to using a more comprehensive subjective well-being measure, but there are gender differences, for example in the (positive) influence that retirement has on males’ efficiency, or the (positive) influence of maternity leave on females.

Academic research on children’s and adolescents’ happiness has been slow to develop. This research provides an empirical investigation to answer the question, “What makes children and adolescents happy?” We explore this question in two studies with a total of 300 participants ages 8–18. Study 1 asks participants to answer the open-ended question, “What makes me happy?” There were five emergent themes—“people and pets,” “achievements,” “material things,” “hobbies,” and “sports”. Study 2 also asks participants to answer the question, “What makes me happy?”, but uses two different measures (a semi-structured thought listing task and a collage task). Using three different happiness measures, we found consistent age differences in what children perceive to make them happy.

This study was designed to identify the relationship between free time management and quality of life, exploring whether the amount of free time or the way people using their free time relates to their quality of life. Data were collected from National Pingtung University of Science and Technology in Taiwan. Of the 500 questionnaires distribute, 403 usable questionnaires were received

Numerous studies document that societal happiness is correlated with individualism, but the nature of this phenomenon remains understudied. In the current paper, we address this gap and test the reasoning that individualism correlates with societal happiness because the most common measure of societal happiness (i.e., country-level aggregates of personal life satisfaction) is individualism-themed. With the data collected from 13,009 participants across fifty countries, we compare associations of four types of happiness (out of which three are more collectivism-themed than personal life satisfaction) with two different measures of individualism. We replicated previous findings by demonstrating that societal happiness measured as country-level aggregate of personal life satisfaction is correlated with individualism. Importantly though, we also found that the country-level aggregates of the collectivism-themed measures of happiness do not tend to be significantly correlated with indivi...

The study investigates the effects of home-based telework on quality of life (QoL). Four dimensions of QoL were analysed; overall satisfaction with life, sense of belonging, sense of becoming and sense of being. Through cross-national survey data (from 217 job holders and 112 partners) and by means of structural equation modeling, a positive association was found between home-based telework to a worker's sense of belonging (beta = 0.30, p < 0.001). On the other hand, a negative path was detected from the job holder's home-based telework to his or her partner's overall satisfaction with life (beta = -0.27, p < 0.05). After controlling for subdimensions of life quality, home-based work did not affect the job holder's overall life satisfaction. Moreover, the more concentration the job holder reported, the lower the sense of belonging was reported by his or her partner (beta = -0.28, p < 0.05). No simple explanation for the negative effects were found, but our i...

Decades of empirical research have shown that friendship experiences are an essential predictor of happiness. However, what might account for the relationship between friendship and happiness? Two studies investigated perceived mattering (Marshall, J Adolesc 24:473–490, 2001) as a mediator of the association between friendship quality and happiness. Study 1 showed that perceived mattering to one’s best friend mediated the relationship between friendship and happiness. Study 2 replicated the findings of the first study and showed that mattering in friendships accounts for the role of friendship quality in happiness across the three closest friendships of the individual. The results are discussed in terms of the theoretical importance of understanding how friendship is related to happiness.

Both writers and scholars frequently emphasize the difficulties of writing successful narratives that are expressive of happiness, but detailed and systematic inquiries into the problem are rare. An exception is Charles Baxter’s essay “Regarding Happiness.” It gives eloquent and clear answers to the questions of what makes it so hard to write happy stories that mean something, and how one can write such a story anyway. However, the propositions from “Regarding Happiness” can be challenged. Michel Faber’s short story “Vanilla Bright Like Eminem” can be read as an elaborate refutation of Baxter’s theory, as it is an engaging ‘happy’ story that breaks almost every rule the essay put forward, and contradicts virtually all of its major claims. Showing that—contrary to Baxter—happiness can be communicated in fiction even when the happy character is unable to see or understand it, and that happiness does not need to be highlighted through a successfully completed activity or via contrast with pain, Faber’s short story offers important amendments to Baxter’s opus and thus makes a valuable contribution to the study of happiness and its relation to literature.

The present investigation examined the role of multiple close relationships (mother, father, best friend, and romantic partner, if any) in happiness among emerging adults with and without a romantic partner. The results for those without a partner (n = 152) revealed that only the relationship experiences with mother and best friend were predictive of happiness. On the other hand, the findings for those with a partner (n = 159) showed that only three factors, namely mother–child relationship quality, romantic relationship quality and conflict were predictive of happiness. The results for this group also suggested that romantic relationship quality was protective of best friendship conflict; moreover, best friendship quality did not buffer the negative impact of romantic partner conflict on happiness, suggesting a less important role of best friends in happiness. In other words, the findings suggest that when emerging adults are involved in a romantic relationship, friends’ importance in happiness might be less pronounced or not pronounced at all. The results were discussed in light of the literature and suggestions were made for future research.

In this paper two philosophical issues are discussed that hold special interest for empirical researchers studying happiness. The first issue concerns the question of how the psychological notion(s) of happiness invoked in empirical research relates to those traditionally employed by philosophers. The second concerns the question of how we ought to conceive of happiness, understood as a purely psychological phenomenon. With respect to the first, I argue that 'happiness', as used in the philosophical literature, has three importantly different senses that are often confused. Empirical research on happiness concerns only one of these senses, and serious misunderstandings about the significance of empirical results can arise from such confusion. I then argue that the second question is indeed philosophical and that, in order to understand the nature of (what I call) psychological happiness, we need first to determine what a theory of happiness is supposed to do: what are our theoretical and practical interests in the notion of happiness? I sketch an example of how such an inquiry might proceed, and argue that this approach can shed more light on the nature and significance of happiness (and related mental states) than traditional philosophical methods.

This paper contains two studies which set out to examine to what extent attributional style (internal, stable, global) and personality traits predicted happiness and psychiatric symptoms in a normal, non-clinical, population of young people in their early twenties. Two hundred and three participants completed five questionnaires: the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ)(version one & version two), Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, Oxford Happiness Inventory, and Langner 22-Item Measure. Sample 1 (n= 120) completed ASQ ...

Hedonism is a way of life, characterised by openness to pleasurable experience. There are many qualms about hedonism. It is rejected on moral grounds and said to be detrimental to long-term happiness. Several mechanisms for this 'paradox of hedonism' have been suggested and telling examples of pleasure seekers ending up in despair have been given. But is that the rule? If so, how much pleasure is too much? An overview of the available knowledge is given in this paper. The relation between hedonism and happiness has been studied at two levels: that of the nation and the individual. At the national level average happiness is correlated with moral acceptance of pleasure and with active leisure. At the individual level it is similarly linked with hedonistic attitudes and also correlated with hedonistic behaviours such as frequent sex and use of stimulants. In most cases the pattern is linearly positive. The relation between happiness and consumption of stimulants follows an inverted U-curve, spoilsports and guzzlers are less happy than modest consumers. Yet, these data cannot settle the issue, since the observed relations may be spurious or due to the effects of happiness on hedonism rather than the reverse. Even if we can prove a positive effect of (mild) hedonism on happiness, there is still the question of how that gains balances against a possible loss of health. A solution is to assess the effect of hedonistic living on the number of years lived happily.

Recent social surveys of happiness (subjective well-being) have given a new stimulus to utilitarian political theory by providing a statistically reliable measure of the ‘happiness’ of individuals that can then be correlated with other variables. One general finding is that greater happiness does not correlate strongly with increased wealth, beyond modest levels, and this has led to calls for governments to shift priorities away from economic growth and towards other social values. This paper notes how the conclusions of this research help to address some of the traditional objections to utilitarianism. The question of how happiness research findings can be used to set happiness-maximization goals for public policy needs careful examination, as the translation from research to policy is not always straightforward. Some empirical and ethical objections to this ‘new utilitarianism’ are raised. The complicating factors of public expectations of, and trust in, governments pose obstacles to any proposal that happiness research may lead to changes in public policy and hence to ‘happier’ populations.

La felicità ha da sempre interessato i filosofi, ma negli ultimi sessant’anni se ne stanno occupando anche gli psicologi. Il benessere, il funzionamento ottimale e altri argomenti simili interessano studiosi di vari ambiti, ma anche il pubblico in generale, che ormai ha acquistato una certa familiarità con tali discussioni, tramite internet e i libri di autoaiuto.
Questa ricerca intende esaminare come il discorso eudaimonico si sviluppi oggi anche al di fuori dell’ambito della filosofia morale. Dopo una breve considerazione sul ruolo dell’eudaimonia nel pensiero filosofico dell’antichità e all’interno della teorizzazione etica, si passa allo studio del pensiero di Martin Seligman fino ad arrivare alla nascita della psicologia positiva e alla nozione di felicità intesa come flourishing. L’eudaimonia nel pensiero di quest’autore è paragonata alla concezione classica, allo scopo di mettere in luce alcune similitudini e, al tempo stesso, rilevare delle differenze. Infatti, il presente saggio svolge, innanzitutto, un lavoro esplorativo sulla psicologia positiva, mettendo a disposizione del lettore le due teorie di Seligman sulla felicità e le principali tematiche empirico-esistenziali da lui esposte: le emozioni positive, la resilienza, le virtù, le esercitazioni, il carattere e i suoi punti di forza. Il focus non è tanto quello della “novità” della proposta, bensì quello di valutarne la formulazione, i limiti e gli sviluppi in corso. L’interlocuzione filosofica è sostenuta da elementi presenti all’interno del pensiero classico, sullo sfondo della teoria etica delle virtù che parte dal punto di vista del soggetto agente e lo considera in modo prioritario ma non esclusivo.

The reward centers of the nervous system play an important role in the evolution of species: They produce pleasurable sensations in the presence of certain stimuli associated to survival and reproduction in order to teach an animal that it's convenient to generate those circumstances, and thus increase the likelihood of survival of the individual and the species. But being humans the most complex living organisms on earth, we have developed reward responses for a wide range of stimuli that go a long way beyond mere survival. These are called extrinsic rewards and maybe, if we force it, they can be traced back to those primal instincts. This is because of a learned conditioning and it depends on culture. For example, we can say that we seek social recognition because it solidifies our chances of getting a mate and having children to perpetuate our DNA, or that we seek financial stability to maximize our chances of surviving for a longer time. But those aren't the only extrinsic rewards that motivate our behaviors. There is indeed an enormous array of activities that will activate these centers in different ways and levels of intensity, depending on cultural conditioning and personal preferences. These can go from completing a hard level on a video game, appreciating a strange piece of abstract art, or attaining academic goals to being selflessly generous, eating vegan or, in general, postponing instant gratification in pursuit of something greater. While pleasure can sometimes act as a signaling of the right way for survival, (like in the case of food for nourishment or sex for reproduction), it can also be deceptive at times. The most delicious foods aren't necessarily the ones that are best for our health. And consuming certain drugs can produce pleasurable sensations but end up killing us or ruining our lives. For navigating this complex structure of rewards associated to sometimes contradicting stimuli humans have developed a more comprehensive concept than just pleasure: the concept of happiness. The pursuit of happiness guides human behavior and lays behind every decision we make. On a simplified vision we can think of happiness as the optimization of the quality, intensity and frequency of rewards experienced by our brains throughout our lives. We choose to sacrifice instant gratification if we sense that the long-term gratification we will obtain out of it is greater. In our example about consumption of harmful drugs, choosing not to take them increases happiness because cognitively we have learned about the disasters of addiction and we consider that long term, and throughout our lives, the sum of rewards we can get without them exceed the ones consuming them can give us minus the pain they'd cause. Happiness as a long-term project provides the rational answer. However, empathy makes some of those sacrifices be real, in the sense that the gratification derived from our sacrifice is actually smaller than the one that we would have had by being selfish. But contributing to the gratification of others is important enough to make it worth it. What is it in the brain that can make us (sometimes) feel happier by sacrificing our immediate wants? Can we be happy most of the time? How can we optimize the different types of rewards we perceive throughout our lives? How to build a model of happiness that is sustainable both socially and in time? To begin to find these answers it's important to understand that the concept of happiness englobes a series of qualitatively different positive emotions, chemically associated to different neurotransmitters. Happiness isn't yes or no, pleasure or pain, black or white, one or

Five hundred ethnically diverse undergraduates reported their happiness strategies – that is, activities undertaken to maintain or increase happiness. Factor analysis extracted eight general strategies: Affiliation, Partying, Mental Control, Goal Pursuit, Passive Leisure, Active Leisure, Religion, and Direct Attempts at happiness. According to multiple regression analyses, these strategies accounted for 52% of the variance in self-reported happiness and 16% over and above the variance accounted for by the Big Five personality traits. The strongest unique predictors of current happiness were Mental Control (inversely related), Direct Attempts, Affiliation, Religion, Partying, and Active Leisure. Gender differences suggest that men prefer to engage in Active Leisure and Mental Control, whereas women favor Affiliation, Goal Pursuit, Passive Leisure, and Religion. Relative to Asian and Chicano(a) students, White students preferred using high arousal strategies. Finally, mediation analyses revealed that many associations between individuals’ personality and happiness levels are to some extent mediated by the strategies they use to increase their happiness – particularly, by Affiliation, Mental Control, and Direct Attempts.