I was fortunate to attend Ed Diener’s talk on Well Being and Public Policy hosted by the Claremont Graduate University’s school of Organizational and Behavioral Sciences. The talk was titled, “Happiness for Complete Wealth. Implications for Public Policy.” The over arching theme of his talk was the importance of measuring well being and using it as a measure of governmental effectiveness rather than focusing solely on Gross Domestic Product. He began his talk with this interesting quote from Robert Kennedy.

“Too much and too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things. Our gross national product … if we should judge America by that - counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for those who break them. It counts the destruction of our redwoods and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and the cost of a nuclear warhead, and armored cars for police who fight riots in our streets. It counts Whitman’s rifle and Speck’s knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children.

“Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country; it measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it tells us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans.”

Why should we measure well being? From the talk….

It’s Democratic – Everyone in the world has their pet projects and different things make different people happy. By measuring well being systematically with representative samples, we give equal voice to those who find mud wrestling makes them happy, rather than having public policy driven only by those who happen to have access to decision makers and what makes them happier.

It’s Useful for policy – There is considerable evidence on the negative effects of commuting such that a raise that allows people to buy a bigger house that necessitates a longer commute often has a negative impact on well being. The relationship between money and happiness is also well known and can be used to drive tax policy.

Happy people are productive people - In truth, there is not necessarily a tradeoff that only stupid people are happy (Flaubert’s error). Rather, reseaarch has shown that happy people have higher supervisor ratings, higher organizational citizenship (they help their co-workers), and earn higher income. The last finding is the result of a long term longiitudinal study by Diener, Nickerson, Lucas, and Sandvick (2002) where cheerfulness as an undergraduate was found to predict income 19 years later.

Happy people are healthier people – From his work with the CDC, he has run predictors of national life expectancy through regression analyses and found the following beta weights:

• .12-> GDP
• .01-> Health Expenditure
• .65-> Life Satisfaction

Apparently, life satisfaction shares the most unique variance with societal life expectancy.

Society CAN affect happiness - Representative samples of Danish and Togolese citizens have confirmed that almost all Danish people are happier than almost all Togolese citizens. Happiness is not just an individual phenomenon. Gallup world poll data has found that the best predictors of well being are:

• Money
• Being able to count on others
• Low corruption
• Low assault rates
• Feeling control over something
• Having learned something new recently
• Being able to use one’s talents

We currently focus government policy on some of these things without considering (or measuring) others.

He closed his talk with the following….Well Being is more than money. Obama is briefed daily about the economy using various measures…who measures well being? “Well being should be a policy imperative.”

BTW, Diener is planning on coming out with a book on Well Being and Public Policy in a few months.

 

Researchers at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center at Emory University in Atlanta have found that when monkeys were given a choice of receiving a food reward, or receiving a food reward and also having another monkey receive food. When paired with relative or “friend” the monkeys primarily went for the “prosocial” choice,  but the monkeys weren’t so generous with strangers, choosing the “selfish” option instead.

Empathy increases in both humans and animals with social closeness, which is often explained by evolution. We help those most closely related to us, to make sure not just our own genes are passed on but that those genes of our family as passed on as well.

Still one may wonder whether giving is still a selfish to capuchins because they can eat together, or if the monkeys simply like to see the other monkey enjoying the food. In the study, eight adult female capuchins were given tokens to exchange for food. One token got them a slice of apple. The other also got an apple slice, plus a similar slice was given to another monkey they could see.

In a series of tests, when the “partner” monkey was a relative or a familiar female from the same social group, the one choosing the token moved closer to the partner and primarily choose the prosocial token that got them both food.

When the second monkey was a stranger, the selfish token was more likely to be chosen, often with the lead monkey turning her back to the stranger. Since the reward was the same for the monkey making the choice, de Waal suggested there must be some intangible benefit to the prosocial choice, perhaps an indication of empathy.

The study put in much effort to eliminate the possibility that the monkeys didn’t understand the task. They also made sure the monkey could always see the other monkey eat the food when they chose the “prosocial option.

Like we’ve found with humans, strict  Dawkinsian evolutionary theory, which asserts that people may seem to act altruistically but only do so if the benefit, is questioned here. If we believed in completely selfish behavior, might researchers find a difference between “prosocial” behaviors toward a friend and toward a relative? In this study, as with many altruism studies with humans, there was no such difference.

Empathy is important to understand for better communities, schools, and personal/professional relationships. Emapthic individuals are less likely to be anti-social and more likely to have strong social ties, better social skills, and more school and life success. There are many applications for increasing one’s empathy, such as teaching it in schools, teaching it to counselors and psychologists, and teaching it as an intervention for criminals and/or emotionally impaired (Autistic, Psychopathic) people. For instance, an important target for Learning by Teaching is to train students in empathy. They have to transmit new contents to the classmates, so that they reflect continuously on the mental processes of their classmates and teachers. This greatly enhances the social relationships of the students and learning that takes place in the classroom.

Regarding psychotherapy, there is an increasing demand to train psychologists to be more empathetic with their clients. In this context, empathy is exremely important for trust and optimal treatment.

Not only is empathy a vital skill in order to maximize social relationships, but empathy is also linked to happiness and general well-being. Martin Seligman originally hypothesized that unhappy people are likely to be more altruistic since they would be more likely to identify with the suffering of others. Findings of studies on mood and helping behaviors, however, showed that happy people are more likely to demonstrate altruism (Seligman, 2002). There is no evidence to show the direction of this relationship, so it very well may be that being altruistic causes happiness. Studies conducted by Isen, George, and Brief (1992) also showed that people are more willing to help others and engage in altruistic behaviors when they are happy. Hence, it can be proposed that altruism and happiness are reciprocal.

In short, happy people are altruistic and altruistic people are happy. We’ll just have to wait for a monkey-mood-measure to see if the same is true for our capuchin friends.

A study which suggests a link between suburban isolation and depression was recently reported on by Psychology Today:

Suburban kids are more likely to drink and use drugs according to a study in Current Directions in Psychological Science. The study suggested a simple antidote: family dinner. Kids who usually eat with at least one parent have better grades and fewer emotional problems than kids who dine on their own.

Just in time for christmas is this article detailing a Finnish study which found that women are healthier when they give and men are happier when they receive.

Is it truly better to give than receive? The verdict’s still out, but one thing is certain: it is great to give! At least, many positive psychology researchers are finding kindness and general pro-social behaviors to increase well-being. Kindness interventions show that happiness can be increased by doing random acts of kindness for others.
In one ten-week experiment, participants were invited to regularly practice random acts of kindness (Boehm, Lyubomirsky, & Sheldon, 2008). Engaging in kind acts (e.g., 12 holding the door open for a stranger or doing a roommate’s dishes) was thought to impact happiness for a variety of reasons, including bolstered self-regard, positive social interactions, and charitable feelings towards others and the community at large. In this study, happiness was measured at baseline, mid-intervention, immediately post-intervention, and one month later. Additionally, two variables were manipulated: 1) the frequency with which participants practiced acts of kindness (either three or nine times each week) and 2) the variety with which participants practiced acts of kindness (either varying their kind acts or repeating the same acts weekly). Finally, a control group merely listed events from the past week.
Interestingly, the frequency with which kind acts were performed did not affect well-being. The variety of the kind acts, however, influenced the extent to which participants became happier. Those who were asked to perform a wide variety of kind acts revealed an upward trajectory for happiness, even through the 1-month follow-up. By contrast, the control group showed no changes in their happiness throughout the 14 weeks of the study, and those not given the opportunity to vary their kind acts actually became less happy midway through the intervention, before eventually rebounding to their baseline happiness level at the follow-up assessment.
In another kindness intervention, students were asked to perform five acts of kindness per week over the course of six weeks, and those five acts had to be done either within a single day (e.g., all on Sunday) or across the week (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, et al., 2005). In this study, happiness levels increased for students performing acts of kindness, but only for those who performed all of their kind acts in a single day. It was theorized by the authors that when kind acts were spread throughout the week, the effect of each kind act was dispersed, such that participants did not differentiate between their normal behavior and the kindnesses prompted by this intervention. Taken together, these  two kindness interventions suggest that not only can happiness be boosted by behavioral intentional activities, but that both the timing and variety of performing such intentional activities significantly moderates their impact on well-being.
Not only is doing kind acts important for well-being, but counting the kindnesses one already offers (in the way one may count blessings) also increases happiness. Otake et al. (2006), found that happy people (determined by a median-split) are more motivated to do kind acts and recognize them, have more happy memories in number and quality, become happier through kindness and are more grateful. Additionally, they perform more acts of kindness during the intervention. One could think of this as positive reinforcement. Some theorized reasons unhappy people did not benefit in this way include depression influencing memories and motivation and/or the possibility of these people not actually performing kind acts in the first place. One recommendation for this group may be to engage in a Lyubomirskian intervention, as mentioned in the prior paragraphs!
Not only does doing varied acts of kindness increase happiness, but spending money on others promotes happiness as well. This may be surprising given how much we covet our assets and can even find happiness in being financially stable. While money can buy happiness (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002), when a person thinks too much about their wealth (think of a miser as the extreme [or Scrooge during this holiday season]), they are less likely to help acquaintances, to donate to charity or to choose to spend time with others (Vohs, Mead & Goode, 2006). Still, spending more of one’s income on others predicts greater happiness both cross-sectionally (in a nationally representative study) and longitudinally (in a field study of windfall spending). In an experimental setting, those who were randomly assigned to spend money on others experienced greater happiness than those assigned to spend money on themselves (Dunn, Aknin & Norton, 2008).

In a nutshell, do good things for others and do it with variety. I would recommend buying lots for others, but during this recession, I’m going to stick with the variety recommendation for now. And because it’s hard to think up these things on one’s own, here’s an abbreviated list written by Joanathan Haidt:

==> · Be a listening ear to a friend. Ask your friend how her day was and actually listen and respond to her before describing your own day.
==> · Flu season is upon us. Help a friend or neighbor who is ill by delivering chicken soup, doing the laundry, or walking the dog.
==> · Give someone else the gift of time-Do something for someone else that requires time and effort on your part.
==> · The next time someone admires something of yours and you can afford to do without it, give it away.
==> · Volunteer in your community.
==> · One day each week, “commit” five random acts of kindness. And, when possible, make them anonymous.

Boehm, J. K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). Does happiness lead to career success? Journal of Career Assessment, 16, 101-116.

Dunn, E.W., Aknin, L.B., & Norton, M.I. Spending Money on Others Promotes Happiness. Science, 319, 1687-1688.

Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803-855.

Otake, K., Shimai, S., & Tanaka-Matsumi, J. (2006). Happy people become happier through kindness: A counting kindness intervention. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7, 361–375.

Psychology Today contains this interesting story from Desmond Tutu along with this quote on what happiness is to him....

All human beings are fundamentally good. That is why you and I thrill not in the presence of the highly aggressive or the rich or the macho but in the presence of Mother Teresa, someone so small you could put her in your back pocket and forget about her.

England's primary schools should teach how to lead happy lives and focus on six themed areas of learning, a major review says.

According to the BBC:

Happiness is infectious and can spread like a "ripple" through social groups, according to US researchers.

In honor of Thanksgiving, Positive Psychology Daily lists these articles about practicing Gratitude 365 days a year.

Gratitude thoughts:

 

• Thanksgiving as Gratitude Day.

• On the benefits of family and holiday rituals.

• Huddling together during Thanksgiving.

• Gratitude for what you do have.

• Gratitude for the bad things that are avoided.

• Benefits of love, gratitude, and kindness may become even stronger in the limbic system during difficult times.

• “If you’re happy and you know it, clap your hands.”  If you’re proud of someone and you know it, praise their effort.

• Gratitude and its energy and spiritual energy.

• Gratitude helps you live longer - one of the four ingredients of the aging Happy-Well.

• A 7-year-old talks about the power of “Three Good Things” every night.

Image. This article first appeared on Positive Psychology News Daily. To see the original article, click here. To comment on this article, click here.

There are no experiments referenced in this article, but the theme of it likely strikes many of us as true.

The superconnected may develop a dual-dependency, says Robert Bornstein, a psychologist at Adelphi University in Long Island. They're not only counting on other people too much; they're also hooked on the devices themselves, sometimes to the point where they feel utterly disconnected, isolated, and detached without them.