Check out what's new in the Thinking Meat Bookstore!
Jul 052010
 

I’m really enjoying Eric Weiner’s book The Geography of Bliss: One Grump’s Search for the Happiest Places in the World, in which he describes his travels in 10 different countries in search of the meaning of happiness. (Oddly enough, of all the places I’ve read about so far, the one I can see myself being happiest in is Iceland. Yes, the winters are dark and long, but he describes a creative atmosphere and a freedom to reinvent yourself that I think I might enjoy.) Anyway, along the same lines, a Gallup poll of more than 136,000 people in 132 countries that ran from 2005 to 2006 has come up with some new insights into the link between income and happiness.

The survey, which its authors report as the first representative sample of the entire planet, asked respondents about their income levels, standard of living, overall evaluations of their lives on a scale of 1 to 10, and numerous quality-of-life indicators such as the degree to which they feel respected or autonomous or find their jobs fulfilling.

The results seemed to identify two different aspects of happiness: an overall feeling that your life is satisfactory and the experience of positive emotions. Life satisfaction does correlate fairly well with income, but evidently the link between enjoying life (or not) on a day-to-day basis is much less well correlated with income. Basically, the study seems to have identified two different types of resources: the possession of economic resources affects life satisfaction, and the possession of psychological/social capital affects day-to-day reports of positive or negative feelings. The study shows that these two flavors of happiness are separate, but I wonder about how they are related.

This article from Science Daily has more information. The paper reporting the research is:

Ed Diener, Weiting Ng, James Harter, Raksha Arora. Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2010; 99 (1): 52 DOI: 10.1037/a0018066

Share
Mar 012010
 

The other night I watched the women’s free skating in the Olympics. As always, I thought I wouldn’t mind seeing a few more of the skaters a little further down the ranks; even if they aren’t in the running for a medal, the fact that they made it to the Olympics means they are amazingly skilled. This sentiment was reinforced when a friend sent me a link to this interactive feature at the New York Times site, which illustrates aurally how very short the difference in time can be between a medalist and a non-medalist in various speed-based Olympic sports. Everyone who goes to the Olympics should be proud of having made it, regardless of how well they did, but I can see how that might be cold comfort if you lost out on a medal, or got a silver instead of a gold, by the merest sliver of a second, or made a small but costly mistake.

Then I heard this story on NPR about the emotions of silver and bronze medalists. Images of the faces of Olympic athletes immediately after an event were shown to volunteers who did not know how the athletes placed in the event, and the volunteers evaluated how happy the athletes looked. Bronze medal winners looked significantly happier than silver medal winners. They also looked happier when they were on the medal stand.

The difference could be the way they frame it. A silver medalist might be focusing on the gold that got away (the dreaded “if only,” one of the most painful thoughts that can torment the human mind). The bronze medalist, on the other hand, might well be thinking of the alternative of not getting a medal at all, compared to which a bronze looks pretty good. This is borne out by analysis of things the medalists said in interviews; bronze medalists used more statements expressing the idea of “at least I,” and silver medalists said “if only” much more often. I can’t say it’s all in how you frame it, but certainly the stories you tell yourself about the things that happen make a difference. Might as well tell yourself good ones.

Share
Oct 312009
 

Lately I’ve been trying to expand my skills into some unfamiliar areas; in particular I’m spending more time on activities involving hand-eye coordination (playing tennis, drawing). It’s frustrating sometimes, especially because this is not an area where I’ve been particularly strong. I started out probably less physically coordinated than average, and to some degree I have avoided activities requiring a high degree of physical coordination, thus digging myself into a rut. It’s never too late to dig yourself out of such a rut (I hope, anyway), so I’m pushing myself to keep practicing until things get easier.

This story from Science Daily offers words of encouragement. It describes research into how working on learning a new skill affects mood. The short answer is that in the moment you’re doing it, striving to increase your ability to do something may make you less happy, but in the long run, it will make you more happy. The reason for this appears to be that in the long run, such behavior addresses a psychological need to be competent. The research also found that addressing needs for autonomy or connection increased feelings of happiness both in the moment and overall, suggesting that it might be possible to make it easier to practice a new skill if you can somehow do it in a way that fosters feelings of either autonomy or connection.

I guess I’ll be back out on the tennis court tomorrow morning; this time I’ll know that in addition to maybe making some progress on my serve, I’m also building up happiness for myself later on. Sweet.

Here’s the citation if you want to go to the source:

Momentary Happiness: The Role of Psychological Need Satisfaction, by Ryan T. Howell, David Chenot, Graham Hill, and Colleen J. Howell. Journal of Happiness Studies, 2009; DOI: 10.1007/s10902-009-9166-1 (Published online 28 October 2009)

Share
Apr 162009
 

A recent EurekAlert article describes some work that examined the effect of positive and negative emotions on a person’s level of adherence to typical cultural values. The study looked at Asians and Europeans; each culture, broadly speaking, has a different attitude toward individuality versus fitting into the group, and these attitudes were examined in individual participants. Then the researchers manipulated the moods of the participants, cheering some up and lowering others slightly into the dumps. The jazzed or bummed participants then were given some things to do that were designed to reveal the degree to which they acted in accordance with their attitudes. The happier ones were more likely to behave in ways that were off their own personal beaten path (Europeans taking more of a group view, Asians acting more independently), indicating that being in a more cheerful frame of mind might predispose people to be more exploratory and open to different ways of being. Mild misery had the opposite effect, reinforcing existing attitudes and behaviors.

It’s a fascinating look into how fluctuations in mood can change something that on the face of it might seem fairly set. Identity is not a static thing. (Incidentally, it’s also a nice story for those of us who like to answer questions about personality—or other topics—with “It depends.”)

(The full article is in the March 2009 issue of Psychological Science: Who I Am Depends on How I Feel: The Role of Affect in the Expression of Culture, Claire E. Ashton-James, William W. Maddux, Adam D. Galinsky, and Tanya L. Chartrand. Psychological Science 20:3, 340-346.)

Of course, the down side of the contingent nature of our behavior is that, as we already know, anxious, fearful people are not always at their best. Maybe that’s why it’s important to keep finding something to laugh at or otherwise feel good about even in trying circumstances. Coincidentally, I also happened across this article from the Association for Psychological Science about the value of positive emotions. The article describes the “broaden and build” model of psychologist Barbara Fredrickson, who has a new book out on the benefits of positivity. The idea is that contentment, playfulness, and serenity appear to help open up the mind to novel ideas (as with the recent experiment into cultural stereotypes), and over time, such moments of broadening add up to a greater sense of purpose, better social connections, and other beneficial outcomes. The article opens with a wonderful anecdote about patas monkeys, who in their youth chase each other around and, in the process, throw themselves onto flexible young trees, which bend and then fling them off in another direction. The monkeys drop this kind of horseplay as they get older, except when they’re being chased by a predator, when they will use a sapling as a slingshot to try to escape death. Evidently those monkeys look like they’re goofing off while they’re actually learning a survival skill.

One of the most endearing things about humans and other animals, it seems to me, is the sense of play, of spontaneous joy in some goofy activity or another, preferably shared. If there’s some cumulative long-term benefit, so much the better. I’m glad psychologists are looking into this kind of thing, and I’m also glad that thinkers before this have examined the question. Edward Abbey, for example, in Desert Solitaire, had this to say about the croaking of frogs in a brief wet spell in the desert:

“Why do they sing? What do they have to sing about? Somewhat apart from one another, separated by roughly equal distances, facing outward from the water, they clank and croak all through the night with tireless perseverance. To human ears their music has a bleak, dismal, tragic quality, dirgelike rather than jubilant. It may nevertheless be the case that these small beings are singing not only to claim their stake in the pond, not only to attract a mate, but also out of spontaneous love and joy, a contrapuntal choral celebration of the coolness and wetness after weeks of desert fire, for love of their own existence, however brief it may be, and for joy in the common life.

Has joy any survival value in the operations of evolution? I suspect that it does; I suspect that the morose and fearful are doomed to quick extinction. Where there is no joy there can be no courage; and without courage all other virtues are useless.”

I can’t do much better than leave you with the words of Cactus Ed. Right now I’m going out on my back patio to joyfully celebrate warmth and sunshine after weeks of midwest ice. (I won’t sing, though, because despite my best efforts I might sound remarkably like the frogs.)

Share
Sep 112008
 

“Every day is better than the one before it,” sang Al Stewart in a bouncy, optimistic song about Lindbergh’s flight across the Atlantic. Thinking that things will keep getting better can be a motivator, but life is more of an up-and-down affair than a series of constant improvements. According to a recent study, older people realize that and have fewer illusions about possible future happiness (and also more accurate recall of past mindsets).

Researchers surveyed nearly 4,000 adults in the US ranging in age from 24 to 74 in 1995-1996, and then again nine years later. They asked about current levels of satisfaction with life and projections for the future. The overall trend was that younger people (under 65) appeared to see life as a sort of a progression, with the present better than the past and the future projected to be even better yet. On the other hand, those over 65 saw the past and the present as being about equally satisfactory, and they did not anticipate as much satisfaction in the future. The younger people were not as accurate in projecting their future state of mind (they thought they’d be more satisfied than they were).

What’s particularly interesting is that across all the age groups, having realistic views of the past and future was linked to “the most adaptive functioning across a broad array of variables”. One of the things I enjoy about getting older is the perspective that you get from having a wider range of experiences to draw on as you face new situations (this is especially valuable for difficult new situations). I’m 47 now, so maybe I can look forward to greater self-awareness and a more realistic grasp of life’s possibilities and limitations by the time I hit 65. (Sounds like I just need to keep my expectations reasonable.) This press release from EurekAlert provides more details, and the paper itself, which will appear in the September 2008 issue of Psychological Science, is available online in PDF format: Realism and Illusion in Americans’ Temporal Views of Their Life Satisfaction: Age Differences in Reconstructing the Past and Anticipating the Future. Margie E. Lachman, Christina Röcke, Christopher Rosnick, and Carol D. Ryff.

Share
May 222008
 

This article from the New York Times goes into some recent research into the mental advantages of possessing an older brain. What some lament as a loss of focus and keen, quick recall is perhaps but the flip side of a broadened field of attention that soaks up more information, and a greater ability to adapt that information for use in different situations. Something to look forward to as I forge on through middle age…

And this press release from the University of Texas describes a study that looked at emotions and aging. It appears that overall, people’s emotions tend to be both more positive and more passive (as opposed to active) as they age, with people over 60 describing themselves as more contented.

Share
Jan 282008
 

There seems to be something inherent in human beings that makes them relatively unhappy in their middle years. Researchers analyzed data from people all around the world and found a common pattern of greater happiness in youth and old age and less happiness in midlife. The pattern appears in data on people in 72 different countries, and is consistent across a surprising range of people: rich, poor, childless, with children, male, female, single, married. There is one noticeable difference in the way people are affected: Men and women in England go through their lowest point emotionally at around the same age, but there’s a ten-year difference between men and women in the US (women bottom out around 40 and men around 50). So maybe some factor or factors unknown can influence the timing, but the middle-age slough of despond seems otherwise invariant.

So far, no one knows what it means or why it happens. I like the quote in this press release from a researcher who says that just knowing that it happens and that it’s just a phase could be comforting. (Physically fit 70-year-olds are on average as happy and mentally healthy as a 20-year-old, so there’s something to look forward to.)

As a 46-year-old, I’m wondering if it has to do with the way the future often seems narrower but deeper after a certain point. You’re old enough to realize you have to let go of some of your dreams because they will never happen. The wave function of possibilities you moved in as a young adult has started to collapse because out of all the possibilities, you’ve made choices that have inevitably excluded other choices. There’s definitely a sense of loss involved in watching your horizons narrow, but once you get over that, you have more energy to channel into the things you’ve chosen and with any luck, some of them will bloom for you. And maybe the process of getting over it is a necessary part of learning how to be happier with life and with yourself.

Share

Happy enough

 Psychology  Comments Off
Jan 242008
 

Can you be happy enough? It may sound like an impossibility, like having enough chocolate. However, an analysis of two different data sets suggests that being at the top of the charts for happiness is not necessarily the best place to be. While various measures of well-being (for example, health, success in relationships, earning power) are correlated positively with happiness, those who are pretty happy (8 or 9 on a scale from 1 to 10) earn more money and are more politically engaged and academically successful than the ultra-happy who score a 10 out of 10. This press release on EurekAlert has the details.

I recently read a rather impassioned excerpt from a new book, Against Happiness: In Praise of Melancholy by Eric G. Wilson. The title is daunting, but the kind of happiness Wilson speaks against is connected with a fear of life’s complexities and a bland acceptance of the status quo; he sees this kind of unchallenging happiness as being antithetical to joy and ecstasy as well as to melancholy. One of the points he makes in this excerpt is that an acceptance, rather than avoidance, of the inevitable sadness of life can be an opening into a more complex and nuanced view of the nature of our existence, and it can also be a spur to improve the things that are wrong. The press release about being happy enough make a similar point: Without a certain amount of discontent or unhappiness to alloy our contentment with the world, we are less likely to see much reason to change, even when change is beneficial. This is not to say that the seriously unhappy should not strive to be happier, of course, but if you’re reasonably satisfied with your life, that may be good enough.

Share