Denise Clegg, MAPP 08, is Program Officer for the Positive Neuroscience project at the University of Pennsylvania Positive Psychology Center. She also serves as a facilitator for the Penn Resilience Program and is a daily editor for Positive Psychology News Daily.
Denise writes on the 20th of each month, and her articles are here.
Is that a Duchenne smile? Does it matter?
I’ll try anything once, twice if I like it, three times to make sure. — Mae West
We should all take Ms. West to heart when choosing positive interventions — for ourselves or others — according to two studies recently described by Stephen Schueller in The Journal of Positive Psychology.
Positive interventions are exercises designed to increase well-being. A 2009 meta-analysis by researchers Nancy Sin and Sonja Lyubormirsky shows that several positive interventions reliably and significantly achieve that goal and also reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety.
So the question becomes, you can boost your happiness, but can you sustain it?
Yes. By doing what you like and liking what you do.
They work, but do we do them?
Kennon Sheldon and Sonja Lyubormirsky’s research shows you are more likely to sustain positive change by changing your actions and patterns than by improving your external circumstances. We adapt to life’s gifts and losses more quickly than you might expect. But a new hobby, habit, or relationship can generate a novel stream of positive experience that is happily hard to get used to. Positive interventions are proven foundations for those kinds of new practices.
That presumes that you actually practice your new habit. Sometimes I still don’t know why it seems hard to do things that 1) I know are good for me, and 2) also even feel good … but these new virtues face stiff competition from my comfortable, effortless, deeply-engrained habits.
A Structure for Choosing Positive Interventions
Stephen Schueller, who conducted his research at the University of Pennsylvania, is the first researcher to develop a structure for recommending positive interventions based on a person’s preferences for prior interventions – described as “similar to Netflix for movies.” The comparison is perceptive. In an entirely unrelated effort, Netflix awarded $1 million in 2009 to a team of researchers who developed an algorithm that successfully predicted film recommendations based on a user’s past preference. Pleasure is a powerful measure and paradigm.
Blessings journal is valuable
- but not for everybody
- Active-constructive responding
- Savoring
- Using signature strengths
- Gratitude visit
- Life summary
- The blessings journal
He found that people are more likely to stick with, and benefit from, exercises they say they enjoy, and that their preference predicted what other interventions might work best for them. Perhaps that seems unsurprising, but the empirical test is an important one for therapists and positive psychology practitioners looking to create the best fit and nurture the most effective outcomes for their clients.
Choose with joy in your heart
He also found that the positive interventions tested formed three groups, based on preference:
- People who liked active-constructive responding also responded better to savoring.
- People who liked using signature strengths also responded better to a gratitude visit.
- People who liked writing a life summary also responded better to the blessings journal.
The findings are preliminary and open to interpretation. Schueller proposes the effects may be based on a kind of time-preference continuum:
“One possibility is that the grouping of exercises found in this study is based on the time-orientation of the exercises. The active-constructive responding and savoring exercises both attempt to build off present experiences, intensifying and elongating either a pleasurable moment or interpersonal interaction. Both the life summary and blessings exercises involve reflection on past experiences. Lastly, both the strengths and gratitude visit require future planning (p. 199).”
Whatever genuinely increases your well-being: just do it, at least twice, three times to make sure. One of the most important findings I see in a range of research is that happiness is a verb. Love, courage, virtue, gratitude, friendship, marriage — despite their luminous labels — only come alive in action.
Images:
Mae West from Wikipedia ,
Journal entry courtesy of JoelMontes
Child Holding Happy Colorful Rainbow Taffy Candy courtesy of Pink Sherbet
References
Schueller, S., (2010). Preferences for positive psychology exercises. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5 (3), 192-203.
Sheldon, K. M., Abad, N., Ferguson, Y., Gunz, A., Houser-Marko, L., Nichols, C. P., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2010). Persistent pursuit of need-satisfying goals leads to increased happiness: A 6-month experimental longitudinal study. Motivation and Emotion, 34(1), 39-48.
Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65(5), 467-487. doi:10.1002/jclp.20593
6 comments
Hi Denise,
Thanx for the heads up on these articles. A question about the Schueller study. Which of the three groups had the major impact on life satisfaction or positive affect?
Also the Sheldon study had some interesting observations. for example not achieving goals had a detrimental effect on SWB. It could be argued that goal pursuit might be detrimental to happiness? Any thoughts?
Hi oz – I can only respond to your second question … (answer to your first not reported in that paper). Yes, SWB suffered at time points measured when the participants were not experiencing progress on their goals (not the same as goal pursuit – but such pursuit inherently opens the risk of unexpected challenges or failure). That seems like realistic affective feedback to oneself from oneself, (depending on the nature of your inner dialogue). I’d be interested to see the effects of optimistic/pessimistic and fixed/flexible thinking styles on intensity and duration of lower SWB as well as longer-term SWB trends for those who face setbacks at first, but work to overcome barriers and eventually experience progress on their goals.
Denise – there was also one other interesting observation. Those who believed that they could be happier also got the most benefit.
I’ve seen other research that suggested that people who focused on the goal as opposed to the journey were unhappier. This suggests that living in the moment might be important. This leads me to wonder if the Active Constructive/Savouring (living in the now) combination might have more impact on SWB. This would be more consistent with an eastern approach to PP. Thoughts?
Dear Denise,
What a wonderful article. I really enjoy your excellent writing and so happy to hear about Steven Schueller’s “Netflix” model of Positive Interventions! Thanks for sharing, and love the “happiness” as a verb idea.
My best to you,
Elaine O’Brien
Thank you, Elaine! Oz — savoring did produce the most significant increase in happiness and decrease in depression (post initial intervention), but Schueller urges caution in comparing efficacy of the individual exercises due to the potential impact of ordering effects. Interestingly, savoring was the only exercise not to show a significant correlation b/t preference and efficacy. But the overall finding is that preference correlates w/ efficacy, and that people fall into different preference categories. Not sure what you mean by eastern approach to PP — that could mean a lot of things — do you mean Buddhist or other philosophical approach?
Denise- sorry meant mindfulness but it could extend into the whole Buddhist philosophy.
The groupings fit with my emperical observations – certainly ACR and savouring work for me whereas strengths etc leave me decidedly cold. Nothing like a conversation to lift the spirits.
The observation on savouring impacting the most on happiness doesn’t surprise me – perhaps we need to focus on the now as opposed to the past (which we can’t change) and the future which is challenging to influence.