Happiness

by Ed Diener

  The attempts to make you happier are usually meant sincerely, and may be a good thing if you are chronically unhappy. As we have seen, happiness conveys benefits to those who experience it, and for those unfortunate individuals who are perpetually sad or angry, a dose of increased well-being may be just what Doctor Happiness ordered. But what about the rest of us, the majority who are already happy? Do we need to be happier? Do you really want to be happier? You might feel that even if you are happy, you are not happy enough. Might all the well-intentioned meddlers be making you unhappier by insisting that you need more happiness? And might they be selling you something that you don't really need?

  Too Nice in the Big Apple

  For those people who think that limitless happiness is a desirable emotional trophy, consider an interesting and ill-fated experiment conducted by a group of well-meaning New Yorkers. This group decided that they could improve their lives and generate more positivity to the world by saying "yes" to everything - absolutely everything - that was asked of them. At first glance, this sounds like a fun social experiment, and a refreshing remedy to all the turnoffs, rejection, and negativity we encounter in our daily lives. Just imagine: a world in which people feel safe to pick up hitchhikers, give money to beggars, allow you to pass them in line, consent to overtures in the bedroom, and allow you to try out new, creative ideas at work. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it? Unless, of course, you are the one who must say yes to everything.

  The sweet New Yorkers began the month of their experiment feeling very positive. They were extraordinarily generous to people, and put their friends and co-workers in a good mood with their unexpected acquiescence and happiness. They were taking on extra tasks at work, fetching cups of coffee, volunteering to pick up kids from school, and allowing strangers to steal the taxis right out from under them. But, as the month wore on, they began to feel spent. Their time, energy, and other resources were stretched thin, and they were having a difficult time functioning effectively. Toward the end of the month, they were absolutely depleted, had put themselves in compromising situations, and were, ironically, feeling negative toward others and harboring feelings of being taken advantage of. Clearly, happiness and positivity with no checks whatsoever can be downright problematic. Especially in New York City.

  Problems of Being a "Happiness Ten"

  Many of us harbor doubts about whether it is good to score a ten on the happiness scale. Might a little unhappiness or complaining be okay? Keep in mind that on a one to ten scale, the majority of people in economically developed nations fall in the six to nine range; few score in the unhappy zone and very few score a ten, the top of the scale - extreme happiness. It seems that some people enjoy complaining a little, and the moral imperative to be constantly cheerful can feel oppressive. At times, extremely happy people seem a bit naive and we wonder whether the superhappy will worry when it is needed. These concerns make sense: in great novels and engaging movies, we want to see conflict, not simply people having a very pleasant and very boring life. Imagine Crime and Punishment without the murder and guilt, or Jaws without the shark attacks. The story of Cinderella would lose its narrative power if the beloved protagonist had been a young girl living with her wealthy, loving, intact family. We are often drawn to stories in which people overcome adversity, rather than those where everything seems to be fine.

  Critics wonder whether our energies might be better placed in focusing on the welfare of others rather than our own personal enjoyment. For that matter, might trying to achieve a complete sense of satisfaction hobble our motivation to improve the quality of our own lives? Despite the clear benefits of happiness, nagging questions remain. Even if we accept happiness as a worthwhile pursuit, might we already be happy enough? Is there, in fact, an optimal level of happiness?

  Many people across the globe find the American idea of being ever-cheerful to be silly. Always smiling, always saying "Great!" and "Super!" and always looking on the bright side seem distasteful to many. To many, constant cheerfulness seems phony and shallow, if not downright stupid. What about duty, hard work, critical thinking, and responsibility? What about facing the difficult problems that plague the world? When one of the authors of this book, Ed, spoke at a roundtable meeting with VIPs in Scotland, many expressed skepticism at the idea that happiness is a good thing. They said that many Scots are dour, and like it that way, and they did not want an American telling them that they should be happy.

  The idea that there may be an optimal level of happiness, a point at which we say "enough," is provided by examples of extreme individuals - those who, for one reason or another, appear too happy. Take, for instance, the case of bipolar (manic depressive) individuals, who are flooded with expansive, joyful feelings when they are in their "up phase." Rather than conferring the usual benefits of health, productivity, and sociability, mania is often detrimental to an individual's life. Consider the case of Peter.

  Peter was a student at a university where one of the authors taught. He attended classes on a disability scholarship - his disability was a mental problem rather than a physical one. Peter was a bright mathematics major, and as long as he stayed on his lithium, which controlled his moods, he could function appropriately as a college student. But he felt that the medications "kept him down"; that is, interfered with his creativity and high moods, and so he quit taking the pills. Very quickly, his energy levels skyrocketed. He met with his professor and confided that he had started writing three new books that very morning, and was very excited about each of them. He had so many good ideas, it was impossible to keep track of them.

  Because Peter was so enthusiastic about the topics of his classes, he attended them regularly, but was too excited to take notes. One day, from the front row of a classroom of two hundred students, he stood up in the middle of the lecture, turned to the class, and shouted out, "I love you all." He attended advanced seminars and sat on the floor, appearing enraptured by complex statistical tables that were far beyond his level of understanding. His grades plummeted from B's to F's, and soon he was expelled from the university.

  But Peter's story does not end there. Even after being ejected from the university, he continued to attend classes and hang around the campus. A professor picked up Peter hitchhiking in the snow barefoot. Although his parents lived over a thousand miles away, Peter would hitchhike to see them. Peter claimed the cold didn't bother him and, besides, he was interested in the experience of traveling through the snow barefoot. Peter told the professor that he was working on a book of poetry and had secured a job doing menial labor. Unfortunately, his employers demanded that he wear shoes, and so he was not sure the job would work out. His employers also demanded that he come to work on a regular basis, and frequently Peter would get so excited by something else that he just could not pull himself away to attend work. Nonetheless, he told his former professor that his life was wonderful because it was filled with exciting activities every second of the day.

  Although the things Peter did might seem amusing because they fly in the face of social norms, his story is a tragic one. Peter experienced a constant flood of energy and enthusiasm, but was unable to function effectively. He was more intelligent and far more creative than many of his peers at the university, but when he quit taking his medication, Peter lacked the ability to maintain his focus on projects, and tended to behave in strange ways that alienated him from others. Of course, mania is not the same thing as happiness, but Peter's story illustrates the potential downsides of having too much exuberance.

  Sociopaths or psychopaths provide another example of the dangers associated with an inability to experience negative feelings. We are not talking about the Hannibal Lecter evil geniuses of the world, but those more common individuals who, for some reason, tend not to experience the negative emotions of worry, anxiety, guilt, and shame. Sociopaths can be both fearless and guiltless and, as a result, often lie effectively. The experience of negative emotions, such as guilt and anxiety, make the rest of us reluctant to
lie, and if we do so, these emotions often make it hard for us to be convincing. Sociopaths single-mindedly pursue pleasure and can therefore easily rationalize hurtful, immoral behaviors. At their worst, they are capable of committing heinous crimes without guilt or shame. In the case of sociopaths, we see that negative emotions such as guilt are tied to our moral sensibilities, and that a lack of negative feelings is just as problematic as experiencing mania. Thus, extreme mania as well as the complete absence of negative emotions can both be extremely detrimental to effective functioning.

  Scientific studies on emotion have pointed to similar conclusions. Take, for example, the case of the "Termites." In the 1920s, Lewis Terman assessed a large group of exceptionally gifted children, little geniuses who were later dubbed "Termites" because of the man who devoted his life to studying them. Many years later, researchers located the Termites, curious to see how they were faring, at a time when many were dead. What they found was surprising - the happiest Termites died at a younger age than the less happy savants.

  When we examined the Termite data, it was clear that all of the gifted individuals were quite happy, and therefore the researchers were not comparing unhappy individuals to happy ones, as is often the case in such research. Instead, the comparison was between the very happy and the extremely happy, with the very happy living longer than their extremely happy peers. Perhaps the happiest Termites did not pay close attention to their physical symptoms, leading to poorer health strategies, or were more likely to take more risks, such as driving fast or drinking too much. Regardless of the reason, the Termites provide a test case from research that suggests that, at the extreme levels, happiness might be associated with some drawbacks.

  Another informative example comes from research conducted by the Swiss psychologist Norbert Semmer on how job dissatisfaction can sometimes be beneficial. He studied people dissatisfied with their work by following them over a period of time and assessing various outcomes, such as length of employment. It will come as no surprise that Semmer found that dissatisfied workers were more likely to quit their jobs and find a new work-place. What is interesting is that his findings showed that many of these dissatisfied workers were happier in their new workplace, suggesting that they were not simply dyspeptic people who would be unhappy wherever they worked. Apparently, for many of the participants in Semmer's study, their original workplace was a poor fit for them or it was simply a bad place to work, and they were more satisfied once they found a new job. In other words, their job dissatisfaction in their first job was not bad if it led them to find a more appropriate job.

  The moral of Semmer's research story is that dissatisfaction and the emotions that accompany it, such as anxiety and frustration, can be useful signals that things are not going well, and can therefore provide the appropriate motivation to make positive changes. In some research studies, people who are put in a sad mood outperform those who are put in a happy mood, in tasks ranging from moral reasoning to logical thinking, indicating that in some situations, a negative mood can sometimes actually facilitate performance. Although people in a happy mood may outperform others in many tasks, in some cases they are careless and rely on habits that don't work in that situation. A negative mood may motivate the person to work harder to change the situation, or be more careful and cautious. In some situations, these responses are exactly what is needed. Thus, occasionally feeling sad or dissatisfied, but not chronically so, can enhance effective functioning.

  Remember the wit of Flaubert, who said that stupidity was necessary for happiness. Too much happiness and zero unhappiness might be a bad thing. Does this mean, then, that Flaubert was right? Of course, it does not. Flaubert made the mistake of dismissing happiness as a fool's errand when it is, in fact, widely beneficial. But studies of subjective well-being suggest that there is an optimal level of happiness - that we should feel some, but not excessive, positive emotions. Here we break ranks from those who encourage the pursuit of limitless happiness because, although happiness is beneficial, not all forms of happiness are, and not in all cases.

  How much happiness is enough? Research shows that the optimal level of happiness depends on the aspect of happiness we are talking about, our resources, and the type of outcome and activity in which we are interested. It makes a difference, for example, whether we consider how frequently a person experiences happiness versus how intensely they experience it. In determining the optimal level of happiness, it also matters which measures we look at: for example, whether we pay attention to a person's work achievements or their social life. Finally, the optimal level of happiness depends on the other resources a person has available for achieving goals.

  Life Outcomes of Extremely Happy People

  Earlier, we reviewed outcomes where happiness is clearly beneficial. In study after study, for example, the happiest people reap the most benefits where friendship is concerned. In research from many countries employing longitudinal designs (in which people are measured over time), those who are "extremely happy" are more likely to be in long-term relationships and involved in volunteer activities. Happy people like and trust others more, and are liked more in return.

  To determine the optimal happiness for social relationships, we intensively studied over two hundred college students. It was clear that the extremely happy were doing better, socially speaking, than were any of the other groups. Self-confidence, energy, confidence, and sociability were highest among the extremely happy. The extremely happy group dated more and had more friends than even the very happy group, and their margin over the unhappy group was very large in the case of social relationships and feelings of energy. Thus, in the realm of sociability, more happiness is better. Unhappy people had the least energy and self-confidence, and the fewest close friends.

  The case of health provides another interesting example of the tangible benefits of happiness. Happiness, as we learned earlier, often translates to healthier behaviors and a more robust physiology. But remember also the possible dark side to the health-happiness connection. In a review of dozens of studies relating health and happiness, researchers found that the happiest people who had late-stage or terminal illnesses were more likely to die than those who were less happy, possibly because they did not take the threat seriously. Another finding was that highly aroused positive emotions, such as elation, might raise blood pressure and heart rate. The research findings on health indicate that there might be an optimal level of happiness, wherein too little subjective well-being fails to convey the potential health benefits of happiness, and too much might also be detrimental. With this cautionary note in mind, it makes sense to ask: Might there be other domains of life where extreme happiness is not desirable, and where emotional balance is needed?

  Magic Eights

  Take achievement, for instance. Achievement means working toward important long-term goals, such as getting good grades and earning a high income at work. What we know about the benefits of happiness tells us that the happier people are, the more likely they are to pursue, persevere, and obtain these favorable outcomes. In fact, this is true when comparing happy people with their unhappy counterparts. But what about differences between people on the positive side of the spectrum? Do the extremely happy achieve more than the very happy? Surprisingly, the answer is no. When individuals complete happiness surveys that use a one to ten scale, those scoring around an eight often tend to fare the best in achievement. Why might the eights of the world outperform their friends and neighbors who are nines or tens? It could be that eights benefit from the creativity and energy of happiness, but also maintain a touch of worry that helps to motivate them.

  Let's analyze this "number 8 phenomenon" in more depth. We found an interesting and surprising result when we examined data from college students. In 1976, thousands of students from elite colleges, small liberal arts schools, large state universities, and traditional black colleges completed a large survey, which included a single question about their levels of cheerfulness. Twenty years
later, when the students were about 37 years old, they were contacted again and asked to report their incomes. It may seem incredible that a single item filled out on a particular date two decades earlier could be used to predict income years later, but it did. The happy folks seemed to be outearning the unhappy people, but the next-to-happiest group was earning the most!

  Similar results can be found in an analysis of a huge sample by Shigehiro Oishi, who analyzed the satisfaction scores of over 100,000 respondents from all over the world. Those who scored well on happiness - the sevens, eights, and nines on a ten-point scale - had higher incomes and more advanced educations than both the tens and those who were unhappy.

  How is it possible that a person can achieve more happiness, or put on the emotional brakes if they seem to be getting too much joy in the wrong places? For that matter, how is it possible to even know if we have too little, too much, or just the right amount of happiness? As we shall explain below, it all depends on which aspects of happiness one is considering. Because happiness is complex and multifaceted, most people are quick to make one-sided and sweeping pronouncements about whether or not it is a worthwhile pursuit. But in the extraordinarily important issue of the optimal levels of happiness, it is necessary to take a deeper, more intricate view of subjective well-being and its role in people's lives.