what is happiness essays

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is Happiness?

Defining Happiness, and How to Become Happier

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

Verywell/ Jiaqi Zhou

How to Cultivate Happiness

How to be a happier person.

Happiness is something that people seek to find, yet what defines happiness can vary from one person to the next. Typically, happiness is an emotional state characterized by feelings of joy, satisfaction, contentment, and fulfillment. While happiness has many different definitions, it is often described as involving positive emotions and life satisfaction. 

When most people talk about the true meaning of happiness, they might be talking about how they feel in the present moment or referring to a more general sense of how they feel about life overall.

Because happiness tends to be such a broadly defined term, psychologists and other social scientists typically use the term ' subjective well-being ' when they talk about this emotional state. Just as it sounds, subjective well-being tends to focus on an individual's overall personal feelings about their life in the present.  

Two key components of happiness (or subjective well-being) are:

• The balance of emotions: Everyone experiences both positive and negative emotions, feelings, and moods. Happiness is generally linked to experiencing more positive feelings than negative ones.
• Life satisfaction: This relates to how satisfied you feel with different areas of your life including your relationships, work, achievements, and other things that you consider important.

Another definition of happiness comes from the ancient philosopher Aristotle, who suggested that happiness is the one human desire, and all other human desires exist as a way to obtain happiness. He believed that there were four levels of happiness: happiness from immediate gratification, from comparison and achievement, from making positive contributions, and from achieving fulfillment. 

Happiness, Aristotle suggested, could be achieved through the golden mean, which involves finding a balance between deficiency and excess.

Signs of Happiness

While perceptions of happiness may be different from one person to the next, there are some key signs that psychologists look for when measuring and assessing happiness.

Some key signs of happiness include:

• Feeling like you are living the life you wanted
• Going with the flow and a willingness to take life as it comes
• Feeling that the conditions of your life are good
• Enjoying positive, healthy relationships with other people
• Feeling that you have accomplished (or will accomplish) what you want in life
• Feeling satisfied with your life
• Feeling positive more than negative
• Being open to new ideas and experiences
• Practicing self-care and treating yourself with kindness and compassion
• Experiencing gratitude
• Feeling that you are living life with a sense of meaning and purpose
• Wanting to share your happiness and joy with others

One important thing to remember is that happiness isn't a state of constant euphoria . Instead, happiness is an overall sense of experiencing more positive emotions than negative ones.

Happy people still feel the whole range of human emotions—anger, frustrastion, boredom, loneliness, and even sadness—from time to time. But even when faced with discomfort, they have an underlying sense of optimism that things will get better, that they can deal with what is happening, and that they will be able to feel happy again.

Types of Happiness

There are many different ways of thinking about happiness. For example, the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle made a distinction between two different kinds of happiness: hedonia and eudaimonia.

• Hedonia: Hedonic happiness is derived from pleasure. It is most often associated with doing what feels good, self-care, fulfilling desires, experiencing enjoyment, and feeling a sense of satisfaction.
• Eudaimonia: This type of happiness is derived from seeking virtue and meaning. Important components of eudaimonic well-being including feeling that your life has meaning, value, and purpose. It is associated more with fulfilling responsibilities, investing in long-term goals, concern for the welfare of other people, and living up to personal ideals.

Hedonia and eudemonia are more commonly known today in psychology as pleasure and meaning, respectively. More recently, psychologists have suggested the addition of the third component that relates to engagement . These are feelings of commitment and participation in different areas of life.

Research suggests that happy people tend to rank pretty high on eudaimonic life satisfaction and better than average on their hedonic life satisfaction.  

All of these can play an important role in the overall experience of happiness, although the relative value of each can be highly subjective. Some activities may be both pleasurable and meaningful, while others might skew more one way or the other.

For example, volunteering for a cause you believe in might be more meaningful than pleasurable. Watching your favorite tv show, on the other hand, might rank lower in meaning and higher on pleasure.

Some types of happiness that may fall under these three main categories include:

• Joy: A often relatively brief feeling that is felt in the present moment
• Excitement: A happy feeling that involves looking forward to something with positive anticipation
• Gratitude: A positive emotion that involves being thankful and appreciative
• Pride: A feeling of satisfaction in something that you have accomplished
• Optimism: This is a way of looking at life with a positive, upbeat outlook
• Contentment: This type of happiness involves a sense of satisfaction

While some people just tend to be naturally happier, there are things that you can do to cultivate your sense of happiness. 

Pursue Intrinsic Goals 

Achieving goals that you are intrinsically motivated to pursue, particularly ones that are focused on personal growth and community, can help boost happiness. Research suggests that pursuing these types of intrinsically-motivated goals can increase happiness more than pursuing extrinsic goals like gaining money or status.  

Enjoy the Moment

Studies have found that people tend to over earn—they become so focused on accumulating things that they lose track of actually enjoying what they are doing.  

So, rather than falling into the trap of mindlessly accumulating to the detriment of your own happiness, focus on practicing gratitude for the things you have and enjoying the process as you go. 

Reframe Negative Thoughts

When you find yourself stuck in a pessimistic outlook or experiencing negativity, look for ways that you can reframe your thoughts in a more positive way. 

People have a natural negativity bias , or a tendency to pay more attention to bad things than to good things. This can have an impact on everything from how you make decisions to how you form impressions of other people. Discounting the positive—a cognitive distortion where people focus on the negative and ignore the positive—can also contribute to negative thoughts.

Reframing these negative perceptions isn't about ignoring the bad. Instead, it means trying to take a more balanced, realistic look at events. It allows you to notice patterns in your thinking and then challenge negative thoughts.

Impact of Happiness

Why is happiness so important? Happiness has been shown to predict positive outcomes in many different areas of life including mental well-being, physical health, and overall longevity.

• Positive emotions increase satisfaction with life.
• Happiness helps people build stronger coping skills and emotional resources.
• Positive emotions are linked to better health and longevity. One study found that people who experienced more positive emotions than negative ones were more likely to have survived over a 13 year period.
• Positive feelings increase resilience. Resilience helps people better manage stress and bounce back better when faced with setbacks. For example, one study found that happier people tend to have lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol and that these benefits tend to persist over time.
• People who report having a positive state of well-being are more likely to engage in healthy behaviors such as eating fruits and vegetables and engaging in regular physical exercise.
• Being happy may make help you get sick less often. Happier mental states are linked to increased immunity.

Some people seem to have a naturally higher baseline for happiness—one large-scale study of more than 2,000 twins suggested that around 50% of overall life satisfaction was due to genetics, 10% to external events, and 40% to individual activities.

So while you might not be able to control what your “base level” of happiness is, there are things that you can do to make your life happier and more fulfilling. Even the happiest of individuals can feel down from time to time and happiness is something that all people need to consciously pursue.

Cultivate Strong Relationships

Social support is an essential part of well-being. Research has found that good social relationships are the strongest predictor of happiness. Having positive and supportive connections with people you care about can provide a buffer against stress, improve your health, and help you become a happier person.

In the Harvard Study of Adult Development, a longitudinal study that looked at participants over 80 years, researchers found that relationships and how happy people are in those relationships strongly impacted overall health.

So if you are trying to improve your happiness, cultivating solid social connections is a great place to start. Consider deepening your existing relationships and explore ways to make new friends. 

Get Regular Exercise

Exercise is good for both your body and mind. Physical activity is linked to a range of physical and psychological benefits including improved mood. Numerous studies have shown that regular exercise may play a role in warding off symptoms of depression, but evidence also suggests that it may also help make people happier, too.

In one analysis of past research on the connection between physical activity and happiness, researchers found a consistent positive link.  

Even a little bit of exercise produces a happiness boost—people who were physically active for as little as 10 minutes a day or who worked out only once a week had higher levels of happiness than people who never exercised.

Show Gratitude

In one study, participants were asked to engage in a writing exercise for 10 to 20 minutes each night before bed.   Some were instructed to write about daily hassles, some about neutral events, and some about things they were grateful for. The results found that people who had written about gratitude had increase positive emotions, increased subjective happiness, and improve life satisfaction.

As the authors of the study suggest, keeping a gratitude list is a relatively easy, affordable, simple, and pleasant way to boost your mood. Try setting aside a few minutes each night to write down or think about things in your life that you are grateful for.

Find a Sense of Purpose

Research has found that people who feel like they have a purpose have better well-being and feel more fulfilled.   A sense of purpose involves seeing your life as having goals, direction, and meaning. It may help improve happiness by promoting healthier behaviors. 

Some things you can do to help find a sense of purpose include:

• Explore your interests and passions
• Engage in prosocial and altruistic causes
• Work to address injustices
• Look for new things you might want to learn more about

This sense of purpose is influenced by a variety of factors, but it is also something that you can cultivate. It involves finding a goal that you care deeply about that will lead you to engage in productive, positive actions in order to work toward that goal.

Press Play for Advice On Reaching Your Dreams

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast , featuring best-selling author Dave Hollis, shares how to create your best life. Click below to listen now.

Follow Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

Challenges of Finding Happiness

While seeking happiness is important, there are times when the pursuit of life satisfaction falls short. Some challenges to watch for include:

Valuing the Wrong Things

Money may not be able to buy happiness, but there is research that spending money on things like experiences can make you happier than spending it on material possessions. 

One study, for example, found that spending money on things that buy time—such as spending money on time-saving services—can increase happiness and life satisfaction.  

Rather than overvaluing things such as money, status, or material possessions, pursuing goals that result in more free time or enjoyable experiences may have a higher happiness reward.

Not Seeking Social Support

Social support means having friends and loved ones that you can turn to for support. Research has found that perceived social support plays an important role in subjective well-being. For example, one study found that perceptions of social support were responsible for 43% of a person's level of happiness.  

It is important to remember that when it comes to social support, quality is more important than quantity. Having just a few very close and trusted friends will have a greater impact on your overall happiness than having many casual acquaintances.

Thinking of Happiness as an Endpoint

Happiness isn’t a goal that you can simply reach and be done with. It is a constant pursuit that requires continual nurturing and sustenance.

One study found that people who tend to value happiness most also tended to feel the least satisfied with their lives.   Essentially, happiness becomes such a lofty goal that it becomes virtually unattainable. 

“Valuing happiness could be self-defeating because the more people value happiness, the more likely they will feel disappointed,” suggest the authors of the study.

Perhaps the lesson is to not make something as broadly defined as “happiness” your goal. Instead, focus on building and cultivating the sort of life and relationships that bring fulfillment and satisfaction to your life. 

It is also important to consider how you personally define happiness. Happiness is a broad term that means different things to different people. Rather than looking at happiness as an endpoint, it can be more helpful to think about what happiness really means to you and then work on small things that will help you become happier. This can make achieving these goals more manageable and less overwhelming.

History of Happiness

Happiness has long been recognized as a critical part of health and well-being. The "pursuit of happiness" is even given as an inalienable right in the U.S. Declaration of Independence. Our understanding of what will bring happiness, however, has shifted over time.

Psychologists have also proposed a number of different theories to explain how people experience and pursue happiness. These theories include:

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

The hierarchy of needs suggests that people are motivated to pursue increasingly complex needs. Once more basic needs are fulfilled, people are then motivated by more psychological and emotional needs.

At the peak of the hierarchy is the need for self-actualization, or the need to achieve one's full potential. The theory also stresses the importance of peak experiences or transcendent moments in which a person feels deep understanding, happiness, and joy. 

Positive Psychology

The pursuit of happiness is central to the field of positive psychology . Psychologists who study positive psychology are interested in learning ways to increase positivity and helping people live happier, more satisfying lives. 

Rather than focusing on mental pathologies, the field instead strives to find ways to help people, communities, and societies improve positive emotions and achieve greater happiness.

Finley K, Axner M, Vrooman K, Tse D. Ideal levels of prosocial involvement in relation to momentary affect and eudaimonia: Exploring the golden mean . Innov Aging . 2020;4(Suppl 1):614. doi:10.1093/geroni/igaa057.2083

Kringelbach ML, Berridge KC. The neuroscience of happiness and pleasure .  Soc Res (New York) . 2010;77(2):659-678.

Panel on Measuring Subjective Well-Being in a Policy-Relevant Framework; Committee on National Statistics; Division on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education; National Research Council; Stone AA, Mackie C, editors. Subjective Well-Being: Measuring Happiness, Suffering, and Other Dimensions of Experience [Internet]. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US).

Lee MA, Kawachi I. The keys to happiness: Associations between personal values regarding core life domains and happiness in South Korea . PLoS One . 2019;14(1):e0209821. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209821

Hsee CK, Zhang J, Cai CF, Zhang S. Overearning . Psychol Sci . 2013;24(6):852-9

Carstensen LL, Turan B, Scheibe S, et al. Emotional experience improves with age: evidence based on over 10 years of experience sampling . Psychol Aging . 2011;26(1):21‐33. doi:10.1037/a0021285

Steptoe A, Wardle J. Positive affect and biological function in everyday life . Neurobiol Aging . 2005;26 Suppl 1:108‐112. doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2005.08.016

Sapranaviciute-Zabazlajeva L, Luksiene D, Virviciute D, Bobak M, Tamosiunas A. L ink between healthy lifestyle and psychological well-being in Lithuanian adults aged 45-72: a cross-sectional study . BMJ Open . 2017;7(4):e014240. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014240

Costanzo ES, Lutgendorf SK, Kohut ML, et al. Mood and cytokine response to influenza virus in older adults . J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci . 2004;59(12):1328‐1333. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.12.1328

Lyubomirsky S, Sheldon KM, Schkade D. Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change . Review of General Psychology. 2005;9 (2):111–131. doi:0.1037/1089-2680.9.2.111

The Harvard Gazette. Good genes are nice, but joy is better .

Zhang Z, Chen W. A systematic review of the relationship between physical activity and happiness . J Happiness Stud 20, 1305–1322 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-018-9976-0

Cunha LF, Pellanda LC, Reppold CT. Positive psychology and gratitude interventions: a randomized clinical trial . Front Psychol . 2019;10:584. Published 2019 Mar 21. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00584

Ryff CD. Psychological well-being revisited: advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia . Psychother Psychosom . 2014;83(1):10‐28. doi:10.1159/000353263

Whillans AV, Dunn EW, Smeets P, Bekkers R, Norton MI. Buying time promotes happiness .  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A . 2017;114(32):8523‐8527. doi:10.1073/pnas.1706541114

Gulacti F. The effect of perceived social support on subjective well-being . Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences . 2010;2(2):3844-3849. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.602

Mauss IB, Tamir M, Anderson CL, Savino NS. Can seeking happiness make people unhappy? [corrected] Paradoxical effects of valuing happiness [published correction appears in Emotion. 2011 Aug;11(4):767]. Emotion . 2011;11(4):807‐815. doi:10.1037/a0022010

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology

Philosophy, One Thousand Words at a Time

Happiness: What is it to be Happy?

Author: Kiki Berk Category: Ethics , Phenomenology and Existentialism Words: 992

Listen here

Do you want to be happy? If you’re like most people, then yes, you do.

But what is happiness? What does it mean to be “happy”? [1]

This essay discusses four major philosophical theories of happiness. [2]

1. Hedonism

According to hedonism, happiness is simply the experience of pleasure. [3] A happy person has a lot more pleasure than displeasure (pain) in her life. To be happy, then, is just to feel good. In other words, there’s no difference between being happy and feeling happy.

Famous hedonists include the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus and the modern English philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. [4] These philosophers all took happiness to include intellectual pleasures (such as reading a book) in addition to physical pleasures (such as having sex).

Although we associate being happy with feeling good, many philosophers think that hedonism is mistaken.

First, it’s possible to be happy without feeling good (such as when a happy person has a toothache), and it’s also possible to feel good without being happy (such as when an unhappy person gets a massage). Since happiness and pleasure can come apart, they can’t be the same thing.

Second, happiness and pleasure seem to have different properties. Pleasures are often fleeting, simple, and superficial (think of the pleasure involved in eating ice cream), whereas happiness is supposed to be lasting, complex, and profound. Things with different properties can’t be identical, so happiness can’t be the same thing as pleasure.

These arguments suggest that happiness and pleasure aren’t identical. That being said, it’s hard to imagine a happy person who never feels good. So, perhaps happiness involves pleasure without being identical to it.

2. Virtue Theory

According to virtue theory, happiness is the result of cultivating the virtues—both moral and intellectual—such as wisdom, courage, temperance, and patience. A happy person must be sufficiently virtuous. To be happy, then, is to cultivate excellence and to flourish as a result. This view is famously held by Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics. [5]

Linking happiness to virtue has the advantage of treating happiness as a lasting, complex, and profound phenomenon. It also explains how happiness and pleasure can come apart, since a person can be virtuous without feeling good, and a person can feel good without being virtuous.

In spite of these advantages, however, virtue theory is questionable. An important part of being virtuous is being morally good. But are immoral people always unhappy? Arguably not. Many bad people seem happy in spite of—or even because of—their unsavory actions. And a similar point can be made about intellectual virtue: unwise or irrational people aren’t always unhappy, either. In fact, some of these people seem happy as a direct result of their intellectual deficiencies. “Ignorance is bliss,” the saying goes!

But virtue theorists have a response here. Maybe some immoral people seem happy, on the surface; but that doesn’t mean that they are truly happy, at some deeper level. And the same thing can be said about people who lack the intellectual virtues: ignorance may lead to bliss, but that bliss isn’t true happiness. So, there seems to be some room for debate on these issues.

3. Desire Satisfaction Theory

According to the desire satisfaction theory, happiness consists in getting what you want—whatever that happens to be. A happy person has many of her desires satisfied; and the more her desires are satisfied, the happier she is.

Even though getting what you want can be a source of happiness, identifying happiness with desire satisfaction is problematic.

To start, this implies that the only way to become happier is by satisfying a desire. This seems wrong. Sometimes our happiness is increased by getting something we didn’t previously want—such as a surprise birthday party or getting stuck taking care of a neighbor’s cat. This implies that desire satisfaction is not necessary for happiness.

Desire satisfaction is not always sufficient for happiness, either. Unfortunately, it is common for people to feel disappointed when they get what they want. Many accomplishments, such as earning a degree or winning a tournament, simply don’t bring the long-lasting happiness that we expect. [6]

So, even if getting what we want sometimes makes us happy, these counterexamples suggest that happiness does not consist in desire satisfaction. [7]

4. Life Satisfaction Theory

According to the life satisfaction theory, happiness consists in being satisfied with your life. A happy person has a positive impression of her life in general, even though she might not be happy about every single aspect of it. To be happy, then, means to be content with your life as a whole.

It’s controversial whether life satisfaction is affective (a feeling) or cognitive (a belief). On the one hand, life satisfaction certainly comes with positive feelings. On the other hand, it’s possible to step back, reflect on your life, and realize that it’s good, even when you’re feeling down. [8]  

One problem for this theory is that it’s difficult for people to distinguish how they feel in the moment from how they feel about their lives overall. Studies have shown that people report feeling more satisfied with their lives when the weather is good, even though this shouldn’t make that much of a difference. But measuring life satisfaction is complicated, so perhaps such studies should be taken with a grain of salt. [9]

5. Conclusion

Understanding what happiness is should enable you to become happier.

First, decide which theory of happiness you think is true, based on the arguments.

Second, pursue whatever happiness is according to that theory: seek pleasure and try to avoid pain (hedonism), cultivate moral and intellectual virtue (virtue theory), decide what you really want and do your best to get it (desire satisfaction theory), or change your life (or your attitude about it) so you feel (or believe) that it’s going well (life satisfaction theory).

And if you’re not sure which theory of happiness is true, then you could always try pursuing all of these things. 😊

[1] This might seem like an empirical (scientific) question rather than a philosophical one. However, this essay asks the conceptual question of what happiness is, and conceptual questions belong to philosophy, not to science.

[2] Happiness is commonly distinguished from “well-being,” i.e., the state of a life that is worth living. Whether or not happiness is the same thing as well-being is an open question, but most philosophers think it isn’t. See, for example, Haybron (2020).

[3] The word “hedonism” has different uses in philosophy. In this paper, it means that happiness is the same thing as pleasure (hedonism about happiness). But sometimes it is used to mean that happiness is the only thing that has intrinsic value (hedonism about value) or that humans are always and only motivated by pleasure (psychological hedonism). It’s important not to confuse these different uses of the word.

[4] For more on Epicurus and happiness, see Konstan (2018). For more on Bentham and Mill on happiness, see Driver (2014), as well as John Stuart Mill on The Good Life: Higher-Quality Pleasures by Dale E. Miller and Consequentialism by Shane Gronholz

[5] For more on Plato and happiness, see Frede (2017); for more on Aristotle and happiness, see Kraut (2018), and on the Stoics and happiness, see Baltzly (2019).

[6] For a discussion of the phenomenon of disappointment in this context see, for example, Ben Shahar (2007).

[7] For more objections to the desire satisfaction theory, see Shafer-Landau (2018) and Vitrano (2013).

[8] If happiness is life satisfaction, then happiness seems to be “subjective” in the sense that a person cannot be mistaken about whether or not she is happy. Whether happiness is subjective in this sense is controversial, and a person who thinks that a person can be mistaken about whether or not she is happy will probably favor a different theory of happiness.

[9] See Weimann, Knabe and Schob (2015) and Berk (2018).

Baltzly, Dirk, “Stoicism”,  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  (Spring 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/stoicism/>.

Berk, Kiki (2018). “Does Money Make Us Happy? The Prospects and Problems of Happiness Research in Economics,” in Journal of Happiness Studies, 19, 1241-1245.

Ben-Shahar, Tal (2007). Happier . New York: McGraw-Hill.

Driver, Julia, “The History of Utilitarianism”,  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/utilitarianism-history/>.

Frede, Dorothea, “Plato’s Ethics: An Overview”,  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  (Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/plato-ethics/>.

Haybron, Dan, “Happiness”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  (Summer 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/happiness/>.

Konstan, David, “Epicurus”,  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/epicurus/>.

Kraut, Richard, “Aristotle’s Ethics”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/aristotle-ethics/>.

Shafer-Landau, Russ (2018). The Ethical Life: Fundamental Readings in Ethics and Moral Problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Vitrano, Christine (2013). The Nature and Value of Happiness. Boulder: Westview Press.

Weimann, Joachim, Andreas Knabe, and Ronnie Schob (2015). Measuring Happiness . Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Related Essays

Meaning in Life: What Makes Our Lives Meaningful? by Matthew Pianalto

The Philosophy of Humor: What Makes Something Funny?  by Chris A. Kramer

Virtue Ethics  by David Merry

John Stuart Mill on The Good Life: Higher-Quality Pleasures by Dale E. Miller

Consequentialism by Shane Gronholz

Ethical Egoism by Nathan Nobis

Ancient Cynicism: Rejecting Civilization and Returning to Nature by G. M. Trujillo, Jr.

What Is It To Love Someone? by Felipe Pereira

Camus on the Absurd: The Myth of Sisyphus by Erik Van Aken

Ethics and Absolute Poverty: Peter Singer and Effective Altruism  by Brandon Boesch

Is Death Bad? Epicurus and Lucretius on the Fear of Death  by Frederik Kaufman

PDF Download

Download this essay in PDF . 

About the Author

Dr. Kiki Berk is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Southern New Hampshire University. She received her Ph.D. in Philosophy from the VU University Amsterdam in 2010. Her research focuses on Beauvoir’s and Sartre’s philosophies of death and meaning in life.

Follow 1000-Word Philosophy on  Facebook ,  Twitter and subscribe to receive email notifications of new essays at the bottom of  1000WordPhilosophy.com

Share this:, 20 thoughts on “ happiness: what is it to be happy ”.

• Pingback: Ancient Cynicism: Rejecting Civilization and Returning to Nature – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: W.D. Ross’s Ethics of “Prima Facie” Duties – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Aristotle on Friendship: What Does It Take to Be a Good Friend? – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: The Philosophy of Humor: What Makes Something Funny? – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Meaning in Life: What Makes Our Lives Meaningful? – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Virtue Ethics – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Is Death Bad? Epicurus and Lucretius on the Fear of Death – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Reason is the Slave to the Passions: Hume on Reason vs. Desire – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Online Philosophy Resources Weekly Update | Daily Nous
• Pingback: Is Immortality Desirable? – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Ethics and Absolute Poverty: Peter Singer and Effective Altruism – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: What Is It To Love Someone? – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Ethical Egoism – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Mill’s Proof of the Principle of Utility – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Consequentialism – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: John Stuart Mill on The Good Life: Higher-Quality Pleasures – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Hope – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Existentialism – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology
• Pingback: Camus on the Absurd: The Myth of Sisyphus – 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology

Comments are closed.

Essays About Happiness: 5 Essay Examples and 6 Writing Prompts

Being happy and content is essential to living a successful life. If you are writing essays about happiness, start by reading our helpful guide.

Whenever we feel positive emotions rushing through our heads, chances are we are feeling happy. Happiness is what you feel when you enter the house, the smell of your favorite food being cooked or when you finally save up enough money to buy something you’ve wanted. It is an undeniably magical feeling. 

Happiness can do wonders for your productivity and well-being; when you are happy, you are more energetic, optimistic, and motivated. So it is, without a doubt, important. However, do not become caught up in trying to be happy, as this may lead to worse problems. Instead, allow yourself to feel your emotions; be authentic, even if that means feeling a little more negative.

5 Top Essay Examples

1. causes of happiness by otis curtis, 2. how to be happy by tara parker-pope, 3. reflections on ‘happiness’ by shahzada sultan.

• 4.  Happiness is Overrated by John Gorman

5. Toxic positivity by Suhani Mahajan

6 prompts for essays about happiness, 1. why is it important to be happy, 2. what is happiness to you, 3. the role of material things in happiness, 4. how does happiness make you more productive, 5. is true happiness achievable, 6. happiness vs. truth.

“If you don’t feel good about yourself you will have a similarly negative attitude towards others and education is one way of having good self-esteem, as it helps you to live life successfully and happily. Education is one way of getting that dream job and education is an essential cog in the wheel to living comfortably and happily. One English survey that included over 15,000 participants revealed that 81 percent of people who had achieved a good level of education had a high level of life satisfaction.”

Based on personal beliefs and research, Curtis’ essay describes different contributing causes to people’s happiness. These include a loving, stable family and good health. Interestingly, there is a positive correlation between education level and happiness, as Curtis cites statistics showing that education leads to high self-esteem, which can make you happier. 

“Socratic questioning is the process of challenging and changing irrational thoughts. Studies show that this method can reduce depression symptoms. The goal is to get you from a negative mindset (“I’m a failure.”) to a more positive one (“I’ve had a lot of success in my career. This is just one setback that doesn’t reflect on me. I can learn from it and be better.”)”

Parker-Pope writes about the different factors of happiness and how to practice mindfulness and positivity in this guide. She gives tips such as doing breathing exercises, moving around more, and spending time in places and with people that make you happy. Most importantly, however, she reminds readers that negative thoughts should not be repressed. Instead, we should accept them but challenge that mindset.

“Happiness is our choice of not leaving our mind and soul at the mercy of the sways of excitement. Happiness cannot eliminate sorrow, suffering, pain or death from the scheme of things, but it can help keep fear, anxiety, sadness, hopelessness, pessimism and other fathers of unhappiness at bay.”

Sultan discusses what happiness means to her personally. It provides an escape from all the dreariness and lousy news of daily life, not eliminating negative thoughts but keeping them at a distance, even just for a moment. She writes that to be happy; we should not base our happiness on the outcomes of our actions. We cannot control the world around us, so we should not link our happiness to it. If something doesn’t go our way, that is just how the world works. It is useless to be sad over what we cannot control.

4.   Happiness is Overrated by John Gorman

“Our souls do float across the sea of life, taking on water as they go, sinking ever so slightly — perhaps even imperceptibly — into despair. But our souls are not the bucket. Happiness itself is. And it’s the bucket we use to pour water out our souls and keep us afloat. What we really need is peace. Peace patches the holes in our souls and stops the leaking. Once we have peace, we will no longer need to seek happiness.”

In his essay, Gorman reflects on how he stopped trying to chase happiness and instead focused on finding peace in life. He writes that we are often so desperate looking for happiness that our lives become complicated, chaotic, and even depressing at times. He wants readers to do what they are passionate about and be their authentic selves; that way, they will find true happiness. You might also be interested in these essays about courage .

“That’s the mindset most of us have. Half of toxic positivity is just the suppression of 200% acceptable feelings such as anger, fear, sadness, confusion, and more. Any combination of such feelings is deemed “negative.” Honestly, mix ‘em up and serve them to me in a cocktail, eh? (Fine, fine, a mocktail. I reserve my right to one of those little umbrellas though.)

But by closing ourselves off to anything but positivity, we’re experiencing the same effects as being emotionally numb. Why are we doing this to ourselves?”

Mahajan writes about the phenomenon known as “toxic positivity” in which everyone is expected to be happy with their lives. It trivializes people’s misfortunes and sufferings, telling them to be happy with what they have instead. Mahajan opposes this, believing that everyone’s feelings are valid. She writes that it’s okay to be sad or angry at times, and the stigma around “negative feelings” should be erased. When we force ourselves to be happy, we may feel emotionally numb or even sad, the exact opposite of being happy. 

Many would say that happiness aids you in many aspects of your life. Based on personal experience and research, discuss the importance of being happy. Give a few benefits or advantages of happiness. These can include physical, mental, and psychological benefits, as well as anything else you can think of. 

Happiness means different things to different people and may come from various sources. In your essay, you can also explain how you define happiness. Reflect on this feeling and write about what makes you happy and why. Explain in detail for a more convincing essay; be sure to describe what you are writing about well. 

Happiness has a myriad of causes, many of which are material. Research the extent to which material possessions can make one happy, and write your essay about whether or not material things can truly make us happy. Consider the question, “Can money buy happiness?” Evaluate the extent to which it can or cannot, depending on your stance.  

Happiness has often been associated with a higher level of productivity. In your essay, look into the link between these two. In particular, discuss the mental and chemical effects of happiness. Since this topic is rooted in research and statistics, vet your sources carefully: only use the most credible sources for an accurate essay.

In their essays, many, including Gorman and Mahajan, seem to hold a more critical view of happiness. Our world is full of suffering and despair, so some ask: “Can we truly be happy on this earth?” Reflect on this question and make the argument for your position. Be sure to provide evidence from your own experiences and those of others. 

In dystopian stories, authorities often restrict people’s knowledge to keep them happy. We are seeing this even today, with some governments withholding crucial information to keep the population satisfied or stable. Write about whether you believe what they are doing is defensible or not, and provide evidence to support your point. 

For help with this topic, read our guide explaining “what is persuasive writing ?”

For help picking your next essay topic, check out our top essay topics about love .

Martin is an avid writer specializing in editing and proofreading. He also enjoys literary analysis and writing about food and travel.

View all posts

Greater Good Science Center • Magazine • In Action • In Education

Happiness Defined

What is happiness.

Coming up with a formal definition of happiness can be tricky. After all, shouldn’t we just know it when we feel it? In fact, we often use the term to describe a range of positive emotions, including amusement, joy, pride, and contentment.

But to understand the causes and effects of happiness, researchers first need to define it. For most, the term happiness is interchangeable with “subjective well-being,” which is typically measured by asking people about how satisfied they feel with their lives (evaluative), how much positive and negative emotion they tend to feel (affective), and their sense of meaning and purpose (eudaimonic). In her 2007 book The How of Happiness , positive psychology researcher Sonja Lyubomirsky elaborates, describing happiness as “the experience of joy, contentment, or positive well-being, combined with a sense that one’s life is good, meaningful, and worthwhile.”

However, it’s important to note that social and cultural factors also influence how we think about happiness. For example, studies by William Tov and others have found that people from cultures that embrace more collectivist ideals think about happiness more in terms of harmony and contentment, while more individualistic-minded people connect it to feelings of exuberance and joy. Happiness levels are also shaped by social groups, like families; happier people increase the happiness of people around them.

Though people around the world have different ways of thinking about happiness and perhaps even experience it in different ways, most involve feeling positive generally and about life overall.

What are the Limitations?

Four Ways Happiness Can Hurt You

Can feeling good ever be bad? New research says yes—and points the way to a healthier,…

Variety Is the Spice of Emotional Life

A new paper finds that cultivating a diversity of emotions—positive or negative—can…

How Much Control Do You Have Over Your Own Happiness?

Social conditions and inequality affect well-being. So, why do we keep insisting "happiness…

Featured Articles

How Everyday Rituals Can Add Meaning to Your Life

A new book illustrates how rituals can improve our lives and relationships, and how to create and recognize your own rituals.

Your Happiness Calendar for May 2024

This month, slow down and simplify.

How Pacific Islanders View Therapy—and Why That Matters

Suicide rates are disproportionately high for people of Pacific Islander heritage. Why?

World Happiness Report Isn’t So Happy for Young Americans

Young people used to be reliably happier than other age groups—but today, in certain regions of the world, they are struggling.

Will the Workweek Ever Get Shorter?

Why don't you have enough free time? A historian looks at how work and leisure time have changed over the past century.

How Well Do Happiness Practices Serve Black Communities?

We interviewed Black people about where happiness comes from and whether 15 typical happiness practices work for them.

Why Practice It?

Many studies have found that happiness actually improves other aspects of our lives. Here is an overview of some of the good stuff that research has linked to happiness.

• Happiness is good for our health : Happier people are less likely to get sick, and they live longer.
• Happiness is associated with more satisfying romantic relationships as well as stronger friendships .
• Happier people make more money and are more productive at work .
• Happier people are more generous .
• Happier people cope better with stress and trauma .
• Happier people are more creative and are better able to see the big picture .

Of course, there will be times in life when happiness feels out of reach. That’s OK. Our unpleasant emotions are appropriate responses to difficult situations; they’re there to guide our responses and help us make meaning from challenges and adversity.

Indeed, there is a great deal of research suggesting that trying to feel or falsely express happiness in bad situations is harmful to mental and physical health—and that striving to feel constantly happy can actually diminish your overall happiness in life. Multiple studies suggest that experiencing and embracing a range of emotions, not just the positive ones, is good for our mental and physical health. It’s also important to note that injury and illness can make happiness harder to achieve. For example, concussions and long COVID are both associated with depression.

In short, happiness in life is a worthy aspiration, and there are benefits to feeling happy—but it’s not realistic or healthy to expect a constant stream of positive emotions. When you do feel unhappy, it’s important to listen to that signal. Perhaps it’s time to change what you’re doing or thinking, seek support from a friend or therapist, or work to address a challenge you are facing. During especially hard times in life, suggests the research, you might look for meaning or psychological richness in your experiences, instead of trying to force yourself to be happier.

“Aim for noticing how you really feel right at that moment—and embrace all your diverse feelings,” suggests James Baraz. This will pave the way to happiness down the line.

How Do I Cultivate It?

Our happiness is shaped by genetics, life experience, social forces,  and culture, as well as individual choices. While your control over most of those domains is limited, there are steps you can take on a personal level to increase your chances of experiencing happiness in life. And all of us can act to change culture and address inequalities that affect happiness on a collective level.

Here are some of the keys to happiness identified by researchers, along with some specific, science-based activities for strengthening skills of happiness, in ourselves and in society.

Build relationships: Perhaps the dominant finding from happiness research is that social connections are fundamental. Try these practices to strengthen trust, mutual support, and affection in your relationships:

• Best Possible Self for Relationships : Imagine your relationship going as well as it possibly could.
• Mental Subtraction of Relationships : Visualize what your life would be like without the people around you.
• Gift of Time : Invest in your relationships by spending quality time with people you care about.
• Learn more ways to strengthen relationships on our website Greater Good in Action.

Practice different kinds of appreciation. Life can be hard, because negative events and emotions are inevitable. But we can bolster our resilience by shining the light of our attention on the good things.

• Savoring Walk : Take a walk and pay attention to positive feelings and experiences, to deepen and extend them.
• Gratitude : Count your blessings on a regular basis, whether by writing a letter, keeping a journal, or just saying thanks.
• Time Capsule : Create a collection of positive experiences to surprise your future self.
• Mental Subtraction of Positive Events : Visualize what your life would be like without the good things you have.

Pay attention. Studies find that people who practice mindfulness —the moment-by-moment awareness of our thoughts, feelings, and external circumstances—score higher on measures of happiness, and lower on measures of anxiety and distress.

• Mindful Breathing : This meditation is the most basic way to cultivate mindful attention.
• Raisin Meditation : You can put your busy life on pause by spending a few minutes feeling and tasting a raisin in your mouth.
• Self-Compassion Break : Stressed? Self-critical? Take just a moment to speak kindly to yourself.
• Get more mindfulness exercises on Greater Good in Action.

Practice kindness. Researchers believe generosity feels good because it highlights and incentivizes positive social interactions and strengthens the social bonds that support happiness. Here are some ways to be kind.

• Do nice things for other people: Neuroscience research shows that when we do nice things for others, our brains light up in areas associated with pleasure and reward.
• Compassion Meditation : This meditation fosters feelings of compassion and concern for others by training you to notice suffering and strive to alleviate it.
• Spend money on other people: Similarly, research by Elizabeth Dunn and her colleagues finds that people report greater happiness when they spend money on others than when they spend it on themselves.
• Learn more ways to practice kindness at Greater Good in Action.

Move your body—and then rest. Exercise isn’t just good for our bodies; it’s good for our happiness. So is sleep!

• Get physical: Studies show that regular physical activity increases happiness and self-esteem, reduces anxiety and stress, and can even lift symptoms of depression. “Exercise may very well be the most effective instant happiness booster of all activities,” writes Sonja Lyubomirsky in The How of Happiness .
• Spend time in nature : People who are more connected to nature tend to experience more positive emotions, vitality, and life satisfaction.
• Then get rest: Research has consistently linked lower sleep to lower happiness . What’s more, a study of more than 900 women, led by psychologist Daniel Kahneman, found that getting just one more hour of sleep each night might have a greater effect on happiness than getting a $60,000 raise.

Address inequalities. More egalitarian countries consistently rank among the happiest in the world—and there is evidence that economic, racial, and gender inequality hurts the happiness of disadvantaged groups . Fortunately, there are steps we can take to address these inequalities.

• Remove barriers to voting. Inequality depresses the vote of low-income people, which reduces their political power. You can help address that situation by supporting organizations dedicated to voter mobilization and reform.
• Work against racial prejudice and xenophobia. There are many research-tested ways to address racial inequality , on individual and collective levels.
• Work for gender and LGBTQ+ equality. There are also evidence-based ways to reduce inequality between men and women, and to expand and protect the human rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer people.
• Support efforts to address poverty. “Economic wealth matters across cultures,” says researcher William Tov. “In every culture, wealthier people generally are happier than less wealthy people.” Fortunately, volunteering and political activism—or more specifically, the sense of meaning and purpose those involve— seem to be good for both mental and physical health . If we can help our society address poverty, says the evidence, then everyone benefits .

Of course, happiness-boosting activities don’t work equally well for everyone . Understanding yourself better can help you choose practices and exercises that align with your personality, your situation, and your goals.

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

There are roughly two philosophical literatures on “happiness,” each corresponding to a different sense of the term. One uses ‘happiness’ as a value term, roughly synonymous with well-being or flourishing. The other body of work uses the word as a purely descriptive psychological term, akin to ‘depression’ or ‘tranquility’. An important project in the philosophy of happiness is simply getting clear on what various writers are talking about: what are the important meanings of the term and how do they connect? While the “well-being” sense of happiness receives significant attention in the contemporary literature on well-being, the psychological notion is undergoing a revival as a major focus of philosophical inquiry, following on recent developments in the science of happiness. This entry focuses on the psychological sense of happiness (for the well-being notion, see the entry on well-being ). The main accounts of happiness in this sense are hedonism, the life satisfaction theory, and the emotional state theory. Leaving verbal questions behind, we find that happiness in the psychological sense has always been an important concern of philosophers. Yet the significance of happiness for a good life has been hotly disputed in recent decades. Further questions of contemporary interest concern the relation between the philosophy and science of happiness, as well as the role of happiness in social and political decision-making.

1.1 Two senses of ‘happiness’

1.2 clarifying our inquiry, 2.1 the chief candidates, 2.2 methodology: settling on a theory, 2.3 life satisfaction versus affect-based accounts, 2.4 hedonism versus emotional state, 2.5 hybrid accounts, 3.1 can happiness be measured, 3.2 empirical findings: overview, 3.3 the sources of happiness, 4.1 doubts about the value of happiness, 4.2 restoring happiness to the theory of well-being, 4.3 is happiness overrated, 5.1 normative issues, 5.2 mistakes in the pursuit of happiness, 5.3 the politics of happiness, other internet resources, related entries, 1. the meanings of ‘happiness’.

What is happiness? This question has no straightforward answer, because the meaning of the question itself is unclear. What exactly is being asked? Perhaps you want to know what the word ‘happiness’ means. In that case your inquiry is linguistic. Chances are you had something more interesting in mind: perhaps you want to know about the thing , happiness, itself. Is it pleasure, a life of prosperity, something else? Yet we can’t answer that question until we have some notion of what we mean by the word.

Philosophers who write about “happiness” typically take their subject matter to be either of two things, each corresponding to a different sense of the term:

• A state of mind
• A life that goes well for the person leading it

In the first case our concern is simply a psychological matter. Just as inquiry about pleasure or depression fundamentally concerns questions of psychology, inquiry about happiness in this sense—call it the (long-term) “psychological sense”—is fundamentally the study of certain mental states. What is this state of mind we call happiness? Typical answers to this question include life satisfaction, pleasure, or a positive emotional condition.

Having answered that question, a further question arises: how valuable is this mental state? Since ‘happiness’ in this sense is just a psychological term, you could intelligibly say that happiness isn’t valuable at all. Perhaps you are a high-achieving intellectual who thinks that only ignoramuses can be happy. On this sort of view, happy people are to be pitied, not envied. The present article will center on happiness in the psychological sense.

In the second case, our subject matter is a kind of value , namely what philosophers nowadays tend to call prudential value —or, more commonly, well-being , welfare , utility or flourishing . (For further discussion, see the entry on well-being . Whether these terms are really equivalent remains a matter of dispute, but this article will usually treat them as interchangeable.) “Happiness” in this sense concerns what benefits a person, is good for her, makes her better off, serves her interests, or is desirable for her for her sake. To be high in well-being is to be faring well, doing well, fortunate, or in an enviable condition. Ill-being, or doing badly, may call for sympathy or pity, whereas we envy or rejoice in the good fortune of others, and feel gratitude for our own. Being good for someone differs from simply being good, period: perhaps it is always good, period, for you to be honest; yet it may not always be good for you , as when it entails self-sacrifice. Not coincidentally, the word ‘happiness’ derives from the term for good fortune, or “good hap,” and indeed the terms used to translate it in other languages often have similar roots. In this sense of the term—call it the “well-being sense”—happiness refers to a life of well-being or flourishing: a life that goes well for you.

Importantly, to ascribe happiness in the well-being sense is to make a value judgment : namely, that the person has whatever it is that benefits a person. [ 1 ] If you and I and have different values, then we may well differ about which lives we consider happy. I might think Genghis Khan had a happy life, because I think what matters for well-being is getting what you want; while you deny this because you think a life of evildoing, however “successful,” is sad and impoverished.

Theories of well-being—and hence of “happiness” in the well-being sense—come in three basic flavors, according to the best-known taxonomy (Parfit 1984): hedonism, desire theories, and objective list theories. Whereas hedonists identify well-being roughly with experiences of pleasure, desire theorists equate it with the satisfaction of one’s desires— actually getting what you want, versus merely having certain experiences. Both hedonism and desire theories are in some sense subjectivist, since they ground well-being in the individual’s subjective states. Objective list theorists, by contrast, think some things benefit us independently of our attitudes or feelings: there are objective prudential goods. Aristotelians are the best-known example: they take well-being ( eudaimonia ) to consist in a life of virtuous activity—or more broadly, the fulfillment of our human capacities. A passive but contented couch potato may be getting what he wants, and he may enjoy it. But he would not, on Aristotelian and other objective list theories, count as doing well, or leading a happy life.

Now we can sharpen the initial question somewhat: when you ask what happiness is, are you asking what sort of life benefits a person? If so, then your question concerns matters of value, namely what is good for people—the sort of thing that ethical theorists are trained to address. Alternatively, perhaps you simply want to know about the nature of a certain state of mind—happiness in the psychological sense. In this case, some sort of psychological inquiry will be needed, either philosophical or scientific. (Laypersons often have neither sort of question in mind, but are really asking about the sources of happiness. Thus it might be claimed, say, that “happiness is being with good friends.” This is not a view about the nature or definition of happiness, but rather a theory about the sorts of things that tend to make us happy. It leaves unanswered, or takes for granted, the question of just what happiness is , such that friends are a good source of it.)

In short, philosophical “theories of happiness” can be about either of at least two different things: well-being, or a state of mind. [ 2 ] Accordingly, there are essentially two bodies of philosophical literature about “happiness” and two sets of debates about its nature, though writers often fail to distinguish them. Such failures have generated much confusion, sometimes yielding bogus disagreements that prove to be merely verbal. [ 3 ] For instance, some psychologists identify “happiness” with attitudes of life satisfaction while remaining neutral on questions of value, or whether Bentham, Mill, Aristotle, or any other thinker about the good life was correct. Such researchers employ the term in the psychological sense. Yet it is sometimes objected against such claims that life satisfaction cannot suffice for “happiness” because other things, like achievement or knowledge, matter for human well-being. The objectors are confused: their opponents have made no claims about well-being at all, and the two “sides,” as it were, are simply using ‘happiness’ to talk about different things. One might just as sensibly object to an economist’s tract on “banks” that it has nothing to say about rivers and streams.

Which use of ‘happiness’ corresponds to the true meaning of the term in contemporary English? Arguably, both. The well-being usage clearly dominates in the historical literature through at least the early modern era, for instance in translations of the ancient Greeks’ ‘ eudaimonia ’ or the Latin ‘ beatitudo ’, though this translation has long been a source of controversy. Jefferson’s famous reference to “the pursuit of happiness” probably employed the well-being sense. Even later writers such as Mill may have used the term in its well-being sense, though it is often difficult to tell since well-being itself is often taken to consist in mental states like pleasure. In ordinary usage, the abstract noun ‘happiness’ often invites a well-being reading. And the locution ‘happy life ’ may not naturally take a psychological interpretation, for the simple reason that lives aren’t normally regarded as psychological entities.

Contrast this with the very different meaning that seems to attach to talk of “ being happy.” Here it is much less clear that we are talking about a property of a person’s life; it seems rather to be a property of the person herself. To be happy, it seems, is just to be in a certain sort of psychological state or condition. Similarly when we say that so-and-so “is happy” (as opposed to saying that he is leading a happy life). This psychological usage, arguably, predominates in the current vernacular. Researchers engaged in the self-described “science of happiness” usually do not take themselves to be making value judgments when they proclaim individuals in their studies to be happy. Nor, when asserting that a life satisfaction study shows Utahans to be happier than New Yorkers, are they committing themselves to the tendentious claim that Utahans are better off . (If they are, then the psychology journals that are publishing this research may need to revise their peer-review protocols to include ethicists among their referees.) And the many recent popular books on happiness, as well as innumerable media accounts of research on happiness, nearly all appear to take it for granted that they are talking about nothing more than a psychological condition.

Henceforth ‘happiness’ will be used in the long-term psychological sense, unless otherwise specified. Note, however, that a number of important books and other works on “happiness” in recent decades have employed the well-being sense of the term. Books of this sort appear to include Almeder 2000, Annas 1993, 2011, Bloomfield 2014, Cahn and Vitrano 2015, Kenny and Kenny 2006, McMahon 2005, McPherson 2020, Noddings 2003, Russell 2013, White 2006, and Vitrano 2014, though again it is not always clear how a given author uses the term. For discussion of the well-being notion, see the entry on well-being . [ 4 ]

2. Theories of happiness

Philosophers have most commonly distinguished two accounts of happiness: hedonism , and the life satisfaction theory. Hedonists identify happiness with the individual’s balance of pleasant over unpleasant experience, in the same way that welfare hedonists do. [ 5 ] The difference is that the hedonist about happiness need not accept the stronger doctrine of welfare hedonism; this emerges clearly in arguments against the classical Utilitarian focus on happiness as the aim of social choice. Such arguments tend to grant the identification of happiness with pleasure, but challenge the idea that this should be our primary or sole concern, and often as well the idea that happiness is all that matters for well-being.

Life satisfaction theories identify happiness with having a favorable attitude toward one’s life as a whole. This basic schema can be filled out in a variety of ways, but typically involves some sort of global judgment: an endorsement or affirmation of one’s life as a whole. This judgment may be more or less explicit, and may involve or accompany some form of affect. It may also involve or accompany some aggregate of judgments about particular items or domains within one’s life. [ 6 ]

A third theory, the emotional state view, departs from hedonism in a different way: instead of identifying happiness with pleasant experience, it identifies happiness with an agent’s emotional condition as a whole, of what is often called “emotional well-being.” [ 7 ] This includes nonexperiential aspects of emotions and moods (or perhaps just moods), and excludes pleasures that don’t directly involve the individual’s emotional state. It might also include a person’s propensity for experiencing various moods, which can vary over time, though several authors have argued against this suggestion (e.g., Hill 2007, Klausen 2015, Rossi 2018). Happiness on such a view is more nearly the opposite of depression or anxiety—a broad psychological condition—whereas hedonistic happiness is simply opposed to unpleasantness. For example, a deeply distressed individual might distract herself enough with constant activity to maintain a mostly pleasant existence—broken only by tearful breakdowns during the odd quiet moment—thus perhaps counting as happy on a hedonistic but not emotional state view. The states involved in happiness, on an emotional state view, can range widely, far more so that the ordinary notion of mood or emotion. On one proposal, happiness involves three broad categories of affective state, including “endorsement” states like joy versus sadness, “engagement” states like flow or a sense of vitality, and “attunement” states like tranquility, emotional expansiveness versus compression, and confidence. Given the departures from commonsensical notions of being in a “good mood,” happiness is characterized in this proposal as “psychic affirmation,” or “psychic flourishing” in pronounced forms.

A fourth family of views, hybrid theories , attempts an irenic solution to our diverse intuitions about happiness: identify happiness with both life satisfaction and pleasure or emotional state, perhaps along with other states such as domain satisfactions. The most obvious candidate here is subjective well-being , which is typically defined as a compound of life satisfaction, domain satisfactions, and positive and negative affect. (Researchers often seem to identify happiness with subjective well-being, sometimes with life satisfaction, and perhaps most commonly with emotional or hedonic state.) The chief appeal of hybrid theories is their inclusiveness: all the components of subjective well-being seem important, and there is probably no component of subjective well-being that does not at times get included in “happiness” in ordinary usage.

How do we determine which theory is correct? Traditional philosophical methods of conceptual or linguistic analysis can give us some guidance, indicating that some accounts offer a better fit with the ordinary concept of happiness. Thus it has been argued that hedonism is false to the concept of happiness as we know it; the intuitions taken to support hedonism point instead to an emotional state view (Haybron 2001). And some have argued that life satisfaction is compatible with profoundly negative emotional states like depression—a suffering artist might not value emotional matters much, and wholeheartedly affirm her life (Carson 1981, Davis 1981b, Haybron 2005, Feldman 2010). Yet it might seem counterintuitive to deem such a person happy. At the same time, people do sometimes use ‘happiness’ to denote states of life satisfaction: life satisfaction theories do seem faithful to some ordinary uses of ‘happiness’. The trouble is that HAPPINESS appears to be a “mongrel concept,” as Ned Block (1995) called the concept of consciousness: the ordinary notion is something of a mess. We use the term to denote different things in different contexts, and often have no clear notion of what we are referring to. This suggests that accounts of happiness must be somewhat revisionary, and that we must assess theories on grounds other than simple fidelity to the lay concept of happiness—“descriptive adequacy,” in Sumner’s (1996) terms. One candidate is practical utility: which conception of happiness best answers to our interests in the notion? We talk about happiness because we care about it. The question is why we care about it, and which psychological states within the extension of the ordinary term make the most sense of this concern. Even if there is no simple answer to the question what happiness is, it may well turn out that our interests in happiness cluster so strongly around a particular psychological kind that happiness can best, or most profitably, be understood in terms of that type of state (Haybron 2003). Alternatively, we may choose to distinguish different varieties of happiness. It will be less important how we use the word, however, than that we be clear about the nature and significance of the phenomena that interest us.

The debate over theories of happiness falls along a couple of lines. The most interesting questions concern the choice between life satisfaction and affect-based views like hedonism and the emotional state theory. [ 8 ] Proponents of life satisfaction see two major advantages to their account. First, life satisfaction is holistic , ranging over the whole of one’s life, or the totality of one’s life over a certain period of time. It reflects not just the aggregate of moments in one’s life, but also the global quality of one’s life taken as a whole (but see Raibley 2010). And we seem to care not just about the total quantity of good in our lives, but about its distribution—a happy ending, say, counts for more than a happy middle (Slote 1982, Velleman 1991). Second, life satisfaction seems more closely linked to our priorities than affect is, as the suffering artist case illustrates. While a focus on affect makes sense insofar as we care about such matters, most people care about other things as well, and how their lives are going relative to their priorities may not be fully mirrored in their affective states. Life satisfaction theories thus seem to fit more closely with liberal ideals of individual sovereignty, on which how well my life is going for me is for me to decide. My satisfaction with my life seems to embody that judgment. Of course a theory of happiness need not capture everything that matters for well-being; the point is that a life satisfaction view might explain why we should care so much about happiness, and so enjoy substantive as well as intuitive support. [ 9 ]

But several objections have been raised against life satisfaction views. The most common complaint has already been noted, namely that a person could apparently be satisfied with her life even while leading a highly unpleasant or emotionally distressed existence, and it can seem counterintuitive to regard such a person as happy (see section 2.2). Some life satisfaction theorists deny that such cases are possible (Benditt 1978), but it could also be argued that such possibilities are part and parcel of life satisfaction’s appeal: some people may not get much pleasure out of life because they don’t care particularly about affective matters, and a life satisfaction theory allows that they can, in their own fashion, be happy.

Two other objections are more substantive, raising questions about whether life satisfaction has the right sort of importance. One concern is whether people often enough have well-grounded attitudes of life satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Evaluating one’s life as a whole can be a complicated business, and there is some question whether people typically have well-defined attitudes toward their lives that accurately reflect how well their lives measure up relative to their priorities. Some research, for instance, suggests that life satisfaction reports tend to reflect judgments made on the spot, drawing on whatever information comes readily to mind, with substantial influences by transient contextual factors like the weather, finding a dime, etc. (Schwarz and Strack 1999). Debate persists over whether this work undermines the significance of life satisfaction judgments, but it does raise a question whether life satisfaction attitudes tend to be well-enough grounded to have the kind of importance that people normally ascribe to happiness.

The third objection is somewhat intricate, so it will require some explaining. The claim is that a wide range of life satisfaction attitudes might be consistent with individuals’ perceptions of how well their lives are going relative to what they care about, raising doubts about the importance of life satisfaction (Haybron 2016). You might reasonably be satisfied when getting very little of what you want, or dissatisfied when getting most of what you want. One reason for this is that people tend to have many incommensurable values, leaving it open how to add them up. Looking at the various ups and downs of your life, it may be arbitrary whether to rate your life a four out of ten, or a seven. A second reason is that life satisfaction attitudes are not merely assessments of subjective success or personal welfare: they involve assessments of whether one’s life is good enough —satisfactory. Yet people’s values may radically underdetermine where they should set the bar for a “good enough” life, again rendering the judgment somewhat arbitrary. Given your values, you might reasonably be satisfied with a two, or require a nine to be satisfied. While it may seem important how well people see their lives going relative to what they care about, it is not obviously so important whether people see their lives going well enough that they are willing to judge them satisfactory.

If life satisfaction attitudes are substantially arbitrary relative to subjective success, then people might reasonably base those attitudes on other factors, such as ethical ideals (e.g., valuing gratitude or noncomplacency) or pragmatic concerns (e.g., comforting oneself). Shifts in perspective might also reasonably alter life satisfaction attitudes. After the funeral, you might be highly satisfied with your life, whereas the high school reunion leaves you dissatisfied; yet neither judgment need be mistaken, or less authoritative.

As a result, life satisfaction attitudes may be poor indicators of well-being, even from the individual’s own point of view. That people in a given country register high levels of life satisfaction may reflect nothing more than that they set the bar extremely low; they might be satisfied with anything short of pure agony. Another country’s citizens might be dissatisfied with their lives, but only because they set the bar much higher. Relative to what they care about, people in the dissatisfied nation could be better off than those in the satisfied nation. To take another example, a cancer patient might be more satisfied with his life than he was before the diagnosis, for he now looks at his life from a different perspective and emphasizes different virtues like fortitude and gratitude as opposed to (say) humility and non-complacency. Yet he need not think himself better off at all: he might believe himself worse off than he was when he was less satisfied. Neither judgment need seem to him or us to be mistaken: it’s just that he now looks at his life differently. Indeed, he might think he’s doing badly, even as he is satisfied with his life: he endorses it, warts and all, and is grateful just have his not-so-good life rather than some of the much worse alternatives.

For present purposes, the worry is that life satisfaction may not have the kind of significance happiness is normally thought to have. This may pose a difficulty for the identification of life satisfaction with happiness: for people frequently seem to use happiness as a proxy for well-being, a reasonably concrete and value-free stand-in that facilitates quick-and-dirty assessments of welfare. Given the discovery that someone is happy, we might infer that he is doing well; if we learn that someone is unhappy, we may conclude that she is doing poorly. Such inferences are defeasible: if we later find that the happy Ned’s wife and friends secretly hate him, we need not decide that he isn’t happy after all; we simply withdraw the conclusion that he is doing well. So long as happiness tracks well-being well enough in most cases, this sort of practice is perfectly respectable. But if we identify happiness with life satisfaction, then we may have a problem: maybe Sally is satisfied only because she values being grateful for the good things in life. This sort of case may not be merely a theoretical possibility: perhaps the very high rates of self-reported life satisfaction in the United States and many other places substantially reflects a broad acceptance of norms of gratitude and a general tendency to emphasize the positives, or perhaps a sense that not to endorse your life amounts to a lack of self-regard. It is not implausible that most people, even those enduring great hardship, can readily find grounds for satisfaction with their lives. Life may have to be pretty hard for a person to be incapable of affirming it.

Despite these concerns there is significant intuitive appeal in the idea that to be happy is to be satisfied with one’s life. Perhaps a different way of conceiving life satisfaction, for instance dispensing with the global judgment and aggregating particular satisfactions and dissatisfactions, would lessen the force of these objections. Alternatively, it is possible that idealized or qualified forms of life satisfaction would mitigate these concerns for some purposes, such as a theory of well-being. [ 10 ]

A second set of issues concerns the differences between the two affect-based views, hedonism and emotional state. The appeal of hedonism is fairly obvious: the pleasantness of our experience is plainly a matter of great significance; many have claimed it to be the only thing that matters. What, by contrast, motivates the emotional state account, which bears obvious similarities to hedonism yet excludes many pleasures from happiness? The question of motivation appears to be the chief worry facing the emotional state theory: what’s to be gained by focusing on emotional state rather than pleasure?

One argument for taking such a view is intuitive: some find it implausible to think that psychologically superficial pleasures invariably make a difference in how happy one is—the typical pleasure of eating a cracker, say, or even the intense pleasure of an orgasm that nonetheless fails to move one, as can happen with meaningless sexual activity. The intuitive distinction seems akin to distinctions made by some ancient philosophers; consider, for instance, the following passage from Epictetus’s Discourses :

‘I have a headache.’ Well, do not say ‘Alas!’ ‘I have an earache.’ Do not say ‘Alas!’ And I am not saying that it is not permissible to groan, only do not groan in the centre of your being . ( Discourses , 1.18.19, emphasis added).

The Stoics did not expect us never to feel unpleasant sensations, which would plainly be impossible; rather, the idea was not to let such things get to us , to impact our emotional conditions.

Why should anyone care to press such a distinction in characterizing happiness? For most people, the hedonic difference between happiness on an emotional state versus a hedonistic view is probably minimal. But while little will be lost, what will be gained? One possibility is that the more “central” affects involving our emotional conditions may bear a special relation to the person or the self , whereas more “peripheral” affects, like the pleasantness of eating a cracker, might pertain to the subpersonal aspects of our psychologies. Since well-being is commonly linked to ideas of self-fulfillment, this sort of distinction might signal a difference in the importance of these states. Another reason to focus on emotional condition rather than experience alone may be the greater psychological depth of the former: its impact on our mental lives, physiology, and behavior is arguably deeper and more pervasive. This enhances the explanatory and predictive significance of happiness, and more importantly its desirability: happiness on this view is not merely pleasant, but a major source of pleasure and other good outcomes (Fredrickson 2004, Lyubomirsky, King et al . 2005). Compare health on this score: while many think it matters chiefly or entirely because of its connection with pleasure, there are few skeptics about the importance of health. As well, emotional state views may capture the idea that happiness concerns the individual’s psychological orientation or disposition : to be happy, on an emotional state theory, is not just to be subjected to a certain sequence of experiences, but for one’s very being to manifest a favorable orientation toward the conditions of one’s life—a kind of psychic affirmation of one’s life. This reflects a point of similarity with life satisfaction views of happiness: contra hedonism, both views take happiness to be substantially dispositional, involving some sort of favorable orientation toward one’s life. But life satisfaction views tend to emphasize reflective or rational endorsement, whereas emotional state views emphasize the verdicts of our emotional natures.

While hedonism and emotional state theories are major contenders in the contemporary literature, all affect-based theories confront the worries, noted earlier, that motivate life satisfaction views—notably, their looser connection with people’s priorities, as well as their limited ability to reflect the quality of people’s lives taken as a whole.

Given the limitations of narrower theories of happiness, a hybrid account such as a subjective well-being theory may seem an attractive solution. This strategy has not been fully explored in the philosophical literature, though Sumner’s “life satisfaction” theory may best be classified as a hybrid (1996; see also Martin 2012). In any event, a hybrid approach draws objections of its own. If we arrive at a hybrid theory by this route, it could seem like either the marriage of two unpromising accounts, or of a promising account with an unpromising one. Such a union may not yield wholesome results. Second, people have different intuitions about what counts as happiness, so that no theory can accommodate all of them. Any theory that tries to thus risks pleasing no one. A third concern is that the various components of any hybrid are liable to matter for quite different reasons, so that happiness, thus understood, might fail to answer to any coherent set of concerns. Ascriptions of happiness could be relatively uninformative if they cast their net too widely.

3. The science of happiness

With the explosive rise of empirical research on happiness, a central question is how far, and how, happiness might be measured. [ 11 ] There seems to be no in-principle barrier to the idea of measuring, at least roughly, how happy people are. Investigators may never enjoy the precision of the “hedonimeter” once envisaged by Edgeworth to show just how happy a person is (Edgeworth 1881). Indeed, such a device might be impossible even in principle, since happiness might involve multiple dimensions that either cannot be precisely quantified or summed together. If so, it could still be feasible to develop approximate measures of happiness, or at least its various dimensions. Similarly, depression may not admit of precise quantification in a single number, yet many useful if imprecise measures of depression exist. In the case of happiness, it is plausible that even current measures provide information about how anxious, cheerful, satisfied, etc. people are, and thus tell us something about their happiness. Even the simplest self-report measures used in the literature have been found to correlate well with many intuitively relevant variables, such as friends’ reports, smiling, physiological measures, health, longevity, and so forth (Pavot 2008).

Importantly, most scientific research needs only to discern patterns across large numbers of individuals—to take an easy case, determining whether widows tend to be less happy than newlyweds—and this is compatible with substantial unreliability in assessing individual happiness. Similarly, an inaccurate thermometer might be a poor guide to the temperature, but readings from many such thermometers could correlate fairly well with actual temperatures—telling us, for instance, that Minnesota is colder than Florida.

This point reveals an important caveat: measures of happiness could correlate well with how happy people are, thus telling us which groups of people tend to be happier, while being completely wrong about absolute levels of happiness. Self-reports of happiness, for instance, might correctly indicate that unemployed people are considerably less happy than those with jobs. But every one of those reports could be wrong, say if everyone is unhappy yet claims to be happy, or vice-versa, so long as the unemployed report lower happiness than the employed. Similarly, bad thermometers may show that Minnesota is colder than Florida without giving the correct temperature.

Two morals emerge from these reflections. First, self-report measures of happiness could be reliable guides to relative happiness, though telling us little about how happy, in absolute terms, people are. We may know who is happier, that is, but not whether people are in fact happy. Second, even comparisons of relative happiness will be inaccurate if the groups being compared systematically bias their reports in different ways. This worry is particularly acute for cross-cultural comparisons of happiness, where differing norms about happiness may undermine the comparability of self-reports. The French might report lower happiness than Americans, for instance, not because their lives are less satisfying or pleasant, but because they tend to put a less positive spin on things. For this reason it may be useful to employ instruments, including narrower questions or physiological measures, that are less prone to cultural biasing. [ 12 ]

The discussion thus far has assumed that people can be wrong about how happy they are. Is this plausible? Some have argued that (sincerely) self-reported happiness cannot, even in principle, be mistaken. If you think you’re happy, goes a common sentiment, then you are happy. This claim is not plausible on a hedonistic or emotional state view of happiness, since those theories take judgments of happiness to encompass not just how one is feeling at the moment but also past states, and memories of those can obviously be spurious. Further, it has been argued that even judgments of how one feels at the present moment may often be mistaken, particularly regarding moods like anxiety. [ 13 ]

The idea that sincere self-reports of happiness are incorrigible can only be correct, it seems, given a quite specific conception of happiness—a kind of life satisfaction theory of happiness on which people count as satisfied with their lives so long as they are disposed to judge explicitly that they are satisfied with their lives on the whole. Also assumed here is that self-reports of happiness are in fact wholly grounded in life satisfaction judgments like these—that is, that people take questions about “happiness” to be questions about life satisfaction. Given these assumptions, we can plausibly conclude that self-reports of happiness are incorrigible. One question is whether happiness, thus conceived, is very important. As well, it is unlikely that respondents invariably interpret happiness questions as being about life satisfaction. At any rate, even life satisfaction theorists might balk at this variant of the account, since life satisfaction is sometimes taken to involve, not just explicit global judgments of life satisfaction, but also our responses to the particular things or domains we care about. Some will hesitate to deem satisfied people who hate many of the important things in their lives, however satisfied they claim to be with their lives as a whole.

In a similar vein, the common practice of measuring happiness simply by asking people to report explicitly on how “happy” they are is sometimes defended on the grounds that it lets people decide for themselves what happiness is. The reasoning again seems to presuppose, controversially, that self-reports of happiness employ a life satisfaction view of happiness, the idea being that whether you are satisfied (“happy”) will depend on what you care about. Alternatively, the point might be literally to leave it up to the respondent to decide whether ‘happy’ means hedonic state, emotional state, life satisfaction, or something else. Thus one respondent’s “I’m happy” might mean “my experience is generally pleasant,” while another’s might mean “I am satisfied with my life as a whole.” It is not clear, however, that asking ambiguous questions of this sort is a useful enterprise, since different respondents will in effect be answering different questions.

To measure happiness through self-reports, then, it may be wiser to employ terms other than ‘happiness’ and its cognates—terms whose meaning is relatively well-known and fixed. In other words, researchers should decide in advance what they want to measure—be it life satisfaction, hedonic state, emotional state, or something else—and then ask questions that refer unambiguously to those states. [ 14 ] This stratagem may be all the more necessary in cross-cultural work, where finding suitable translations of ‘happy’ can be daunting—particularly when the English meaning of the term remains a matter of contention (Wierzbicka 2004).

This entry focuses on subjective well-being studies, since that work is standardly deemed “happiness” research. But psychological research on well-being can take other forms, notably in the “eudaimonic”—commonly opposed to “hedonic”—literature, which assesses a broader range of indicators taken to represent objective human needs, such as meaning, personal growth, relatedness, autonomy, competence, etc. [ 15 ] (The assimilation of subjective well-being to the “hedonic” realm may be misleading, since life satisfaction seems primarily to be a non -hedonic value, as noted earlier.) Other well-being instruments may not clearly fall under either the “happiness” or eudaimonic rubrics, for instance extending subjective well-being measures by adding questions about the extent to which activities are seen as meaningful or worthwhile (White and Dolan 2009). An important question going forward is how far well-being research needs to incorporate indicators beyond subjective well-being.

The scientific literature on happiness has grown to proportions far too large for this article to do more than briefly touch on a few highlights. [ 16 ] Here is a sampling of oft-cited claims:

• Most people are happy
• People adapt to most changes, tending to return over time to their happiness “set point”
• People are prone to make serious mistakes in assessing and pursuing happiness
• Material prosperity has a surprisingly modest impact on happiness

The first claim, that most people are happy, appears to be a consensus position among subjective well-being researchers (for a seminal argument, see Diener and Diener 1996). The contention reflects three lines of evidence: most people, in most places, report being happy; most people report being satisfied with their lives; and most people experience more positive affect than negative. On any of the major theories of happiness, then, the evidence seems to show that most people are, indeed, happy. Yet this conclusion might be resisted, on a couple of grounds. First, life satisfaction theorists might question whether self-reports of life satisfaction suffice to establish that people are in fact satisfied with their lives. Perhaps self-reports can be mistaken, say if the individual believes herself satisfied yet shows many signs of dissatisfaction in her behavior, for instance complaining about or striving to change important things in her life. Second, defenders of affect-based theories—hedonistic and emotional state views—might reject the notion that a bare majority of positive affect suffices for happiness. While the traditional view among hedonists has indeed been that happiness requires no more than a >1:1 ratio of positive to negative affect, this contention has received little defense and has been disputed in the recent literature. Some investigators have claimed that “flourishing” requires greater than a 3:1 ratio of positive to negative affect, as this ratio might represent a threshold for broadly favorable psychological functioning (e.g., Larsen and Prizmic 2008). While the evidence for any specific ratio is highly controversial, if anything like this proportion were adopted as the threshold for happiness, on a hedonistic or emotional state theory, then some of the evidence taken to show that people are happy could in fact show the opposite. In any event, the empirical claim relies heavily on nontrivial philosophical views about the nature of happiness, illustrating one way in which philosophical work on happiness can inform scientific research.

The second claim, regarding adaptation and set points, reflects well-known findings that many major life events, like being disabled in an accident or winning the lottery, appear strongly to impact happiness only for a relatively brief period, after which individuals may return to a level of happiness not very different from before. [ 17 ] As well, twin studies have found that subjective well-being is substantially heritable, with .50 being a commonly accepted figure. Consequently many researchers have posited that each individual has a characteristic “set point” level of happiness, toward which he tends to gravitate over time. Such claims have caused some consternation over whether the pursuit and promotion of happiness are largely futile enterprises (Lykken and Tellegen 1996; Millgram 2000). However, the dominant view now seems to be that the early claims about extreme adaptation and set points were exaggerated: while adaptation is a very real phenomenon, many factors—including disability—can have substantial, and lasting, effects on how happy people are. [ 18 ] This point was already apparent from the literature on correlates and causes of happiness, discussed below: if things like relationships and engaging work are important for happiness, then happiness is probably not simply a matter of personality or temperament. As well, the large cross-national differences in measured happiness are unlikely to be entirely an artifact of personality variables. Note that even highly heritable traits can be strongly susceptible to improvement. Better living conditions have raised the stature of men in the Netherlands by eight inches—going from short (five foot four) to tall (over six feet)—in the last 150 years (Fogel 2005). Yet height is considered much more heritable than happiness, with typical heritability estimates ranging from .60 to over .90 (e.g., Silventoinen, Sammalisto et al . 2003). [ 19 ]

The question of mistakes will be taken up in section 5.2. But the last claim—that material prosperity has relatively modest impacts on happiness—has lately become the subject of heated debate. For some time the standard view among subjective well-being researchers was that, beyond a low threshold where basic needs are met, economic gains have only a small impact on happiness levels. According to the well-known “Easterlin Paradox,” for instance, wealthier people do tend to be happier within nations, but richer nations are little happier than less prosperous counterparts, and—most strikingly—economic growth has virtually no impact (Easterlin 1974). In the U.S., for example, measured happiness has not increased significantly since at least 1947, despite massive increases in wealth and income. In short, once you’re out of poverty, absolute levels of wealth and income make little difference in how happy people are.

Against these claims, some authors have argued that absolute income has a large impact on happiness across the income spectrum (e.g., Stevenson and Wolfers 2008). The question continues to be much debated, but in 2010 a pair of large-scale studies using Gallup data sets, including improved measures of life satisfaction and affect, suggested that both sides may be partly right (Kahneman and Deaton 2010; Diener, Ng et al . 2010). Surveying large numbers of Americans in one case, and what is claimed to be the first globally representative sample of humanity in the other, these studies found that income does indeed correlate substantially (.44 in the global sample), at all levels, with life satisfaction—strictly speaking, a “life evaluation” measure that asks respondents to rate their lives without saying whether they are satisfied. Yet the correlation of household income with the affect measures is far weaker: globally, .17 for positive affect, –.09 for negative affect; and in the United States, essentially zero above $75,000 (though quite strong at low income levels). For more recent discussions of empirical work, see Jebb et al. 2018 along with relevant chapters in Diener et al. 2018 and the annual World Happiness Reports from 2012 onward (Helliwell et al. 2012). Research on the complex money-happiness relationship resists simple characterization, but a crude summary is that the connection tends to be positive and substantial, strong at lower income levels while modest to weak or even negative at higher incomes, and stronger and less prone to satiation for life evaluation than emotional well-being metrics. But again, these are very rough generalizations that gloss over a variety of important factors and admit of many exceptions across both individuals and societies.

In short, the relationship between money and happiness may depend on which theory of happiness we accept: on a life satisfaction view, the relationship may be strong; whereas affect-based views may yield a much weaker connection, again above some modest threshold. Here, again, philosophical views about the nature and significance of happiness may play an important role in understanding empirical results and their practical upshot. Economic growth, for instance, has long been a top priority for governments, and findings about its impact on human well-being may have substantial implications for policy.

It is important to note that studies of this nature focus on generic trends, not specific cases, and there is no dispute that significant exceptions exist—notably, populations that enjoy high levels of happiness amid low levels of material prosperity. Among others, a number of Latin American countries, Maasai herders, Inughuit hunter-gatherers, and Amish communities have registered highly positive results in subjective well-being studies, sometimes higher than those in many affluent nations, and numerous informal accounts accord with the data. [ 20 ] Such “positive outliers” suggest that some societies can support high levels of happiness with extremely modest material holdings. The importance of money for happiness may depend strongly on what kind of society one inhabits. An interesting question, particularly in light of common environmental concerns, is how far the lessons of such societies can, or should, be transferred to other social forms, where material attainment and happiness are presently more tightly coupled. Perhaps some degree of decoupling of happiness and money would be desirable.

So the role of money in happiness appears, at this juncture, to be a mixed bag, depending heavily on how we conceive of happiness and what range of societies we are considering. What (else), then, does matter most for happiness? There is no definitive list of the main sources of happiness in the literature, partly because it is not clear how to divide them up. But the following items seem generally to be accepted as among the chief correlates of happiness: supportive relationships, engagement in interesting and challenging activities, material and physical security, a sense of meaning or purpose, a positive outlook, and autonomy or control. [ 21 ] Significant correlates may also include—among many others—religion, good governance, trust, helping others, values (e.g., having non-materialistic values), achieving goals, not being unemployed, and connection with the natural environment. [ 22 ]

An illustrative study of the correlates of happiness from a global perspective is the Gallup World Poll study noted earlier (Diener, Ng et al . 2010; see also Jebb et al. 2020). In that study, the life satisfaction measure was more strongly related to material prosperity, as noted above: household income, along with possession of luxury conveniences and satisfaction with standard of living. The affect measures, by contrast, correlated most strongly with what the authors call “psychosocial prosperity”: whether people reported being treated with respect in the last day, having family and friends to count on, learning something new, doing what they do best, and choosing how their time was spent.

What these results show depends partly on the reliability of the measures. One possible source of error is that this study might exaggerate the relationship between life satisfaction and material attainments through the use of a “ladder” scale for life evaluation, ladders being associated with material aspirations. Errors might also arise through salience biases whereby material concerns might be more easily recalled than other important values, such as whether one has succeeded in having children; or through differences in positivity biases across income levels (perhaps wealthier people tend to be more “positive-responding” than poorer individuals). Another question is whether the affect measures adequately track the various dimensions of people’s emotional lives. However, the results are roughly consonant with other research, so they are unlikely to be entirely an artifact of the instruments used in this study. [ 23 ] A further point of uncertainty is the causal story behind the correlations—whether the correlates, like psychosocial prosperity, cause happiness; whether happiness causes them; whether other factors cause both; or, as is likely, some combination of the three.

Such concerns duly noted, the research plausibly suggests that, on average, material progress has some tendency to help people to better get what they want in life, as found in the life satisfaction measures, while relationships and engaging activities are more important for people’s emotional lives. What this means for happiness depends on which view of happiness is correct.

4. The importance of happiness

Were you to survey public attitudes about the value of happiness, at least in liberal Western democracies, you would likely find considerable support for the proposition that happiness is all that really matters for human well-being. Many philosophers over the ages have likewise endorsed such a view, typically assuming a hedonistic account of happiness. (A few, like Almeder 2000, have identified well-being with happiness understood as life satisfaction.)

Most philosophers, however, have rejected hedonistic and other mental state accounts of well-being, and with them the idea that happiness could suffice for well-being. [ 24 ] (See the entry on well-being .) Objections to mental state theories of well-being tend to cluster around two sets of concerns. First, it is widely believed that the non-mental conditions of our lives matter for well-being: whether our families really love us, whether our putative achievements are genuine, whether the things we care about actually obtain. The most influential objection of this sort is Robert Nozick’s experience machine case, wherein we are asked to imagine a virtual reality device that can perfectly simulate any reality for its user, who will think the experience is genuine (Nozick 1974). Would you plug in to such a machine for life? Most people would not, and the case is widely taken to vitiate mental state theories of well-being. Beyond having positive mental states, it seems to matter both that our lives go well and that our state of mind is appropriately related to how things are. [ 25 ]

A second set of objections concerns various ways in which a happy person might nonetheless seem intuitively to be leading an impoverished or stunted life. The most influential of these worries involves adaptation , where individuals facing oppressive circumstances scale back their expectations and find contentment in “small mercies,” as Sen put it. [ 26 ] Even a slave might come to internalize the values of his oppressors and be happy, and this strikes most as an unenviable life indeed. Related worries involve people with diminished capacities (blindness, Down Syndrome), or choosing to lead narrow and cramped or simpleminded lives (e.g., counting blades of grass). Worries about impoverished lives are a prime motivator of Aristotelian theories of well-being, which emphasize the full and proper exercise of our human capacities.

In the face of these and other objections most commentators have concluded that neither happiness nor any other mental state can suffice for well-being. Philosophical interest in happiness has consequently flagged, since its theoretical importance becomes unclear if it does not play a starring role in our account of the good.

Even as happiness might fail to suffice for well-being, well-being itself may be only one component of a good life , and not the most important one at that. Here ‘good life’ means a life that is good all things considered, taking account of all the values that matter in life, whether they benefit the individual or not. Kant, for example, considered both morality and well-being to be important but distinct elements of a good life. Yet morality should be our first priority, never to be sacrificed for personal happiness.

In fact there is a broad consensus, or near-consensus, among ethical theorists on a doctrine we might call the priority of virtue : broadly and crudely speaking, the demands of virtue or morality trump other values in life. [ 27 ] We ought above all to act and live well, or at least not badly or wrongly. This view need not take the strong form of insisting that we must always act as virtuously as possible, or that moral reasons always take precedence. But it does mean, at least, that when being happy requires acting badly, one’s happiness must be sacrificed. If it would be wrong to leave your family, in which you are unhappy, then you must remain unhappy, or find more acceptable ways to seek happiness.

The mainstream views in all three of the major approaches to ethical theory—consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics—agree on some form of the priority of virtue. Where these views chiefly differ is not on the importance of being good, but on whether being good necessarily benefits us. Virtue ethicists tend to answer in the affirmative, the other two schools in the negative. Building virtue into well-being, as Aristotelians do, may seem to yield a more demanding ethics, and in some ways it does. Yet many deontologists and consequentialists—notably Kant—advocate sterner, more starkly moralistic visions of the good life than Aristotle would ever have dreamt of (e.g., Singer 1972).

Happiness, in short, is believed by most philosophers to be insufficient for well-being, and still less important for the good life. These points may seem to vitiate any substantial role for happiness in ethical thought. However, well-being itself is still regarded as a central concept in ethical thought, denoting one of the chief elements of a good life even if not the sole element. And there are reasons for thinking happiness important, both practically and theoretically, despite the worries noted above.

Even if happiness does not suffice for well-being—a point that not all philosophers would accept—it might still rate a privileged spot in theories of well-being. This could happen in either of two ways.

First, happiness could be a major component of a theory of well-being. Objective list theories of well-being sometimes include happiness or related mental states such as enjoyment among the fundamental constituents of well-being. A more ambitious proposal, originated by L.W. Sumner, identifies well-being with authentic happiness —happiness that is authentic in the sense of being both informed and autonomous (Sumner 1996). The root idea is that well-being involves being happy, where one’s happiness is a response of one’s own (autonomous), to a life that genuinely is one’s own (informed). The authenticity constraint is meant to address both experience machine-type worries and “happy slave” objections relating to adaptation, where happiness may be non-autonomous, depending on manipulation or the uncritical acceptance of oppressive values. Since these have been the most influential objections to mental state accounts of well-being, Sumner’s approach promises to considerably strengthen the position of happiness-centered approaches to well-being, and several philosophers have developed variants or close relations of the authentic happiness theory (Brülde 2007, Haybron 2008a, Tiberius and Plakias 2010, Višak 2015). The approach remains fairly new, however, so its long-term prospects remain unclear. [ 28 ]

A second strategy forsakes the project of giving a unitary theory of well-being, recognizing instead a family of two or more kinds of prudential value. Happiness could be central to, or even exhaustive of, one of those values. Shelly Kagan, for instance, has suggested that welfare hedonism could be correct as a theory of how well a person is doing, but not of how well a person’s life is going, which should perhaps be regarded as a distinct value (Kagan 1992, 1994). In short, we might distinguish narrow and wide well-being concepts. An experience machine user might be doing well in the narrow sense, but not the wide—she is doing well, though her life is quite sad. Happiness might, then, suffice for well-being, but only in the narrow sense. Others have made similar points, but uptake has been limited, perhaps because distinguishing multiple concepts of prudential value makes the already difficult job of giving a theory of well-being much harder, as Kagan pointedly observes. [ 29 ] An interesting possibility is that the locution ‘happy life’, and the corresponding well-being sense of happiness, actually refers to a specific variety of well-being—perhaps well-being in the wide sense just suggested, or well-being taken as an ideal state, an ultimate goal of deliberation. This might explain the continued use of ‘happiness’ for the well-being notion in the philosophical literature, rather than the more standard ‘wellbeing.’

The preceding section discussed ways that happiness might figure prominently even in non-mental state theories of well-being. The question there concerned the role of happiness in theories of well-being. This is a different question from how important happiness is for well-being itself. Even a theory of well-being that includes no mention at all of happiness can allow that happiness is nonetheless a major component or contributor to well-being, because of its relation to the things that ultimately constitute well-being. If you hold a desire theory of well-being, for instance, you will very likely allow that, for most people, happiness is a central aspect of well-being, since most people very much desire to be happy. Indeed, some desire theorists have argued that the account actually yields a form of hedonism, on the grounds that people ultimately desire nothing else but happiness or pleasure (Sidgwick 1907 [1966], Brandt 1979, 1989).

Happiness may be thought important even on theories normally believed to take a dismissive view of it. Aristotelians identify well-being with virtuous activity, yet Aristotle plainly takes this to be a highly pleasant condition, indeed the most pleasant kind of life there is (see, e.g., NE , Bk. I 8; Bk. VII 13). You cannot flourish, on Aristotelian terms, without being happy, and unhappiness is clearly incompatible with well-being. Even the Stoics, who notoriously regard all but a virtuous inner state as at best indifferent, would still assign happiness a kind of importance: at the very least, to be unhappy would be unvirtuous; and virtue itself arguably entails a kind of happiness, namely a pleasant state of tranquility. As well, happiness would likely be a preferred indifferent in most cases, to be chosen over unhappiness. To be sure, both Aristotelian and Stoic accounts are clear that happiness alone does not suffice for well-being, that its significance is not what common opinion takes it to be, and that some kinds of happiness can be worthless or even bad. But neither denies that happiness is somehow quite important for human well-being.

In fact it is questionable whether any major school of philosophical thought denies outright the importance of happiness, at least on one of the plausible accounts of the matter. Doubts about its significance probably owe to several factors. Some skeptics, for example, focus on relatively weak conceptions of happiness, such as the idea that it is little more than the simple emotion of feeling happy—an idea that few hedonists or emotional state theorists would accept. Or, alternatively, assuming that a concern for happiness has only to do with positive states. Yet ‘happiness’ also serves as a blanket term for a domain of concern that involves both positive and negative states, namely the kinds of mental states involved in being happy or unhappy. Just as “health” care tends to focus mainly on ill health, so might happiness researchers choose to focus much of their effort on the study and alleviation of unhappiness—depression, suffering, anxiety, and other conditions whose importance is uncontroversial. The study of happiness need be no more concerned with smiles than with frowns.

5. The pursuit and promotion of happiness

The last set of questions we will examine centers on the pursuit of happiness, both individual and collective. Most of the popular literature on happiness discusses how to make oneself happier, with little attention given to whether this is an appropriate goal, or how various means of pursuing happiness measure up from an ethical standpoint. More broadly, how if at all should one pursue happiness as part of a good life?

We saw earlier that most philosophers regard happiness as secondary to morality in a good life. The individual pursuit of happiness may be subject to nonmoral norms as well, prudence being the most obvious among them. Prudential norms need not be as plain as “don’t shoot yourself in the foot.” On Sumner’s authentic happiness view of well-being, for instance, we stand to gain little by pursuing happiness in inauthentic ways, for instance through self-deception or powerful drugs like Huxley’s soma , which guarantees happiness come what may (Huxley 1932 [2005]). The view raises interesting questions about the benefits of less extreme pharmaceuticals, such as the therapeutic use of antidepressants; such medications can make life more pleasant, but many people worry whether they pose a threat to authenticity, perhaps undercutting their benefits. It is possible that such drugs involve prudential tradeoffs, promoting well-being in some ways while undermining it in others; whether the tradeoffs are worth it will depend on how, in a given case, the balance is struck. Another possibility is that such drugs sometimes promote authenticity, if for instance a depressive disorder prevents a person from being “himself.”

Looking to more broadly ethical, but not yet moral, norms, it may be possible to act badly without acting either immorally or imprudently. While Aristotle himself regarded acting badly as inherently imprudent, his catalogue of virtues is instructive, as many of them (wit, friendliness, etc.) are not what we normally regard as moral virtues. Some morally permissible methods of pursuing happiness may nonetheless be inappropriate because they conflict with such “ethical” virtues. They might, for instance, be undignified or imbecilic.

Outwardly virtuous conduct undertaken in the name of personal happiness might, if wrongly motivated, be incompatible with genuine virtue. One might, for instance, engage in philanthropy solely to make oneself happier, and indeed work hard at fine-tuning one’s assistance to maximize the hedonic payoff. This sort of conduct would not obviously instantiate the virtue of compassion or kindness, and indeed might be reasonably deemed contemptible. Similarly, it might be admirable, morally or otherwise, to be grateful for the good things in one’s life. Yet the virtue of gratitude might be undermined by certain kinds of gratitude intervention, whereby one tries to become happier by focusing on the things one is grateful for. If expressions of gratitude become phony or purely instrumental, the sole reason for giving thanks being to become happy—and not that one actually has something to be thankful for—then the “gratitude” might cease to be admirable, and may indeed be unvirtuous. [ 30 ]

A different question is what means of pursuing happiness are most effective . This is fundamentally an empirical question, but there are some in-principle issues that philosophical reflection might inform. One oft-heard claim, commonly called the “paradox of hedonism,” is that the pursuit of happiness is self-defeating; to be happy, don’t pursue happiness. It is not clear how to interpret this dictum, however, so that it is both interesting and true. It is plainly imprudent to make happiness one’s focus at every moment, but doubtful that this has often been denied. Yet never considering happiness also seems an improbable strategy for becoming happier. If you are choosing among several equally worthwhile occupations, and have good evidence that some of them will make you miserable, while one of them is likely to be highly fulfilling, it would not seem imprudent to take that information into account. Yet to do so just is to pursue happiness. The so-called paradox of hedonism is perhaps best seen as a vague caution against focusing too much on making oneself happy, not a blanket dismissal of the prospects for expressly seeking happiness—and for this modest point there is good empirical evidence (Schooler, Ariely et al . 2003, Lyubomirsky 2007).

That happiness is sometimes worth seeking does not mean we will always do a good job of it (Haybron 2008b). In recent decades a massive body of empirical evidence has gathered on various ways in which people seem systematically prone to make mistakes in the pursuit of their interests, including happiness. Such tendencies have been suggested in several domains relating to the pursuit of happiness, including (with recent surveys cited):

• Assessing how happy we are, or were in the past (Haybron 2007)
• Predicting (“forecasting”) what will make us happy (Gilbert 2006)
• Choosing rationally (Kahneman and Tversky 2000, Gilovitch, Griffin et al . 2002, Hsee and Hastie 2006)

A related body of literature explores the costs and benefits of (ostensibly) making it easier to pursue happiness by increasing people’s options; it turns out that having more choices might often make people less happy, for instance by increasing the burdens of deliberation or the likelihood of regret (Schwartz 2004). Less discussed in this context, but highly relevant, is the large body of research indicating that human psychology and behavior are remarkably prone to unconscious social and other situational influences, most infamously reported in the Milgram obedience experiments (Doris 2002, 2015, Haybron 2014). Human functioning, and the pursuit of happiness, may be more profoundly social than many commentators have assumed. [ 31 ]

Taken together, this research bears heavily on two central questions in the philosophical literature: first, the broad character of human nature (e.g., in what sense are we rational animals? How should we conceive of human autonomy?); second, the philosophical ideals of the good society and good government.

Just a decade ago the idea of happiness policy was something of a novelty. While it remains on the fringes in some locales, notably the United States, in much of the world there has been a surge of interest in making happiness an explicit target of policy consideration. Attention has largely shifted, however, to a broader focus on well-being to reflect not just happiness but also other welfare concerns of citizens, and dozens of governments now incorporate well-being metrics in their national statistics. [ 32 ]

Let’s consider the rationale for policies aimed at promoting well-being. In political thought, the modern liberal tradition has tended to assume an optimistic view of human nature and the individual’s capacities for prudent choice. Partly for this reason, the preservation and expansion of individual freedoms, including people’s options, is widely taken to be a central goal, if not the goal, of legitimate governments. People should be freed to seek the good life as they see it, and beyond that the state should, by and large, stay out of the well-being-promotion business.

This vision of the good society rests on empirical assumptions that have been the subject of considerable debate. If it turns out that people systematically and predictably err in the pursuit of their interests, then it may be possible for governments to devise policies that correct for such mistakes. [ 33 ] Of course, government intervention can introduce other sorts of mistakes, and there is some debate about whether such measures are likely to do more harm than good (e.g., Glaeser 2006).

But even if governments cannot effectively counteract human imprudence, it may still be that people fare better in social forms that influence or even constrain choices in ways that make serious mistakes less likely. (Food culture and its impact on health may be an instructive example here.) The idea that people tend to fare best when their lives are substantially constrained or guided by their social and physical context has recently been dubbed contextualism ; the contrary view, that people do best when their lives are, as much as possible, determined by the individuals themselves, is individualism (Haybron 2008b). Recent contextualists include communitarians and many perfectionists, though contextualism is not a political doctrine and is compatible with liberalism and even libertarian political morality. Contextualism about the promotion of well-being is related to recent work in moral psychology that emphasizes the social character of human agency, such as situationism and social intuitionism. [ 34 ]

Quite apart from matters of efficacy, there are moral questions about the state promotion of happiness, which has been a major subject of debate, both because of the literature on mistakes and research suggesting that the traditional focus of state efforts to promote well-being, economic growth, has a surprisingly modest impact on happiness. One concern is paternalism : does happiness-based policy infringe too much on personal liberty? Some fear a politics that may too closely approximate Huxley’s Brave New World, where the state ensures a drug-induced happiness for all (Huxley 1932 [2005]). Extant policy suggestions, however, have been more modest. Efforts to steer choice, for instance in favor of retirement savings, may be paternalistic, but advocates argue that such policies can be sufficiently light-handed that no one should object to them, in some cases even going so far as to deem it “libertarian paternalism” (Thaler and Sunstein 2008). [ 35 ] The idea is that gentle “nudges,” like setting default options on hiring forms to setting aside money for retirement, interfere only trivially with choice, imposing little or no cost for those who wish to choose differently, and would very likely be welcomed by most of those targeted.

Also relatively light-handed, and perhaps not paternalistic at all, are state efforts to promote happiness directly through social policy, for instance by prioritizing unemployment over economic growth on the grounds that the former has a larger impact on happiness. Other policies might include trying to reduce commute times, or making walkable neighborhoods and green space a priority in urban planning, again on happiness grounds. Some may deem such measures paternalistic insofar as they trade freedom (in the form of economic prosperity) for a substantive good, happiness, that people value unevenly, though it has also been argued that refusing to take citizens’ values like happiness into consideration in policy deliberation on their behalf can amount to paternalism (Haybron and Alexandrova 2013).

A related sort of objection to happiness-based policy argues that happiness, or even well-being, is simply the wrong object of policy, which ought instead to focus on the promotion of resources or capabilities (Rawls 1971, Nussbaum 2000, Quong 2011, Sen 2009). Several reasons have been cited for this sort of view, one being that policies aimed at promoting happiness or well-being violate commonly accepted requirements of “liberal neutrality,” according to which policy must be neutral among conceptions of the good. According to this constraint, governments must not promote any view of the good life, and happiness-based policy might be argued to flout it. Worries about paternalism also surface here, the idea being that states should only focus on affording people the option to be happy or whatever, leaving the actual achievement of well-being up to the autonomous individual. As we just saw, however, it is not clear how far happiness policy initiatives actually infringe on personal liberty or autonomy. A further worry is that, happiness isn’t really, or primarily, what matters for human well-being (Nussbaum 2008).

But a major motivation for thinking happiness the wrong object of policy is that neither happiness nor well-being are the appropriate focus of a theory of justice . What justice requires of society, on this view, is not that it make us happy; we do not have a right to be happy. Rather, justice demands only that each has sufficient opportunity (in the form of resources or capabilities, say) to achieve a good life, or that each gets a fair share of the benefits of social cooperation. However plausible such points may be, it is not clear how far they apply to many proposals for happiness-based policy, save the strongest claims that happiness should be the sole aim of policy: many policy decisions are not primarily concerned with questions of social justice, nor with constitutional fundamentals, the focus of some theories of justice. Happiness could be a poor candidate for the “currency” of justice, yet still remain a major policy concern. Indeed, the chief target of happiness policy advocates has been, not theories of justice, but governments’ overwhelming emphasis on promoting GDP and other indices of economic growth. This is not, in the main, a debate about justice, and as of yet the philosophical literature has not extensively engaged with it.

However, the push for happiness-based policy is a recent development. In coming years, such questions will likely receive considerably more attention in the philosophical literature.

• Adler, Matthew D., 2019, Measuring Social Welfare: An Introduction , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Adler, M. D., and M. Fleurbaey (eds.), 2015, The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Ahuvia, A., et al., 2015, “Happiness: An Interactionist Perspective,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 5(1): 1–18.
• Alexandrova, A., 2005, “Subjective Well-Being and Kahneman’s ‘Objective Happiness’,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 6: 301–324.
• –––, 2008, “First-Person Reports and the Measurement of Happiness,” Philosophical Psychology , 21(5): 571–583.
• –––, 2017, A Philosophy for the Science of Well-Being , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Alexandrova, A. and D. M. Haybron, 2012, “High Fidelity Economics,” in The Elgar Companion to Recent Economic Methodology , W. Hands and J. Davis (eds.). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
• –––, 2016, “Is Construct Validation Valid?,” Philosophy of Science , 83(5): 1098–1109.
• Almeder, R., 2000, Human Happiness and Morality , Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Press.
• Andreou, C., 2010, “A Shallow Route to Environmentally Friendly Happiness: Why Evidence That We Are Shallow Materialists Need Not Be Bad News for the Environment(Alist),” Ethics, Place & Environment , 13(1): 1–10.
• Ang, J. M. S., 2019, “Can Existentialists Be Happy? Authentic Life, Authentic Happiness,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 122–129.
• Angier, T., 2015, “Happiness: Overcoming the Skill Model,” International Philosophical Quarterly , 55(1): 5–23.
• Angner, E., 2009, “The Politics of Happiness,” Philosophy and Happiness , L. Bortolotti (ed.), New York: Palgrave, 1–26.
• –––, 2010, “Are subjective measures of well-being ‘direct’?” Australasian Journal of Philosophy , 89(1): 115–130.
• –––, 2011, “The Evolution of Eupathics: The Historical Roots of Subjective Measures of Well-Being,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(1): 4–41.
• –––, 2013a, “Is it possible to measure happiness?,” European Journal for Philosophy of Science , 3(2): 221–240.
• –––, 2013b, “Is Empirical Research Relevant to Philosophical Conclusions?,” Res Philosophica , 90(3): 365–85.
• –––, 2016, A Course in Behavioral Economics , second edition, London: Palgrave.
• Annas, J., 1993, The Morality of Happiness , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2011, Intelligent Virtue , New York: Oxford.
• Argyle, M., 1999, “Causes and Correlates of Happiness,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.). New York: Russell Sage Foundation: 3–25.
• –––, 2002, The Psychology of Happiness , New York: Routledge.
• Austin, A., 2015, “On Well-Being and Public Policy: Are We Capable of Questioning the Hegemony of Happiness?,” Social Indicators Research , 127(1): 1–16.
• Badhwar, N., 2008, “Is Realism Really Bad for You? A Realistic Response,” The Journal of Philosophy , 105(2): 85–107.
• –––, 2014, Well-Being: Happiness in a Worthwhile Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2015, “Happiness,” in The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Well-Being , ed. G. Fletcher, New York: Routledge, 323–35.
• Bagaric, M., and J. McConvill, 2005, “Goodbye Justice, Hello Happiness: Welcoming Positive Psychology to the Law,” Deakin Law Review , 10(1): 1–26.
• Barrow, R., 1980, Happiness and Schooling , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• –––, 1991, Utilitarianism: A Contemporary Statement , Brookfield, VT: Edward Elgar.
• Beck, B., and B. Stroop, 2015, “A Biomedical Shortcut to (Fraudulent) Happiness? An Analysis of the Notions of Well-Being and Authenticity Underlying Objections to Mood Enhancement,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Berlin: Springer, 115–34.
• Becker, L. C., 2012, Habilitation, Health, and Agency , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Belliotti, R. A., 2004, Happiness Is Overrated , New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
• –––, 2013, “The Seductions of Happiness,” The Oxford Handbook of Happiness , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Benditt, T. M., 1974, “Happiness,” Philosophical Studies , 25: 1–20.
• –––, 1978, “Happiness and Satisfaction – A Rejoinder to Carson,” The Personalist , 59: 108–9.
• Besser, L. L., 2014, Eudaimonic Ethics , New York: Routledge.
• Besser-Jones, L., 2013, “The Pursuit and Nature of Happiness,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 103–21.
• Billon, A., 2016, “Irrationality and Happiness: A (Neo-) Shopenhauerian Argument for Rational Pessimism,” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy , 11(1): 1–27.
• Bishop, M., 2012, “The Network Theory of Well-Being: An Introduction,” The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication , 7: 1–29.
• –––, 2015, The Good Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Biswas-Diener, R., 2018, “The Subjective Well-Being of Small Societies,” Handbook of Well-Being , E. Diener, S. Oishi, and L. Tay (eds.), Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers.
• Biswas-Diener, R., J. Vittersø and E. Diener, 2005, “Most People are Pretty Happy, but There is Cultural Variation: The Inughuit, The Amish, and The Maasai,” The Journal of Happiness Studies , 6(3): 205–226.
• Blackson, T., 2009, “On Feldman’s Theory of Happiness,” Utilitas , 21(3): 393–400.
• Block, N., 1995, “On a Confusion About A Function of Consciousness,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 18: 227–247.
• Bloomfield, P., 2014, The Virtues of Happiness , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bognar, G., 2010, “Authentic Happiness,” Utilitas , 22(3): 272–284.
• Bok, D., 2010a, The Politics of Happiness: What Government Can Learn from the New Research on Well-Being , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Bok, S., 2010b, Exploring Happiness: From Aristotle to Brain Science , New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Bortolotti, L. (ed.), 2009, Philosophy and Happiness , New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Bosch, M. van den, and W. Bird, 2018, Oxford Textbook of Nature and Public Health: The Role of Nature in Improving the Health of a Population , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bramble, B., 2016, “The Experience Machine,” Philosophy Compass , 11(3): 136–45.
• Brandt, R. B., 1959, Ethical Theory , Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• –––, 1979, A Theory of the Good and the Right , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 1989, “Fairness to Happiness,” Social Theory & Practice , 15: 33–58.
• –––, 1992, Morality, Utilitarianism, and Rights , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Brülde, B., 2007, “Happiness theories of the good life,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 15–49.
• –––, 2015, “Well-Being, Happiness and Sustainability,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , Happiness Studies Book Series, J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Berlin: Springer, 157–76.
• Brannmark, J., 2003, “Leading lives: On happiness and narrative meaning,” Philosophical Papers , 32(3): 321–343.
• Bruni, L., F. Comim, and M. Pugno (eds.), 2008, Capabilities and Happiness , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Buss, S., 2004, “The Irrationality of Unhappiness and the Paradox of Despair,” Journal of Philosophy , CI(4): 171–200.
• Cahn, S. M. and C. Vitrano (eds.), 2008, Happiness: Classical and Contemporary Readings in Philosophy , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2015, Happiness and Goodness: Philosophical Reflections on Living Well , New York: Columbia University Press.
• Campbell, R., 1973, “The Pursuit Of Happiness,” Personalist , 54: 325–337.
• Capaldi, C. A. et al., 2015, “Flourishing in Nature: A Review of the Benefits of Connecting with Nature and Its Application as a Wellbeing Intervention,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 5(4): 1–16.
• Capuccino, C., 2013, “Happiness and Aristotle’s Definition of Eudaimonia,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 1–26.
• Carson, T. L., 1978a, “Happiness and Contentment: A Reply to Benditt,” The Personalist , 59: 101–7.
• –––, 1978b, “Happiness and the Good Life,” Southwestern Journal of Philosophy , 9: 73–88.
• –––, 1979, “Happiness and the Good Life: a Rejoinder to Mele,” Southwestern Journal of Philosophy , 10: 189–192.
• –––, 1981, “Happiness, Contentment, and the Good Life,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 62: 378–92.
• Cashen, M, 2012, “Happiness, Eudaimonia, and The Principle of Descriptive Adequacy,” Metaphilosophy , 43(5): 619–35.
• Cavallaro, M., and G. Heffernan, 2019, “From Happiness to Blessedness: Husserl on Eudaimonia, Virtue, and the Best Life,” HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology , 8(2): 353–388.
• Chappell, T., 2013, “Eudaimonia, Happiness, and the Redemption of Unhappiness,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 27–52.
• Charry, E. T., 2010, God and the Art of Happiness , Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company.
• Chekola, M., 2007, “Happiness, Rationality, Autonomy and the Good Life,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 51–78.
• Christakis, N., J. Fowler, Simon, i. Schuster, P. D. Audio and L. Findaway World, 2009, Connected: The surprising power of our social networks and how they shape our lives , New York: Little, Brown and Co.
• Clark, A., et al., 2018, The Origins of Happiness: The Science of Well-Being over the Life Course , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Cohen Kaminitz, S., forthcoming, “Looking Good or Feeling Well? Understanding the Combinations of Well-Being Indicators Using Insights from the Philosophy of Well-Being,” Social Indicators Research , online first 12 February 2020. doi:10.1007/s11205-020-02289-9
• David, S., Boniwell, I., and A. Ayers (eds.), 2013, The Oxford Handbook of Happiness , New York: Oxford.
• Davis, W., 1981a, “Pleasure and Happiness,” Philosophical Studies , 39: 305–318.
• –––, 1981b, “A Theory of Happiness,” American Philosophical Quarterly , 18: 111–20.
• de Boer, J., 2014, “Scaling Happiness,” Philosophical Psychology , 27(5): 703–18.
• De Brigard, F., 2010, “If You like It, Does It Matter If It’s Real?,” Philosophical Psychology , 23(1): 43–57.
• de Lazari-Radek, K., and Singer, P., 2014, The Point of View of the Universe: Sidgwick and Contemporary Ethics , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Den Uyl, D. and T. R. Machan, 1983, “Recent Work on the Concept of Happiness,” American Philosophical Quarterly , 20: 115–34.
• Diener, E., 2008, “Myths in the Science of Happiness, and Directions for Future Research,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press: 493–514.
• Diener, E. and R. Biswas-Diener, 2008, Happiness: unlocking the mysteries of psychological wealth , Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• Diener, E. and C. Diener, 1996, “Most People Are Happy,” Psychological Science , 7(3): 181–185.
• Diener, E., R. E. Lucas, U. Schimmack and J. F. Helliwell, 2009, Well-Being for Public Policy , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Diener, E., R. E. Lucas and C. N. Scollon, 2006, “Beyond the Hedonic Treadmill: Revising the Adaptation Theory of Well-Being,” American Psychologist , 61(4): 305–314.
• Diener, E., W. Ng, J. Harter and R. Arora, 2010, “Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, whereas psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 99(1): 52–61.
• Diener, E. and M. Seligman, 2004, “Beyond Money: Toward an economy of well-being,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest , 5(1): 1–31.
• Diener, E. and E. M. Suh (eds.), 2000, Culture and Subjective Well-Being , Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press.
• Diener, E., E. M. Suh, R. E. Lucas and H. L. Smith, 1999, “Subjective Well-Being: Three Decades of Progress,” Psychological Bulletin , 125(2): 276–302.
• Dolan, P., and L. Kudrna, 2016, “Sentimental Hedonism: Pleasure, Purpose, and Public Policy,” Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being , J. Vittersø (ed.), Berlin: Springer, 437–52.
• Dolan, P. and M. P. White, 2007, “How can measures of subjective well-being be used to inform public policy?” Perspectives on Psychological Science , 2(1): 71–85.
• Doris, J. M., 2002, Lack of Character , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• –––, 2009, “Skepticism about persons,” Philosophical Issues , 19(1): 57–91.
• –––, 2015, Talking to Our Selves , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Easterlin, R. A., 1974, “Does Economic Growth Improve the Human Lot?” Nations and Households in Economic Growth: Essays in Honor of Moses Abramovitz , P. A. David and M. W. Reder (eds.), New York: Academic Press.
• –––, 2003, “Explaining Happiness,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 100(19): 11176–11183.
• –––, 2005, “Building a Better Theory of Well-Being,” Economics and Happiness , L. Bruni and P. L. Porta (eds.), New York: Oxford, 29–65.
• Ebenstein, A. O., 1991, The Greatest Happiness Principle: An Examination of Utilitarianism , New York: Garland.
• Edgeworth, F. Y., 1881, Mathematical Psychics: an Essay on the Application of Mathematics to the Moral Sciences , London: Kegan Paul.
• Eid, M. and R. J. Larsen (eds.), 2008, The Science of Subjective Well-Being , New York: Guilford.
• Elster, J., 1983, Sour Grapes , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Epictetus, The Discourses as Reported by Arrian, The Manual, and Fragments , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1925.
• Euler, S. S., 2019, “Psychological Universals in the Study of Happiness: From Social Psychology to Epicurean Philosophy,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 130–37.
• Everett, D. L., 2009, Don’t sleep, there are snakes: Life and language in the Amazonian jungle , New York: Random House.
• Feldman, F., 2004, Pleasure and the Good Life , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2010, What Is This Thing Called Happiness? , New York: Oxford.
• –––, 2019, “An Improved Whole Life Satisfaction Theory of Happiness?,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 9(2):1–7.
• Flanagan, O., 2007, The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Flanagan, O., M. Letourneau, and W. Zhao, 2019, “Particulars of Well-Being,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 1–5.
• Fletcher, G., 2013, “A Fresh Start for the Objective-List Theory of Well-Being,” Utilitas , 25(2): 206–20.
• Fleurbaey, M., and D. Blanchet, 2013, Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Fogel, R. W., 2005, “Changes in the disparities in chronic diseases during the course of the 20th century,” Perspectives in biology and medicine , 48(1 Supplement): S150-S165.
• Fraser, C., 2013, “Happiness in Classical Confucianism: Xúnzǐ,” E. Minar (ed.), Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 53–79.
• Frederick, S. and G. Loewenstein, 1999, “Hedonic Adaptation,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press: 302–29.
• Fredrickson, B. L., 2004, “The Broaden-and-Build Theory of Positive Emotions,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 359(1449): 1367–1377
• Fredrickson, B. L. and D. Kahneman, 1993, “Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 65(1): 45–55.
• Fredrickson, B. L. and M. F. Losada, 2005, “Positive Affect and the Complex Dynamics of Human Flourishing,” American Psychologist , 60(7): 678–686.
• Frey, B. S., 2008, Happiness: A Revolution in Economics , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Frumkin, H., 2001, “Beyond toxicity: Human health and the natural environment,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 20(3): 234–240.
• Gilbert, D., 2006, Stumbling on Happiness , New York: Knopf.
• Gilovitch, T., D. Griffin and D. Kahneman (eds.), 2002, Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Glaeser, E. L., 2006, “Paternalism and Psychology,” University of Chicago Law Review , 73(1): 133–156.
• Goldman, A. H., 2016, “Happiness is an Emotion,” The Journal of Ethics , 21(1): 1–16.
• –––, 2019, Life’s Values: Pleasure, Happiness, Well-Being, and Meaning , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Goldstein, I., 1973, “Happiness: The Role of Non-Hedonic Criteria in Its Evaluation,” International Philosophical Quarterly , 13: 523–34.
• –––, 1981, “Cognitive Pleasure and Distress,” Philosophical Studies , 39: 15–23.
• –––, 1989, “Pleasure and Pain: Unconditional, Intrinsic Values,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 50(2): 255–276.
• Goldstein, I., 2002, “Are emotions feelings? A further look at hedonic theories of emotions,” Consciousness and Emotion , 3(1): 21–33.
• Graham, C., 2009, Happiness around the world: The paradox of happy peasants and miserable millionaires , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Graham, M., 2017, “A Fate Worse Than Death? The Well-Being of Patients Diagnosed as Vegetative With Covert Awareness,” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice , 20(5): 1–16.
• Griffin, J., 1979, “Is Unhappiness Morally More Important Than Happiness?” Philosophical Quarterly , 29: 47–55.
• –––, 1986, Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement, and Moral Importance , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• –––, 2000, “Replies,” Well-Being and Morality , R. Crisp and B. Hooker (eds.), New York: Oxford: 281–313.
• –––, 2007, “What Do Happiness Studies Study?” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8(1): 139–148.
• Griswold, C., 1996, “Happiness, Tranquillity, and Philosophy,” Critical Review , 10(1): 1–32.
• Haidt, J., 2001, “The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment,” Psychological Review , 108(4): 814–834.
• Hare, R. M., 1963, Freedom and Reason , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hausman, D. M., 2010, “Hedonism and Welfare Economics,” Economics and Philosophy , 26(3): 321–44.
• –––, 2011, Preferences, Value, Choice, and Welfare , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Hausman, D. M. and B. Welch, 2009, “Debate: To Nudge or Not to Nudge,” Journal of Political Philosophy , 18(1): 123–136.
• Hawkins, J., 2008, “Well-Being, Autonomy, and the Horizon Problem,” Utilitas , 20(2): 1–27.
• –––, 2014a, “Well-Being, Time, and Dementia,” Ethics , 124(3): 507–542.
• –––, 2014b, “Well-Being: What Matters Beyond the Mental?,” in Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics (Volume 4), M. Timmons (ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2016, “The Experience Machine and the Experience Requirement,” The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Well-Being , G. Fletcher (ed.), New York: Routledge.
• –––, 2019, “Well-Being, The Self, and Radical Change,” Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, Vol 9 , M. Timmons (ed.), New York: Oxford University Press, 251.
• Haybron, D. M., 2001, “Happiness and Pleasure,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 62(3): 501–528.
• –––, 2003, “What Do We Want from a Theory of Happiness?” Metaphilosophy , 34(3): 305–329.
• –––, 2005, “On Being Happy or Unhappy,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 71(2): 287–317.
• –––, 2007, “Do We Know How Happy We Are?” Nous , 41(3): 394–428.
• –––, 2008a, “Happiness, the Self, and Human Flourishing,” Utilitas , 20(1): 21–49.
• –––, 2008b, The Pursuit of Unhappiness: The Elusive Psychology of Well-Being , New York, Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2011, “Central Park: Nature, Context, and Human Wellbeing,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(2): 235–254.
• –––, 2013a, Happiness: A Very Short Introduction , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2013b, “The Proper Pursuit of Happiness,” Res Philosophica , 90(3): 387–411.
• –––, 2014, “Adventures in Assisted Living: Well-Being and Situationist Psychology,” The Philosophy and Psychology of Character and Happiness , N. E. Snow and F. V. Trivigno (eds.), New York: Routledge, 1–25.
• –––, 2016, “Mental State Approaches to Well-Being,” The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy , M. D. Adler & M. Fleurbaey (eds.), New York: Oxford, 347–378.
• Haybron, D. M., and A. Alexandrova, 2013, “Paternalism in Economics,” Paternalism: Theory and Practice , C. Coons and M. Weber (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 157–77.
• Haybron, D. M., and V. Tiberius, 2015, “Well-Being Policy: What Standard of Well-Being?,” Journal of the American Philosophical Association , 1(4): 712–33.
• Headey, B., 2007, The Set-Point Theory of Well-Being Needs Replacing: On the Brink of a Scientific Revolution? , DIW Berlin: German Institute for Economic Research.
• –––, 2008, “The Set-Point Theory of Well-Being: Negative Results and Consequent Revisions,” Social Indicators Research , 85(3): 389–403.
• Hersch, G., 2015, “Can an Evidential Account Justify Relying on Preferences for Well-Being Policy?,” Journal of Economic Methodology , 22(3): 1–13.
• –––, 2017, “Ignoring Easterlin: Why Easterlin’s Correlation Findings Need Not Matter to Public Policy,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 19(8): 2225–2241.
• –––, 2020, “No Theory-Free Lunches in Well-Being Policy,” The Philosophical Quarterly , 70(278): 43–64.
• Hill, S., 2007, “Haybron on Mood Propensity and Happiness,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 10(2): 215–28.
• Hindriks, F., & Douven, I., 2018, “Nozick’s experience machine: An empirical study,” Philosophical Psychology , 31(2): 1–21.
• Ho, S. M., W. Duan, and S. C. Tang, 2014, “The Psychology of Virtue and Happiness in Western and Asian Thought,” The Philosophy and Psychology of Character and Happiness , N. E. Snow and F. V. Trivigno (eds.), New York: Routledge, 223–46.
• Houlden, V., et al., 2018, “The Relationship between Greenspace and the Mental Wellbeing of Adults: A Systematic Review,” PLOS ONE , 13(9): 1–35.
• Hsee, C. K. and R. Hastie, 2006, “Decision and experience: Why don’t we choose what makes us happy?” Trends in Cognitive Sciences , 10(1): 31–37.
• Hurka, T., 2010, The Best Things in Life: A Guide to What Really Matters , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Huxley, A., 1932 [2005], Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited , New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
• Inglehart, R., R. Foa, C. Peterson and C. Welzel, 2008, “Development, freedom, and rising happiness: A global perspective, 1981–2007” Perspectives on Psychological Science , 3(4): 264–285.
• Inglehart, R. and H.-D. Klingemann, 2000, “Genes, Culture, Democracy, and Happiness,” Culture and Subjective Well-Being , E. Diener and E. M. Suh (eds.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press: 165–183.
• Intelisano, S., Krasko, J., & Luhmann, M., 2019, “Integrating Philosophical and Psychological Accounts of Happiness and Well-Being,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 8: 1–40.
• Jebb, A. T., L. Tay, E. Diener, and S. Oishi, 2018, “Happiness, Income Satiation and Turning Points around the World,” Nature Human Behaviour , 2(1): 33–38.
• Joshanloo, M., 2013, “A Comparison of Western and Islamic Conceptions of Happiness,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 14(6): 1857–74.
• –––, 2014, “Eastern Conceptualizations of Happiness: Fundamental Differences with Western Views,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 15(2): 475–93.
• Joshanloo, M., and D. Weijers, 2019, “A Two-Dimensional Conceptual Framework for Understanding Mental Well-Being,” PLoS ONE , 14(3): e0214045.
• Kagan, S., 1992, “The Limits of Well-Being,” Social Philosophy and Policy , 9(2): 169–89.
• –––, 1994, “Me and My Life,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 94: 309–324.
• Kahane, Guy, 2011, “Reasons to Feel, Reasons to Take Pills,” Enhancing Human Capacities , J. Savulescu, R. Ter Meulen, and G. Kahane (eds.), Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, 166–78.
• Kahneman, D., 1999, “Objective Happiness,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation: 3–25.
• Kahneman, D. and A. Deaton, 2010, “High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 107(38): 16489–16493.
• Kahneman, D., E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), 1999, Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press.
• Kahneman, D., B. L. Fredrickson, C. A. Schreiber and D. A. Redelmeier, 1993, “When More Pain Is Preferred to Less: Adding a Better End,” Psychological Science , 4(6): 401–405.
• Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (eds.), 2000, Choices, Values, and Frames , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Kauppinen, A., 2013, “Meaning and Happiness,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 161–185.
• Kazez, J., 2007, The Weight of Things: Philosophy and the Good Life , Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Kekes, J., 1982, “Happiness,” Mind , 91: 358–76.
• –––, 1988, The Examined Life , Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press.
• –––, 1992, “Happiness,” Encyclopedia of Ethics , L. C. Becker and C. B. Becker (eds.), New York: Garland: 430–435.
• Kellert, S. R. and E. O. Wilson (eds.), 1995, The Biophilia Hypothesis , Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
• Kelman, M., 2005, “Hedonic Psychology and the Ambiguities of ‘Welfare’,” Philosophy & Public Affairs , 33(4): 391–412.
• Kenny, A. and C. Kenny, 2006, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Utility , Charlottesville, VA: Imprint Academic.
• Keyes, C. L., 2002, “The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life,” Journal of Health and Social Behavior , 43(2): 207–222.
• Kim, R., 2020, Confucianism and the Philosophy of Well-Being , New York: Routledge.
• Klausen, S. H., 2015, “Happiness, Dispositions and the Self,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 17(3): 777–780.
• –––, 2019, “Understanding Older Adults’ Wellbeing from a Philosophical Perspective,” Journal of Happiness Studies , online first.
• Kraut, R., 1979, “Two Conceptions of Happiness,” The Philosophical Review , 138: 167–97.
• –––, 2018, The Quality of Life: Aristotle Revised , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Kristjánsson, K., 2010, “Positive psychology, happiness, and virtue: The troublesome conceptual issues,” Review of general psychology , 14(4): 296.
• –––, 2012, “Positive Psychology and Positive Education: Old Wine in New Bottles?” Educational Psychologist , 47(2): 86–105.
• –––, 2018, “The flourishing–happiness concordance thesis: Some troubling counterexamples,” The Journal of Positive Psychology , 13(6): 541–552.
• Krueger, A., D. Kahneman, C. Fischler, D. Schkade, N. Schwarz and A. Stone, 2009, “Time Use and Subjective Well-Being in France and the U.S,” Social Indicators Research ,(93): 7–18.
• Larsen, R. J. and Z. Prizmic, 2008, “Regulation of Emotional Well-Being: Overcoming the Hedonic Treadmill,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press: 258–289.
• Lauinger, W., 2015, “A Framework for Understanding Parental Well-Being,” Philosophia , 43(3): 847–868.
• Layard, R., 2005, Happiness: Lessons from a new science , New York: Penguin.
• LeBar, M., and D. Russell, 2013, “Well-Being and Eudaimonia: A Reply to Haybron,” Aristotelian Ethics in Contemporary Perspective , 21: 52.
• Lin, E., 2015, “How to Use the Experience Machine,” Utilitas , 28(3): 314–32.
• Loewenstein, G. and E. Haisley, 2008, “The Economist as Therapist: Methodological Ramifications of ‘Light’ Paternalism,” The Foundations of Positive and Normative Economics , A. Caplin and A. Schotter (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 210–248.
• Lucas, R. E., 2008, “Personality and Subjective Well-Being,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press: 171–194.
• Lucas, R. E., A. E. Clark, Y. Georgellis and E. Diener, 2004a, “Re-Examining Adaptation and the Setpoint Model of Happiness: Reactions to Changes in Marital Status,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 84: 527–539.
• –––, 2004b, “Unemployment alters the set point for life satisfaction,” Psychological Science , 15(1): 8–13.
• Luhmann, M., and S. Intelisano, 2018, “Hedonic Adaptation and the Set Point for Subjective Well-Being,” Handbook of Well-Being , E. Diener, S. Oishi, and L. Tay (eds.), Salt Lake City: DEF Publishers.
• Lumber, R., M. Richardson, and D. Sheffield, 2017, “Beyond Knowing Nature: Contact, Emotion, Compassion, Meaning, and Beauty Are Pathways to Nature Connection,” PLOS ONE , 12(5): e0177186.
• Luo, S., 2018, “Happiness and the Good Life: A Classical Confucian Perspective,” Dao , 71(2): 1–18.
• Lykken, D. and A. Tellegen, 1996, “Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon,” Psychological Science , 7(3): 186–9.
• Lyubomirsky, S., 2007, The How of Happiness , New York: Penguin.
• Lyubomirsky, S., L. King and E. Diener, 2005, “The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Happiness Lead to Success?” Psychological Bulletin , 131(6): 803–855.
• Lyubomirsky, S., K. M. Sheldon and D. Schkade, 2005, “Pursuing Happiness: The Architecture of Sustainable Change,” Review of General Psychology , 9(2): 111–131.
• MacLeod, A. K., 2015, “Well-Being: Objectivism, Subjectivism or Sobjectivism?,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 16 1073–1089.
• Martin, M. W., 2012, Happiness and the Good Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• May, T., 2015, A Significant Life Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Mayerfeld, J., 1996, “The Moral Asymmetry of Happiness and Suffering,” Southern Journal of Philosophy , 34: 317–338.
• –––, 1999, Suffering and Moral Responsibility , New York: Oxford.
• McFall, L., 1989, Happiness , New York: Peter Lang.
• McMahon, D. M., 2005, Happiness: A History , New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.
• McPherson, D., 2020, Virtue and Meaning: A Neo-Aristotelian Perspective , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Metz, T., 2014, “Gross National Happiness: A Philosophical Appraisal,” Ethics and Social Welfare , 8(3): 218–32.
• Meynell, H., 1969, “Human Flourishing,” Religious Studies , 5: 147–154.
• Millgram, E., 2000, “What’s the Use of Utility,” Philosophy and Public Affairs , 29(2): 113–136.
• Mitchell, P., 2018, “Adaptive Preferences, Adapted Preferences,” Mind , 127(508): 1003–25.
• Moller, D., 2011, “Wealth, Disability, and Happiness,” Philosophy & Public Affairs , 39(2): 177–206.
• Montague, R., 1967, “Happiness,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society , 67: 87–102.
• Morris, S., 2011, “In defense of the hedonistic account of happiness,” Philosophical Psychology , 24(2): 261 – 281.
• –––, 2015, Science and the End of Ethics , New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Mulligan, K., 2016, “Happiness, Luck and Satisfaction.,” ARGUMENTA , 1(2): 133–45.
• Mulnix, J. W., & Mulnix, M. J., 2015a, Happy Lives, Good Lives: A Philosophical Examination , Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
• ––– (eds.), 2015b, Theories of Happiness: An Anthology , Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
• Murphy, M. C., 2001, Natural Law and Practical Rationality , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Myers, D. G. and E. Diener, 1995, “Who Is Happy?” Psychological Science , 6(1): 10–19.
• Nettle, D., 2005, Happiness: The Science Behind Your Smile , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Noddings, N., 2003, Happiness and Education , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Nozick, R., 1974, Anarchy, State, and Utopia , New York: Basic Books.
• –––, 1989, The Examined Life , New York: Simon and Schuster.
• Nussbaum, M. C., 2000, Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach , New York: Cambridge University Press.
• –––, 2008, “Who Is the Happy Warrior? Philosophy Poses Questions to Psychology,” The Journal of Legal Studies , 37(s2): S81-S113.
• Oishi, S., Choi, H., Buttrick, N., et al., 2019, “The psychologically rich life questionnaire,” Journal of Research in Personality , 81: 257–270.
• Parducci, A., 1995, Happiness, Pleasure, and Judgement: The Contextual Theory and Its Applications , Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
• Parfit, D., 1984, Reasons and Persons , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Paul, L. A., 2016, Transformative Experience , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Pavot, W., 2008, “The Assessment of Subjective Well-Being: Successes and Shortfalls,” The Science of Subjective Well-Being , M. Eid and R. J. Larsen (eds.), New York: Guilford Press, 124–140.
• Phillips, J., L. Misenheimer and J. Knobe, 2011, “The Ordinary Concept of Happiness (and Others Like It),” Emotion Review , 71: 929–937.
• Phillips, J., S. Nyholm, and S. Liao, 2014, “The Good in Happiness,” Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy (Volume 1), T. Lombrozo, S. Nichols, and J. Knobe (eds.), 253–93.
• Phillips, J., De Freitas, J., Mott, C., Gruber, J., & Knobe, J., 2017, “True happiness: The role of morality in the folk concept of happiness,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 146(2): 165–181.
• Posner, E. and C. R. Sunstein (eds.), 2010, Law and Happiness , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Purcell, S., 2013, “Natural Goodness and the Normativity Challenge: Happiness Across Cultures,” Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association , 87: 183–94.
• Quong, J., 2011, Liberalism Without Perfection , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Raibley, J., 2010, “Well-being and the priority of values,” Social Theory and Practice , 36(4): 593–620.
• –––, 2011, “Happiness is not Well-Being,” Journal of Happiness Studies , 13(6): 1105–1121.
• –––, 2012, “Health and Well-Being,” Philosophical Studies , 165(2): 469–89.
• –––, 2013, “Values, Agency, and Welfare,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 187–214.
• Rawls, J., 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Raz, J., 1986, The Morality of Freedom , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2004, “The Role of Well-Being,” Philosophical Perspectives , 18(1): 269–294.
• Rescher, N., 1972, Welfare: The Social Issues In Philosophical Perspective , Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
• –––, 1980, Unpopular Essays on Technological Progress , Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
• Ricard, M., 2006, Happiness: A Guide to Developing Life’s Most Important Skill , New York: Little, Brown and Co.
• Roberts, R. C., 2019, “Joys: A Brief Moral and Christian Geography,” Faith and Philosophy , 36(2): 195–222.
• Rodogno, R., 2014, “Happiness and Well-Being: Shifting the Focus of the Current Debate,” South African Journal of Philosophy , 33(4): 433–46.
• –––, 2015, “Prudential Value or Well-Being,” Handbook of Value , T. Brosch and D. Sander (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 287–312.
• Rodogno, R., Krause-Jensen, K., & Ashcroft, R. E., 2016, “‘Autism and the good life’: a new approach to the study of well-being,” Journal of Medical Ethics , 42(6): 401–408.
• Ross, L. and R. E. Nisbett, 1991, The Person and the Situation: Perspectives of Social Psychology , Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
• Rossi, M., 2018, “Happiness, Pleasures, and Emotions,” Philosophical Psychology , 31(6): 898–919.
• Rossi, M., & Tappolet, C., 2016, “Virtue, Happiness, and Well-Being,” The Monist , 99(2): 112–127.
• Russell, D., 2013, Happiness for Humans , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Ryan, R. M. and E. L. Deci, 2001, “On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being,” Annual Review of Psychology , 52: 141–166.
• Ryff, C. D., 1989, “Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 57(6): 1069–1081.
• Samson, C., 2019, “Indigenous and Western Views of Happiness: An Essay on the Politics of Contentment,” Regimes of Happiness: Comparative and Historical Studies , B. Turner, J. T. Jen, and Y. Contreras-Vejar (eds.), London: Anthem Press, 219–34.
• Savulescu, J., R. Ter Meulen, and G. Kahane, 2011, Enhancing Human Capacities , Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
• Scanlon, T., 1999, What We Owe to Each Other , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Schooler, J. W., D. Ariely and G. Loewenstein, 2003, “The Pursuit and Assessment of Happiness Can Be Self-Defeating,” The Psychology of Economic Decision , I. Brocas and J. Carillo (eds.), New York: Oxford University.
• Schultz, B., 2017, The Happiness Philosophers , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Schwartz, B., 2004, The Paradox of Choice , New York: HarperCollins.
• Schwarz, N. and F. Strack, 1999, “Reports of Subjective Well-Being: Judgmental Processes and Their Methodological Implications,” Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , D. Kahneman, E. Diener and N. Schwarz (eds.), New York: Russell Sage Foundation Press: 61–84.
• Schwitzgebel, E., 2008, “The Unreliability of Naive Introspection,” Philosophical Review , 117(2): 245–273.
• –––, 2011, Perplexities of Consciousness , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Schwitzgebel, E. and R. T. Hurlburt, 2007, Describing Inner Experience? Proponent Meets Skeptic , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Scruton, R., 1975, Reason and Happiness. Nature and Conduct , R. S. Peters (ed.), New York: Macmillan: 139–61.
• Seligman, M., 2002, Authentic Happiness , New York: Free Press.
• –––, 2011, Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-being , New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Sen, A., 1987a, Commodities and Capabilities , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 1987b, On Ethics and Economics , Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• –––, 2009, The Idea of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Sidgwick, H., 1907 [1966], The Methods of Ethics , New York: Dover Publications.
• Silventoinen, K., S. Sammalisto, M. Perola, D. I. Boomsma, B. K. Cornes, C. Davis, L. Dunkel, M. De Lange, J. R. Harris and J. V. B. Hjelmborg, 2003, “Heritability of adult body height: a comparative study of twin cohorts in eight countries,” Twin Research , 6(5): 399–408.
• Singer, P., 1972, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Philosophy and Public Affairs , 1(3): 229–243.
• Singh, R., and A. Alexandrova, forthcoming, “Happiness Economics as Technocracy,” Behavioural Public Policy , first online 12 Dec 2019: doi:10.17863/CAM.46854
• Sizer, L., 2010, “Good and good for you: An affect theory of happiness,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 80(1): 133–163.
• Skidelsky, E., 2014, “What Can We Learn From Happiness Surveys?,” Journal of Practical Ethics , 2(2): 20–32.
• –––, 2017, “Happiness, Pleasure, and Belief,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy , 95(3): 435–446.
• Slote, M., 1982, “Goods and Lives,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 63: 311–26.
• –––, 1983, Goods and Virtues , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Smart, J. J. C., 1973, “An Outline of a System of Utilitarian Ethics,” Utilitarianism: For and Against , J. J. C. Smart and B. Williams, New York: Cambridge University Press: 3–74.
• Snow, N. E., and Trivigno, F. V., 2014, The Philosophy and Psychology of Character and Happiness , New York: Routledge.
• Sosis, C., 2012, “Happiness: The Potential Power of Environment,” The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication , 7: 1–10.
• –––, 2014, “Hedonic possibilities and heritability statistics,” Philosophical Psychology , 27(5): 681–702.
• Spahn, A., 2015, “Can Technology Make Us Happy?,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Cham: Springer, 93–113.
• Sprigge, T. L. S., 1987, The Rational Foundations of Ethics , New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
• –––, 1991, “The Greatest Happiness Principle,” Utilitas , 3(1): 37–51.
• Stenberg, J., 2019, “The All-Happy God,” Faith and Philosophy , 36(4): 423–41.
• Stevenson, C. M., 2018, “Experience Machines, Conflicting Intuitions and the Bipartite Characterization of Well-Being,” Utilitas , 30(4): 383–98.
• Stevenson, B. and J. Wolfers, 2008, “Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity , Spring 2008: 1–87.
• Stiglitz, J. E., J.-P. Fitoussi, and M. Durand, 2019, Measuring What Counts: The Global Movement for Well-Being , New York: New Press.
• Stiglitz, J. E., Amartya. Sen, and J.-Paul. Fitoussi, 2009, Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress , Paris: Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.
• Sugden, R., 2008, “Capability, Happiness, and Opportunity,” Capabilities and Happiness , L. Bruni, F. Comim, and M. Pugno (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 299–322.
• Suikkanen, J., 2011, “An Improved Whole Life Satisfaction Theory of Happiness,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(1): 1–18.
• –––, 2019. “The Advice Models of Happiness: A Response to Feldman,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 9(2), available online , doi:10.5502/ijw.v9i2.837
• Sumner, L. W., 1996, Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2000, “Something In Between,” Well-Being and Morality , R. Crisp and B. Hooker (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, 1–19.
• Tatarkiewicz, W., 1976, Analysis of Happiness , The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
• Telfer, E., 1980, Happiness , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Thaler, R. H. and C. R. Sunstein, 2008, Nudge : improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness , New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Thomas, D. A. L., 1968, “Happiness,” Philosophical Quarterly , 18: 97–113.
• Tiberius, V., 2006, “Well-Being: Psychological Research for Philosophers,” Philosophy Compass , 1: 493–505.
• –––, 2008, The Reflective Life , New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 2014, Moral Psychology: A Contemporary Introduction , New York: Routledge
• –––, 2018, Well-Being As Value Fulfillment , New York: Oxford University Press, USA.
• Tiberius, V. and A. Plakias, 2010, “Well-Being,” The Moral Psychology Handbook , J. Doris, G. Harman, S. Nichols, et al . (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press.
• Trout, J. D., 2005, “Paternalism and Cognitive Bias,” Law and Philosophy , 24: 393–434.
• –––, 2009, The Empathy Gap: Building bridges to the good life and the good society , New York: Viking Press.
• Trout, J. D., and S. A. Buttar, 2000, “Resurrecting ‘Death Taxes’: Inheritance, Redistribution, and the Science of Happiness,” Journal of Law & Politics , 16(4): 765–847.
• van der Deijl, Willem, 2016, “What Happiness Science Can Learn from John Stuart Mill,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 6(1): 164–79.
• –––, 2017a, “Are Measures of Well-Being Philosophically Adequate?,” Philosophy of the Social Sciences , 47(3): 209–34.
• –––, 2017b, The Measurement of Wellbeing in Economics: Philosophical Explorations , Ph.D. Dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
• –––, 2017c, “Which Problem of Adaptation?,” Utilitas , 29(4): 474–92.
• van der Rijt, J.-W., 2013, “Public Policy and the Conditional Value of Happiness,” Economics and Philosophy , 29(3): 381–408.
• –––, 2015, “The Political Turn Towards Happiness,” Well-Being in Contemporary Society , J. H. Søraker, et al. (eds.), Cham: Springer, 215–31.
• Veenhoven, R., 1984, Conditions of Happiness , Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
• –––, 1997, “Advances in Understanding Happiness,” Revue Québécoise de Psychologie , 18: 29–79.
• –––, 2005, “Is Life Getting Better? How Long and Happily Do People Live in Modern Society?” European Psychologist , 10(4): 330–343.
• Velleman, J. D., 1991, “Well-Being and Time,” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly , 72(1): 48–77.
• Verhoef, A., 2018, “Paul Ricoeur: Philosophy, Theology and Happiness,” Stellenbosch Theological Journal , 4(2): 151–66.
• Vitrano, C., 2010, “The subjectivity of happiness,” Journal of Value Inquiry , 44(1): 47–54.
• –––, 2014, The Nature and Value of Happiness , Boulder: Westview Press.
• Višak, T., 2015, “Sacrifices of Self Are Prudential Harms: A Reply to Carbonell,” The Journal of Ethics , 19(2): 219–29.
• Vittersø, J., ed., 2016, Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being , Berlin: Springer.
• Von Wright, G. H., 1963, The Varieties of Goodness , London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Walker, M., 2011, “Happy-People-Pills for All,” International Journal of Wellbeing , 1(1): 1–22.
• Waterman, A. S., 1993, “Two Conceptions of Happiness: Contrasts of Personal Expressiveness (Eudaimonia) and Hedonic Enjoyment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 64(4): 678–691.
• –––, ed., 2013, The Best within Us: Positive Psychology Perspectives on Eudaimonia , Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Weijers, D., 2013, “Intuitive Biases in Judgments about Thought Experiments: The Experience Machine Revisited,” Philosophical Writings , 41(1): 17–31.
• –––, 2014, “Nozick’s experience machine is dead, long live the experience machine!,” Philosophical Psychology , 27(4): 513–535.
• White, M. D., 2013, “Can We—and Should We—Measure Well-Being?,” Review of Social Economy , 71(4): 526–33.
• White, M. P. and P. Dolan, 2009, “Accounting for the Richness of Daily Activities,” Psychological Science , 20(8): 1000–1008.
• White, N. P., 2006, A Brief History of Happiness , Oxford: Blackwell.
• Wierzbicka, A., 2004, “‘Happiness’ in cross-linguistic & cross-cultural perspective,” Daedalus , 133(2): 34–43.
• Williams, B., 1981, Moral Luck. Moral Luck , New York, Cambridge University Press: 20–39.
• Wilson, J., 1968, “Happiness,” Analysis , 29: 13–21.
• Wodak, D., 2019, “What If Well-Being Measurements Are Non-Linear?,” Australasian Journal of Philosophy , 97(1): 29–45.
• Wong, D. B., 2013, “On Learning What Happiness Is,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 81–101.
• Wren-Lewis, S, 2013, “Well-Being as a Primary Good: Towards Legitimate Well-Being Policy,” Philosophy & Public Policy Quarterly , 31(2): 2–9.
• –––, 2014, “How successfully can we measure well-being through measuring happiness?,” South African Journal of Philosophy , 33: 417–432.
• –––, 2019, The Happiness Problem: Expecting Better in an Uncertain World , Chicago, IL: Policy Press.
• Zamuner, E., 2013, “Happiness, Consciousness, and the Ontology of Mind,” Philosophical Topics , 41(1): 237–54.
• Zhang, E. Y., 2019, “Forgetfulness and Flow: ‘Happiness’ in Zhuangzi’s Daoism,” Science, Religion and Culture , 6(1): 77–84.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• World Database of Happiness , Erasmus University of Rotterdam.
• Positive Psychology Center , University of Pennsylvania.
• The Happiness and Well-Being Project , with Suggested Readings and links to Funded Research , Saint Louis University.

Aquinas, Thomas | Aristotle | Bentham, Jeremy | character, moral: empirical approaches | communitarianism | consequentialism | economics: philosophy of | emotion | ethics: ancient | ethics: virtue | hedonism | Kant, Immanuel | liberalism | Mill, John Stuart | moral psychology: empirical approaches | pain | paternalism | Plato | pleasure | well-being

Acknowledgments

For helpful comments, many thanks are due to Anna Alexandrova, Robert Biswas-Diener, Thomas Carson, Irwin Goldstein, Richard Lucas, Jason Raibley, Eric Schwitzgebel, Stephen Schueller, Adam Shriver, Edward Zalta, and an anonymous referee for the SEP. Portions of Section 2 are adapted from Haybron 2008, “Philosophy and the Science of Subjective Well-Being,” in Eid and Larsen, The Science of Subjective Well-Being , and used with kind permission of Guilford Press.

Copyright © 2020 by Dan Haybron < dan . haybron @ slu . edu >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Happiness — What Is Happiness

What is Happiness

• Categories: Happiness

About this sample

Words: 590 |

Published: Mar 13, 2024

Words: 590 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

• Expert in: Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

4 pages / 1862 words

2 pages / 860 words

2 pages / 863 words

5 pages / 2479 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Happiness

To be a successful person in life so that can generate happiness on the work you have accomplished in your life it requires some efforts. I will do this by determining what I want to achieve in my life. I will make no changes of [...]

Argo, J. J., White, K., & Dahl, D. W. (2006). Social comparison theory and deception in the interpersonal exchange of consumption information. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(1), 99-108.Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning [...]

Aristotle once said, "Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence." Indeed, happiness is a fundamental human emotion that we strive to achieve throughout our lives. However, [...]

Happiness is a complex and multifaceted concept that has been a subject of extensive debate and discussion throughout history. Some argue that happiness is determined by external factors such as wealth, success, and [...]

Happiness and money, both are an important role in human’s life. There is a question that many people will argue about the impact from them, which have more benefit to people, it also means which is more important for people [...]

Burgess, H. (2021). 5 ways to make the most of your holidays. Psychology Today. Retrieved from 396-408.

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Psychology of Happiness: A Summary of the Theory & Research

Little did I know the overwhelming depth of this topic! I found myself asking questions – can science explain happiness?

Can happiness be measured? What is happiness, anyway?

Arguably, a lot has been written on the topic of happiness , including on this website. The following provides an exploration of happiness, and, importantly, it provides you with links to further resources on this important topic.

Keep reading to discover a range of topics including the main theories of happiness, and a fascinating look at the neuroscience of happiness, as well as an interesting discussion on topics such as subjective wellbeing (the more scientific term for happiness), what positive psychology has to say about happiness, success and happiness, and more. Hopefully, it will answer some questions about happiness. Please enjoy!

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Happiness & Subjective Wellbeing Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients identify sources of authentic happiness and strategies to boost wellbeing.

This Article Contains:

A scientific explanation of happiness, a look at the theory and science of happiness, the psychology of happiness, happiness and positive psychology, interesting research and studies, the happiness research institute, the happiness professor, other well-known researchers, articles on success and happiness, 16 most important happiness articles, other recommended journal and scholarly articles (pdf), a take-home message.

What exactly do we mean when we talk about a scientific explanation of happiness? What, in fact, is the science of happiness?

Put very simply, the science of happiness looks at “ what makes happy people happy ” (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). If you think about it, the subjective nature of happiness makes it incredibly difficult to define and also challenging to measure (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

Let’s look into this further …

In the past

Happiness has been the topic of discussion and debate since the ancient Greek times. Hedonism has a long history (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Science has looked closely at happiness as ‘hedonically’ defined – or, in other words, happiness is the outcome of the pursuit of pleasure over pain (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Aristippus, a Greek philosopher from the 4th century BC claimed happiness was the sum of life’s ‘hedonic’ moments (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Hedonic enjoyment is a state whereby an individual feels relaxed, has a sense of distance from their problems and, can be said to feel ‘happy’ (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Since the days of Aristotle, happiness has been conceptualized as being composed of at least 2 aspects – hedonia (or, pleasure) and eudaimonia (a sense that life is well-lived) (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

In the present

What does science say about this? Well, research has shown that, whilst these two aspects are definitely distinct and that, in ‘happy’ people, both hedonic and eudaimonic components of happiness correspond (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

A study by Kesebir and Diener (2008) report that in happiness surveys , more than 80% of interviewees rated their overall ‘eudaimonic’ life satisfaction as “pretty to very happy” and, at the same time, 80% of people interviewed also rate their current, hedonic ‘mood’ as positive (e.g. giving a rating of 6-7 on a 10-point valence scale, where 5 is ‘hedonically neutral’).

Neuroscientists have made substantial progress into investigating the functional neuroanatomy of pleasure (which, according to Kringelbach and Berridge 2010, makes an important contribution to our experience of happiness and plays a key role in our sense of wellbeing).

Pleasure has, for many years in the discipline of psychology, been closely associated with happiness (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

According to Sigmund Freud (1930), people: ‘ strive after happiness; they want to become happy and to remain so. This endeavor has two sides, a positive and a negative aim. It aims, on the one hand, at an absence of pain and displeasure, and, on the other, at the experiencing of strong feelings of pleasure ’ (p. 76).

Kringelbach and Berridge (2010) argue that the neuroscience of both pleasure and happiness can be found by studying hedonic brain circuits. This is because, according to most modern perspectives, pleasure is an important component of happiness.

Does this provide the opportunity to ‘measure’ happiness, therefore providing a scientific explanation of happiness?

In fact, work of neuroscientists has found that pleasure is not merely a sensation, or thought, but rather an outcome of brain activity in dedicated ‘hedonic systems’ (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

All pleasures, from the most fundamental (food, sexual pleasure) right through to higher-order pleasures (e.g. monetary, medical, and altruistic pleasures) seem to involve the same brain systems (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

Some of the hedonic mechanisms are found deep within the brain (the nucleus accumbens, ventral pallidum, and brainstem) and others are located in the cortex (orbitofrontal, cingulate, medial prefrontal and insular cortices) (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

In the future

It can be said, then, that pleasure activated brain networks are widespread. Despite this exciting finding – a brain network for happiness – Kringelbach and Berridge (2010) say that further research is needed to fully comprehend the functional neuroanatomy of happiness.

As well as the findings from neuroscience supporting an anatomical basis to happiness, another component of a scientific explanation of happiness is the issue of measurement.

Can happiness be measured?

Some individuals argue that maybe happiness should not be the subject of scientific explanation because it is impossible to objectively measure it (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Perhaps, though, as argued by Ed Diener, happiness is subjective. According to Ed Diener, people are happy if they think they are, and each person is the best judge of whether they are, in fact, happy or not (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

He introduced a term to describe this ‘measure’ of happiness: Subjective wellbeing .

Having the measure of subjective wellbeing makes a scientific explanation of happiness possible… by asking questions such as:

• Are you happy?
• How would you rate your happiness on a scale of 1 – 10

Controlled experiments can be devised to determine what can be done to raise/lower these responses.

The Experience Sampling Method (ESM) has been valuable in the assessment of subjective wellbeing. It has been a positive development in the science of happiness.

ESM provides an overall indication of wellbeing over time, based on the total balance of measurement of positive and negative affect at different times (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Diener provided evidence that subjective wellbeing has “construct validity” meaning that, yes, it is measuring something ‘real’! This is because Diener showed that subjective wellbeing is constant over time, is highly correlated with some personality traits and has the capacity to predict future outcomes.

Diener and colleagues suggest that it is possible to measure happiness using valid, reliable methods including using instruments, looking at observable indicators of happiness such as smiling behavior, and objective reports from one’s friends and family (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Nevertheless, many critics have opposed the concept of subjective wellbeing, including psychologist Michael Argyle (2001). Argyle states

“the main weakness of subjective measure is that they are affected by cognitive biases such as the effects of expectation and adaptation so that we don’t know how far to believe the scores”

However, other researchers have developed several well-validated scales for measuring happiness, supporting its’ validity as a scientific construct.

The Steen Happiness Index (Seligman, Steen, Park & Peterson, 2005)

Consists of twenty items. Participants read a series of statements and select the one that best describes how they are at the present time. Items indicate three kinds of ‘happy life’ – the pleasant life, the engaged life, and the meaningful life.

These dimensions will be explored closely very soon!

Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999)

Consists of four items to assess global subjective happiness. The participants read four statements, including ‘In general, I consider myself…’ and the individual then selects an item from 1 to 7 from, for example, ‘not a very happy person’ to ‘a very happy person’.

Test-retest and self-peer correlations have suggested good to excellent reliability, and construct validation studies of convergent and discriminant validity have confirmed the use of this scale to measure the construct of subjective happiness.

Happiness Scale (Fordyce, 1977)

This scale is also referred to as the Emotion Questionnaire as it assesses emotional wellbeing as an indication of perceived happiness. It is comprised of two items. The first is a scale measuring happiness/unhappiness by participants ranking descriptive phrases on a 0 – 10 scale.

The other item making up the test requires participants to give an approximate percentage of time that he/she feels happy, unhappy and neutral. The test has shown to have adequate reliability and validity.

Therefore, evidence from neuroscience, paired with evidence from the measurement of subjective wellbeing, or, happiness, suggest that a scientific explanation of happiness is, in fact, possible.

It is overwhelming to consider what happiness is… where to begin?! Happiness has been the topic of discussion and debate since the ancient Greek times.

In 1973, ‘Psychology Abstracts International’ began listing happiness as an index term (Diener, 1984). However, because happiness is a term that is used widely and frequently, it has various meanings and connotations (Diener, 1984).

The construct of happiness is still evolving, and although challenging to define, it is a construct that can be empirically evaluated through qualitative and quantitative assessment (Delle Fave, Brdar, Freire, Vella-Brodrick & Wissing, 2011). Delle Fave and colleagues (2011) noted that happiness is also an ambiguous term which can have a number of meanings:

• A transient emotion (that is synonymous with joy)
• An experience of fulfillment and accomplishment (characterized by a cognitive evaluation)
• A long-term process of meaning-making and identity development through achieving one’s potential and the pursuit of subjectively relevant goals.

Historically, since the days of Aristotle, happiness has been conceptualized as being composed of at least 2 aspects – hedonia (or, pleasure) and eudaimonia (a sense that a life is well-lived) (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

Research has shown that, whilst these two aspects are definitely distinct, that in ‘happy’ people, both hedonic and eudaimonic components of happiness correspond (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2010).

A study by Kesebir and Diener (2008) report that in happiness surveys, more than 80% of interviewees rated their overall ‘eudaimonic’ life satisfaction as “pretty to very happy” and, at the same time, 80% of the people interviewed also rate their current, hedonic ‘mood’ as positive (e.g. giving a rating of 6-7 on a 10-point valence scale, where 5 is ‘hedonically neutral’).

Moving forward into the modern era, there is some agreement about the aspects that make up theories of happiness. There are, according to Haybron (2003), when looking at theories of happiness, 3 basic views:

• Hedonism – in other words, to be happy is to experience, on the whole, a majority of pleasure. Hedonia.
• Life-satisfaction view – to be happy is to have a favorable attitude about one’s life as a whole, either over its entirety or just over a limited period of time. Eudaimonia.
• Affective state theory – that happiness depends on an individual’s overall emotional state.

Other theories of happiness are so-called ‘hybrid’ theories that combine the life satisfaction theory with other hedonistic or affective-state theories (Haybron, 2003). One of these hybrid theories is the one that is the most widely accepted theory of happiness: subjective wellbeing (Haybron, 2003). Subjective wellbeing is considered to be a more scientific term than happiness.

A closer look at hedonia

Hedonism has a long history (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Science has looked closely at happiness as ‘hedonically’ defined – or, in other words, the pursuit of pleasure over pain (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Aristippus, a Greek philosopher from the 4th century BC claimed happiness was the sum of life’s ‘hedonic’ moments (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Hedonic enjoyment is a state whereby an individual feels relaxed, has a sense of distance from their problems and, can be said to feel ‘happy’ (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Hedonia refers, in simple terms, to the pursuit of pleasure. It was argued by Hobbes that happiness is found in the successful pursuit of our human appetites, and DeSade went on to say that the pursuit of sensation and pleasure is the ultimate goal of life (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

The Utilitarian philosophers, including Bentham, put forth the argument that a good society is one which is developed out of individuals attempting to maximize pleasure and pursue self-interest (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

It should be clarified that hedonia, in respects to happiness, does not have the same meaning as physical hedonism: happiness can come not only from short-term pleasure, but can also arise from achieving goals or other valued outcomes (Ryan & Deci, 2001). So-called hedonic psychologists are of the belief that happiness can include the preferences and pleasures of the mind, as well as the body (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Kahneman (1999) defined hedonic psychology as the study of “what makes experiences and life pleasant and unpleasant” (p. ix). Within the framework of hedonic psychology, the terms wellbeing and hedonism are used interchangeably (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Hedonic psychology explains wellbeing in terms of pleasure versus pain, and it, therefore, becomes the center of much research and also interventions that principally aim to enhance human happiness (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Hedonic psychology has been a focus of the theory of happiness, in part, due to the links between hedonia and other dominant theories. For example, hedonia ties in with behavioral theories of reward and punishment, as well as theories that focus on the cognitive expectations of the outcomes of reward and punishment (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Despite there being a variety of ways to consider the human experience of pleasure/pain, the majority of research in hedonic psychology looks into the assessment of subjective wellbeing. To introduce the term, briefly, subjective wellbeing (or ‘happiness’) consists of three components (Ryan & Deci, 2001):

• Life satisfaction
• The presence of a positive mood
• The absence of a negative mood

Elsewhere in this website, you can read more about eudaimonia and the Aristotelian view of happiness . For the purpose of exploring theories of happiness, I will briefly look at eudaimonia now:

What is eudaimonia? (The life satisfaction view of happiness)

Aristotle argued that, because of man’s unique capacity to reason, pleasure alone cannot achieve happiness – because animals are driven to seek pleasure, and man has greater capacity than animals (The Pursuit of Happiness, 2018).

In striving for happiness, the most important factor is for a person to have ‘complete virtue’ – in other words, to have good moral character (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018).

Eudaimonia was, according to Aristotle, “activity expressing virtue” that will therefore lead to a happy life. Aristotle proposed that happiness was neither virtue, or pleasure, but rather the exercise of virtue.

The argument taken by the Aristotelian view is that happiness, per se, is not the principal criterion of wellbeing (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Proponents of this view see wellbeing as achieved by people living in accordance with the ‘daimon’ (true self). (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Eudaimonic theories of happiness argue that rather than the pursuit of pleasure, happiness is the result of the development of individual strengths and virtues (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

The theory of eudaimonic happiness has its basis in the concept of the self-actualising individual (proposed by Maslow ) and the concept of the ‘fully functioning person’ (Rogers) (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). Many modern scientific explanations of happiness are conducive with the theory of eudaimonic happiness.

For example, Waterman suggested that happiness is enhanced by people acting in accordance with their most deeply held values (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). Waterman also introduced the term ‘personal expressiveness’ to describe the state of authenticity that occurs when people’s activities reflect their values.

The eudaimonic theory of happiness adopts the Self-Determination Theory to conceptualize happiness (Deci & Ryan, 2000). This theory argues that fulfillment in the areas of autonomy and competence will enhance happiness. In other words, this view suggests that subjective wellbeing (i.e. happiness) can be achieved through engaging in eudaimonic pursuits (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Affective state theory

To recap, this theory of happiness proposes that happiness is the result of one’s overall emotional state. Bradburn (1969) put forward the argument that happiness is made up of two separate components that are quite independent and uncorrelated: positive affect and negative affect. According to Bradburn, happiness is a global judgment people make by comparing their negative affect and positive affect (Diener, 1984).

This led to the development of the Affect Balance Scale (Diener, 1984). The Bradburn Affect Balance Scale is a self-report measure of the quality of life. The scale is made up of descriptions of ten mood states (for example, item one is feeling “particularly excited or interested in something”), and the subject reflects upon whether they have been in that mood state during the last week.

A measure of the quality of life, as an indication of happiness, is derived by the sum of the ‘negative’ items are taken away from the sum of the ‘positive’ items (Diener, 1984).

Affect state theory also takes the view that the absence of negative affect is not the same thing as the presence of positive affect (Diener, 1984).

Theories developed by positive psychologists

The discipline of positive psychology has developed some unique theories of happiness. For example, Seligman (2002) introduced the Authentic Happiness theory. This theory is based around the notion that authentic happiness results from a person living according to their ‘signature strengths’ which develop as people become aware of their own personal strengths and take ownership of them (Seligman, 2002).

Another theory of happiness is Csikszentmihalyi’s ‘flow’ theory. Flow may be defined as “ the state of engagement, optimal happiness, and peak experience that occurs when an individual is absorbed in a demanding and intrinsically motivating challenge ” (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008, p. 395). This state of engagement has been proposed to be a pathway to happiness (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Some psychologists suggest that perhaps, in fact, happiness is relative – or, in other words, it is an evaluation of subjective judgments about one’s situations, comparing others’ situations to one’s own or even one’s earlier situations, goals or aspirations (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). This argument has, however, been refuted.

Veenhoven explains that comparison may affect the cognitive or life-satisfaction aspects of happiness, but that the affective component results from hedonic experience (meeting one’s fundamental needs) and is therefore quite separate of any comparisons (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

To summarise these related topics – the scientific explanation of happiness and the theory and science of happiness – there are a number of theories conceptualizing happiness and in keeping with these theories, the term can have slightly different meanings.

Download 3 Free Happiness Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will equip you or your clients with tools to discover authentic happiness and cultivate subjective well-being.

Download 3 Free Happiness Tools Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Way back in 1929, Walter A. Pitkin wrote ‘ The Psychology of Happiness ’ and in this book, he differentiated between happiness and related emotions including pleasure and enjoyment (Samuel, 2019). He argued that achieving happiness was not merely the result of luck or chance. Since this time, psychologists have continued to try and define happiness.

According to psychology, happiness is about more than simply the experience of a positive mood. In order to describe happiness, psychologists commonly refer to subjective wellbeing (Kesebir & Diener, 2008). In other words, happiness is “ people’s evaluations of their lives and encompasses both cognitive judgments of satisfaction and affective appraisals of moods and emotions ” (Kesebir & Diener, 2008, p. 118).

The psychological inquiry into happiness is important because happiness is not only associated with improved physical health and even longevity, but it is also a priority for people – across the world, happiness has been rated as being more important than other desirable outcomes including living a meaningful life or making a lot of money (Psychology Today, 2019).

There are three ways that psychologists study happiness:

1. Need and goal satisfaction theories

These theories suggest that happiness results from striving to achieve appropriate goals and meeting one’s fundamental human needs (Nelson, Kurtz & Lyubomirsky, in press). Deci and Ryan (2000) for example, proposed Self-determination Theory, which stipulates that wellbeing is achieved when one meets their basic human needs including autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

2. Genetic and personality predisposition theories

These propose that wellbeing is influenced by genes, and is associated with the personality traits of extraversion and neuroticism (Nelson et al., in press). This, in turn, implies that wellbeing does not change much over time.

3. Process/activity theories

Process/activity theories argue that wellbeing may be improved by participating in activities that are engaging and require effort (Nelson et al., in press).

Psychologists ask the question, ‘is it possible to increase one’s happiness?’. Some psychologists claim that making an attempt to enhance happiness is pointless because happiness levels are predetermined and stable over time (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Consistent with this argument is the happiness set point. The happiness set point argues that a person’s state of happiness will be constant over time, regardless of changes in circumstances (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Adapting to environmental changes is termed ‘the hedonic treadmill ’ or ‘homeostatic control’ (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). This notion of adaptation (leading to relatively stable levels of happiness) is supported by findings in research that individuals who may be high in either positive or negative affect (e.g. lottery winners, paralysis victims) demonstrate that their happiness levels revert to their ‘usual’ range after a period of time (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Some psychologists argue that the happiness set point provides evidence that happiness cannot be enhanced (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). There is a perspective taken by some psychologists that happiness is a ‘trait’ or a personal disposition to experience a certain affect.

This perspective suggests that happiness is relatively stable over time, and therefore efforts to increase happiness are futile (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008). However, research has shown that although subjective wellbeing may be associated with personality traits (e.g. extraversion), that differences in reports of happiness levels over time suggest that, in fact, happiness is not a trait (Norrish & Vella-Brodrick, 2008).

Thus, happiness has been an important area of focus for psychologists. What, then, about the more recent science of happiness…positive psychology?

Positive psychology can be described as a psychology of potential, and what ‘could be’ as compared to what ‘is’ (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). It aims to shift what has historically been the predominant focus of psychology – pathology – to examining the development of positive qualities in individuals and communities (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).

In other words, Positive Psychology aims to understand and cultivate the factors that put individuals, communities, and societies in a position where they are able to ‘flourish’ (Fredrickson, 2001).

What does it mean to ‘flourish’? Put simply, it is a state of optimal wellbeing (Fredrickson, 2001). Fredrickson (2001) asked the question “ What role do positive emotions play in positive psychology? ”

Well, as it turns out, happiness can be thought of as experiencing predominantly positive emotions , or affective states, rather than negative ones (Tkach & Lyubomirsky, 2006). Thus, positive emotions are a sign of flourishing, or, in other words, happiness (Fredrickson, 2001). Happiness is central to the assumptions of positive psychology.

Seligman (2011) described the PERMA model of flourishing. This model defines psychological wellbeing in terms of 5 domains:

• P ositive emotions
• E ngagement
• R elationships
• A ccomplishment

For more detail on flourishing and how to achieve it, check out our article on Seligman’s PERMA+ model .

Let’s look at some interesting happiness research! In a large random-assignment experiment, Seligman and colleagues (2005) operationalized then evaluated 5 different happiness interventions.

They found that two of the interventions – writing about three good things the person had experienced each day and why they occurred, and using ‘signature strengths’ in a novel way – made people happier, and less depressed up to six months later! Compared to participants who engaged in the intervention, those in the placebo control group returned to the baseline levels of happiness and depression symptoms after just one week!

Lyubomirsky and colleagues (2006) conducted three studies examining the effects of writing, talking and thinking about significant life events – ‘triumphs and defeats’. While the majority of psychological research has focused on the way in which negative life circumstances are processed and managed, this unique study looked at the processing a positive life experience (Lyubomirsky, Sousa & Dickerhoof, 2006). This aspect of the study involved participants reflecting on their happiest day.

The researchers found that when participants thought while ‘replaying’ their happiest moment, it resulted in enhanced personal growth, improvements in general health and physical functioning, as well as lower pain levels, compared to the outcomes if the person was writing while analyzing their happiest moments.

The findings of the study suggest that people should be advised against over-analyzing or trying to make sense of a happy experience. Rather, Lyubomirsky and associates suggest that individuals should feel content in reliving and savoring happy experiences rather than trying to understand their meanings or causes.

Even though the experience of happiness is related to greater wellbeing and psychological health, in fact, some studies have shown that the desire to feel happy in an extreme form, or even simply placing a high value on happiness, can be detrimental in terms of wellbeing. In fact, in a research study by Ford and colleagues (2014), it was found that the emphasis placed upon attaining happiness can present a risk factor for symptoms and even a diagnosis of depression.

In a study of 181 participants, Sheldon et al. (2010) conducted a 6-month longitudinal experiment that sought to increase the happiness levels of those in the ‘treatment’ condition. The treatment group set goals to increase their feelings of autonomy, competence or relatedness in life while the comparison group set out to improve their life experiences.

In fact, it was found that those individuals in the treatment group had sustained increases in happiness (Sheldon et al., 2010). However, this gain lasted only while the individuals were actively engaged with the goals.

Interestingly, those who initially had a positive attitude towards change in happiness experienced greater benefits from the treatment! (Sheldon et al., 2010).

What, do you ask, is the Happiness Research Institute ? Well, it is an independent ‘think tank’ developed to investigate the reasons that some societies are happier than others.

The Happiness Research Institute aims to provide relevant parties with up-to-date information about the origins and effects of happiness, as well as to draw attention to subjective wellbeing as an important area for public policy debate. Furthermore, the Institute aims to improve the quality of life of all people.

The Happiness Research Institute provides knowledge, consultancy, and presentations. An example of the knowledge-building activities carried out by the Institute was that, in 2018, the Happiness Research Institute, in conjunction with the Nordic Council of Ministers compiled a study that was called ‘In the shadow of happiness’.

The study examined the reasons why some people living in Nordic countries are happy whilst others are suffering or struggling. The research also involved an analysis of why some groups within this cluster are struggling more often, and the impact this has on society.

In terms of consultancy, the Happiness Research Institute has also worked with groups including the Danish government, the Minister of State for Happiness in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the city of Goyang in South Korea. The aim of these partnerships is to improve quality of life and wellbeing of citizens.

Presentations by the Happiness Research Institute have taken place globally and featured at more than 1000 international events to share knowledge about what drives happiness, wellbeing, and quality of life.

The Happiness Research Institute analyses the somewhat separate components of the different cognitive, affective and eudaimonic dimensions of happiness, wellbeing and quality of life in order to explore these complex concepts. As previously explained, the cognitive dimension refers to the appraisal of overall life satisfaction, while the affective dimension focuses on the emotions that people experience on a daily basis.

Finally, the eudaimonic dimension looks at Aristotle’s perception of the ‘good life’ and is centered on purpose and meaning.

The reason that the Happiness Research Institute measures happiness is in order to shift policy priorities and therefore try and improve quality of life in societies, that will facilitate, in turn, the achievement of goals such as longevity and productivity. The Institute focuses not on the factors that cannot be changed (i.e. genetics, biology) but rather policies (that can be changed over time) and behavior (that can be changed immediately).

By examining the policies related to overall life satisfaction (i.e. the cognitive dimension of happiness) the Happiness Research Institute can explain 75% of the variance between more than 150 countries which were included in the 2018 World Happiness Report. The Institute also hopes to highlight the overlooked dimension of inequality in wellbeing, and increase the awareness and understanding of this inequality. The Happiness Research Institute is accessible via Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, and Meik Wiking is the CEO.

Professor Paul Dolan was coined ‘the happiness professor’ in The Telegraph in July, 2018. Professor Dolan is the Professor of Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He is a leading expert in the fields of human behaviour and happiness.

Prof Dolan wrote the best-selling book , Happiness by Design and, more recently, Happy Ever After . His work is centred around two themes:

• The development of measures of happiness and subjective wellbeing that can then be used in policy, and by individuals who are looking to be happier.
• Utilising work from behavioural science that can be used to understand and change individual behaviour, and contribute more to this evidence base.

What would positive psychology be without its founding fathers , and other famous contributors?

Martin Seligman:

Dr. Seligman was born in 1942, and is credited as being the ‘father of Positive Psychology’ (The Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). Seligman suggests that there are three kinds of happiness:

• Pleasure and gratification
• Embodiment of strengths and virtues
• Meaning and purpose

One can remember that, as discussed earlier, happiness – or, subjective wellbeing – had three similar, distinct components like Seligman suggested. In his book , Authentic Happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment , Seligman (2002) says:

‘[Positive Psychology] takes you through the countryside of pleasure and gratification, up into the high country of strength and virtue, and finally to the peaks of lasting fulfillment: meaning and purpose’

Seligman also wrote a book titled Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life . He is an acclaimed author, and psychologist, also known for his work on ‘learned helplessness’ which has been popular within the discipline of psychology.

Michael W. Fordyce

Fordyce (December 14, 1944 – January 24, 2011) was a pioneer in the subject of happiness research (Friedman, 2013). In 1977, in the journal Social Indicators Research, the Fordyce Happiness Scale was published. In his multitude of research, Fordyce demonstrated that happiness can be measured statistically, and that also, by engaging in ‘volitional behavior’, happiness can also be deliberately increased (Friedman, 2013).

Diener was born in 1946, and is also known as ‘Dr. Happiness’ (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). He is a leading researcher in the field of positive psychology. Diener is perhaps best known for coming up with the term “subjective wellbeing”, which is the component of happiness that can be empirically measured (Pursuit of Happiness, 2018). Diener believes that happiness has a strong genetic component, and thus is relatively stable. He also developed the Satisfaction with Life Scale.

Sonja Lyubomirsky

Lyubomirsky is a research psychologist who writes the Psychology Today blog titled ‘ The How of Happiness ’ (Sonja Lyubomirsky, 2019). She is a professor and vice chair at the University of California, Riverside. Lyubomirsky is the author of two books : The How of Happiness , and The Myths of Happiness .

Daniel Gilbert

Gilbert, a social psychologist, is also referred to as Professor Happiness at Harvard University (Dreifus, 2008). He is in charge of a laboratory that has been set up to investigate the nature of happiness. Gilbert’s main work centres around the fact that relationships with family and friends, and that the time spent investing in these social relationships contribute more to happiness than material possessions (Dreifus, 2008).

He suggests that more pleasure can be found in experiences, rather than goods or objects – perhaps, he argues, because experiences can be shared with others whereas possessions are generally not shared (Dreifus, 2008).

The psychology of happiness – WOBI

Research has suggested that there might be a causal relationship between positive affect and success … that not only does success bring happiness but, interestingly, that a happy person is more likely to achieve success (Psychology of Happiness, 2019). These three articles provide an account of success and happiness:

• Boehm, J. K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). Does happiness promote career success? Journal of Career Assessment, 16 , 101–116.
• Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131 , 803–855.
• Uusiautti, S. (2013). On the positive connection between success and happiness. International Journal of Research Studies in Psychology , 1–12.

[Reviewer’s update:

Since this post was originally published, additional research has come out suggesting that the original theory at the heart of Uusiautti’s (2013) research doesn’t seem to hold true. As a replacement, you may want to check out the article by Okabe-Miyamoto et al. (2021), who recently found that increasing the variety of experiences to escape the hedonic treadmill may actually result in smaller boosts in wellbeing – not larger ones.]

In recent times, a wealth of research has been published into the topic of happiness, such as:

• Diener, E., Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Shigehiro, O. (2017). Findings all psychologists should know from the new science on subjective well-being. Canadian Psychologist, 58 , 87 – 104
• Oerlemans, W. G. M., & Bakker, A. B. (2018). Motivating job characteristics and happiness at work: A multilevel perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103 , 1230 – 1241.
• Kaufman, M., Goetz, T., Lipnevich, A. A., & Pekrun, R. (2018). Do positive illusions of control foster happiness? Emotion, September 20, no pagination specified .
• Hoffman, J., Gander, F., & Ruch, W. (2018). Exploring differences in well-being across occupation type and skill. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 4 , 290 – 303.
• Piff, P. K., & Moskowitz, J. P. (2018). Wealth, poverty, and happiness: Social class is differentially associated with positive emotions. Emotion, 18 , 902 – 905.
• McGuirk, L., Kuppens, P., Kingston, R., & Bastian, B. (2018). Does a culture of happiness increase rumination over failure? Emotion, 18 , 755 – 764.
• Warr, P. (2018). Self-employment, personal values, and varieties of happiness-unhappiness. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 23 , 388 – 401.
• Liao, K Y-H, & Weng, C-Y. (2018). Gratefulness and subjective well-being: Social connectedness and presence of meaning as mediators. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65 , 383 – 393.
• Blanke, E. S., Riediger, M., & Brose, A. (2018). Pathways to happiness are multidirectional: Association between state mindfulness and everyday affective experience. Emotion, 18 , 202 – 211.
• Fuochi, G., Veneziani, C. A., & Voci, A. (2018). Differences in the way to conceive happiness relate to different reactions to negative events. Journal of Individual Differences, 39 , 27 – 38.
• Weber, S., & Hagmayer, Y. (2018). Thinking about the Joneses? Decreasing rumination about social comparison increases well-being. European Journal of Health Psychology, 25 , 83 – 95.
• Felsman, P., Verduyn, P., Ayduk, O., & Kross, E. (2017). Being present: Focusing on the present predicts improvements in life satisfaction but not happiness. Emotion, 17 , 1047 – 1051.
• Tamir, M., Schwartz, S. H., Oishi, S., & Kim, M. Y. (2017). The secret to happiness: Feeling good or feeling right? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146 , 1448 – 1459.
• Phillips, J., De Freitas, J., Mott, C., Gruber, J., & Knobe, J. (2017). True happiness: The role of morality in the folk concept of happiness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 165 – 181.
• Chopik, W. J., & O’Brien, E. (2017). Happy you, healthy me? Having a happy partner is independently associated with better health in oneself. Health Psychology, 36 , 21 – 30.
• Gross-Manos, D., & Ben-Arieh, A. (2017). How subjective well-being is associated with material deprivation and social exclusion on Israeli 12-year-olds. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 87 , 274 – 290.

17 Exercises To Increase Happiness and Wellbeing

Add these 17 Happiness & Subjective Well-Being Exercises [PDF] to your toolkit and help others experience greater purpose, meaning, and positive emotions.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

Follow the links below to some intriguing research in PDF form!

• How Do Simple Positive Activities Increase Well-Being? – Sonja Lyubomirsky, Kristin Layous (Access here )
• The How, Why, What, When and Who of Happiness: Mechanisms Underlying the Success of Positive Activity Interventions – Kristin Layous & Sonja Lyubomirsky (Access here )
• Variety is the Spice of Happiness: The Hedonic Adaptation Prevention (HAP) Model – Kennon M. Sheldon, Julia Boehm, Sonja Lyubomirsky (Access here )
• Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change – Lyubomirsky, S, Sheldon, K M, Schkade, D (Access here )
• A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation – Lyubomirsky, S, Lepper, HS (Access here )
• Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? – Richard A. Easterlin (Access here )
• Lottery Winners and Accident Victims: Is Happiness Relative? – Philip Brickman, Dan Coates, Ronnie Janoff-Bulman (Access here )

This article provides a snapshot of a huge topic which is, in fact, the overarching focus of positive psychology: happiness. It has been shown that subjective wellbeing is the closest thing to a scientific equivalent to happiness, which can be measured. The main feature of this article is that it has provided a range of resources which you can refer to in the future, including 16 key papers published in the last two years.

So, happiness… an elusive phenomenon, which we all seem to strive for. Hopefully this article has provided an overview of what is, undoubtedly, a very important issue. We all strive to be happier.

What is your understanding of happiness? What do you think makes happy people happy? Do you think that happiness can be measured, or, like some argue, do you think it is purely subjective?

What do you think about the recent articles shared? Please feel free to discuss this interesting topic further! I hope you have claimed some important take-home messages on happiness. Thanks for reading!

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Happiness Exercises for free .

• Argyle, M. (2001). The Psychology of Happiness . Routledge.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behaviour. Psychological Inquiry, 11 , 227 – 268.
• Delle Fave, A., Brdar, I., Freire, T., Vella-Brodrick, D., & Wissing, M. P. (2011). The eudaimonic and hedonic components of happiness: Qualitative & quantitative findings. Social Indicators Research, 100 , 185 – 207.
• Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95 , 542 – 575.
• Dreifus, C. (2008). The smiling professor. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/science/22conv.html
• Ford, B. Q., Shallcross, A. J., Mauss, I. B., Floerke, V. A., & Gruber, J. (2014). Desperately seeking happiness: Valuing happiness is associated with symptoms and diagnosis of depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 33 , 890 – 905.
• Fordyce, M. W. (1977). Development of a program to increase personal happiness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24 , 511 – 521.
• Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology. American Psychologist, 56 , 218 – 226
• Freud, S., & Riviere, J. (1930). Civilization and Its Discontents . New York: J Cape & H Smith.
• Friedman, H. L. (2013). The legacy of a pioneering happiness researcher: Michael W. Fordyce (Dec 14, 1944 – Jan 24, 2011). Journal of Happiness Studies, 14 , 363 – 366
• Happiness (2019). In Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/basics/happiness
• Haybron, D. M. (2003). What do we want from a theory of happiness? Metaphilosophy, 34 , 305 – 329
• Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective happiness. In Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwartz (Eds). USA: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Kesebir, P., & Diener, E. (2008). In pursuit of happiness: Empirical answers to philosophical questions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3 , 117 – 125.
• Kringelbach, M. L., & Berridge, K. C. (2010). The Neuroscience of Happiness and Pleasure. Social Research (New York) , 77, 659 – 678.
• Lyubomirsky, S. (2019). Sonja Lyubomirsky. Retrieved from http://www.sonjalyubomirsky.com/
• Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective well-being: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46 , 137 – 155.
• Lyubomirsky, S., Sousa, L., & Dickerhoof, R. (2006). The costs and benefits of writing, talking, and thinking about life’s triumphs and defeats. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 90, 692 – 708.
• Nelson, S. K., Kurtzy, J. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (in press). What psychological science knows about happiness . In S. J. Lynn, W. O’Donohue & S. Lilienfeld (Eds.) Better, stronger, wiser: Psychological science and well-being. New York: Sage
• Norrish, J. M., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2008). Is the study of happiness a worthy scientific pursuit? Social Indicators Research, 87 , 393 – 407.
• Okabe-Miyamoto, K., Margolis, S., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2021). Is variety the spice of happiness? More variety is associated with lower efficacy of positive activity interventions in a sample of over 200,000 happiness seekers.  The Journal of Positive Psychology.
• Psychology of Happiness (2019). Psychologist World. Retrieved from https://www.psychologistworld.com/emotion/psychology-of-happiness-positive-affect
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52 , 141 – 166.
• Samuel, L. R. (2019). The Psychology of Happiness (Circa 1929). Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/psychology-yesterday/201901/the-psychology-happiness-circa-1929
• Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic Happiness: Using the new Positive Psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment . New York, NY: Free Press.
• Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish . New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
• Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive Psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55 , 5 – 14.
• Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60 , 410 – 421
• 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 , 39 – 48.
• The Pursuit of Happiness (2019). Retrieved from https://www.pursuit-of-happiness.org
• Tkach, C., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How do people pursue happiness? Relating personality, happiness-increasing strategies and well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7 , 183 – 225.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

I am impressed by the organization of ideas and materials on happiness. I would be interested to get more materials on happiness if you can supply me, with or refer me to some articles or books.

Hi Mohammad,

Thank you for your kind words and interest in learning more about happiness. I’m glad to hear that you found our resources helpful.

In addition to the article you mentioned, we have a wealth of resources on the psychology of happiness. Here are some additional articles that you may find useful:

– “ The Science of Gratitude: How It Improves Your Health and Happiness “: This article explores the benefits of practicing gratitude, including improved relationships, better physical health, and increased happiness. It also includes practical tips for cultivating gratitude in your daily life. – “ The Power of Positive Self-Talk: How It Can Improve Your Mental Health “: This article explores the benefits of positive self-talk, including increased self-esteem and reduced anxiety. It also provides practical tips for cultivating positive self-talk.

And here are some additional book recommendations on happiness: – “ The How of Happiness: A Scientific Approach to Getting the Life You Want ” by Sonja Lyubomirsky: This book is based on years of scientific research on the psychology of happiness and provides evidence-based strategies for increasing happiness and life satisfaction. – “ Stumbling on Happiness ” by Daniel Gilbert: This book explores the science of happiness and why humans often struggle to predict what will make them happy. Gilbert provides insight into the psychological processes that influence our happiness and offers practical tips for living a more fulfilling life.

Hope this helps! Kind regards, Julia | Community Manager

Were you happy while typing this article? How did you feel throughout the entire writing process?

in precise… PHENOMENAL SNAPSHOT.

Thank you for the snapshot on the concepts and theories of happiness . It is really helpful for my thesis writing.

Nice article, but incomplete . You should have discusses ed neurobiochemistry. How dopamine , endorphins serotonin & oxytocin are invested by nature in happiness circuitry. How have we evolved to incorporate release of these chemicals through daily activities

Thank you for this article. I’m sure that it’ll help me to defining happiness in my research.

This article is a really informative overview of Happiness, the subject that I believe is the most important driver of life advancement. Focusing on happiness and its pursuit as a positive discipline instead of focusing on ailments and pathologies that need to be “treated” or “cured” to find some happiness is the best approach. I recently published my book, “America, The Happy” addressing the pursuit happiness and its role in American life. I would have liked to have found this piece earlier, but I’ll reference it in my next one. Very good work.

Thank you so much for this overview it’s contributing greatly to my research into happiness.

A Happiness ‘Recipe’ In its rudiments a neuro-anatomy of happiness maps positive affective states of attentive arousal and pleasure to neurological processes, respectively the activity of dopamine and opioid systems. These systems can be hijacked by addictive drugs, but I submit that they can also be conjointly activated by simple cognitive protocols detailed below. This is achieved through opioid/dopamine interactions induced from concurrent contingencies that induce relaxation and attentive arousal. This simple, innocuous, and easily falsifiable procedure is in short a ‘recipe’ for happiness that conforms with commonplace notions that happiness is coextensive with a committed and meaningful life. My work is largely based on the latest iteration of incentive or discrepancy-based models of motivation representative of the work of Dr. Kent Berridge of the University of Michigan. Berridge is a renowned bio-behaviorist and neuroscientist who has contributed significantly to the neuroscience of happiness (see link below) and was kind to vet and endorse the little book I have linked below. My explanation and argument are tiered into three parts, for a lay audience (pp.7-52), an expanded academic version (pp.53-86), and a formal journal article published on the topic in the International Journal of Stress Management. The procedure is a variant of mindfulness practice but entails a new definition of mindfulness based on affective neuroscience. Still, all is moot if the procedure is ineffective. A brief summary of my argument In discrepancy models of motivation (or bio-behaviorism), affect is schedule dependent. VR (variable-ratio) schedules of reinforcement or reward (gaming, gambling, creative behavior) are characterized by moment to moment positive act-outcome discrepancy or uncertainty between what is expected and what actually happens, which parallels the release of the neuro-modulator dopamine that is felt a state of attentive arousal, but not pleasure. However, heightened pleasurable affect as well as heightened attentive arousal is also reported while performing under VR schedules, but only when the musculature is in a state of inactivity or relaxation. Relaxation induces the activity of mid-brain opioid systems and is felt as pleasure. Because dopamine and opioid systems can co-activate each other, concurrent contingencies which induce relaxation (mindfulness protocols) and attentive arousal (purposive or meaningful behavior) will result in a significant spike in affective tone as both dopaminergic and opioid activity will be much higher due to their synergistic effects. The procedure to do this, outlined on pp. 47-52, has several important characteristics. Behavior Analytic- no appeal to events outside of objective behavior. Simple – explained in five minutes, and refutable as quickly. Cognitive Behavioral – coheres to CBT principles, and is structured, brief, and rational. Also, as a layman (though academically trained in behavioral psychology, I am an executive for a tech company in New Orleans), I am most curious to see if this procedure is effective. Formal test is not at first necessary, but informal exposure is since the procedure is simple in aspect but possibly very useful in practice. (But again, I may be wrong!) https://www.scribd.com/doc/284056765/The-Book-of-Rest-The-Odd-Psychology-of-Doing-Nothing https://www.scribd.com/doc/121345732/Relaxation-and-Muscular-Tension-A-bio-behavioristic-explanation Berridge, Kringelbach article on the neuro-anatomy of happiness https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3008353/ And Holmes’ Article on Meditation and Rest from ‘The American Psychologist’ https://www.scribd.com/document/291558160/Holmes-Meditation-and-Rest-The-American-Psychologist

I am amazed at no mention of BROADEN AND BUILT THEORY by Barb Frederickson, nor of DR PAUL WONG’S POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY 2. Thank you for your amazing work.

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Embracing JOMO: Finding Joy in Missing Out

We’ve probably all heard of FOMO, or ‘the fear of missing out’. FOMO is the currency of social media platforms, eager to encourage us to [...]

The True Meaning of Hedonism: A Philosophical Perspective

“If it feels good, do it, you only live once”. Hedonists are always up for a good time and believe the pursuit of pleasure and [...]

Happiness Economics: Can Money Buy Happiness?

Do you ever daydream about winning the lottery? After all, it only costs a small amount, a slight risk, with the possibility of a substantial [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (50)
• Coaching & Application (57)
• Compassion (26)
• Counseling (51)
• Emotional Intelligence (24)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (21)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (20)
• Mindfulness (45)
• Motivation & Goals (45)
• Optimism & Mindset (34)
• Positive CBT (29)
• Positive Communication (20)
• Positive Education (47)
• Positive Emotions (33)
• Positive Leadership (18)
• Positive Parenting (4)
• Positive Psychology (33)
• Positive Workplace (37)
• Productivity (17)
• Relationships (46)
• Resilience & Coping (38)
• Self Awareness (21)
• Self Esteem (38)
• Strengths & Virtues (32)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (34)
• Theory & Books (46)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (64)

3 Happiness Exercises Pack [PDF]

What Is Happiness?

Reviewed by Psychology Today Staff

Happiness is an electrifying and elusive state. Philosophers, theologians, psychologists, and even economists have long sought to define it. And since the 1990s, a whole branch of psychology— positive psychology —has been dedicated to pinning it down. More than simply positive mood, happiness is a state of well-being that encompasses living a good life, one with a sense of meaning and deep contentment.

Feeling joyful has its health perks as well. A growing body of research also suggests that happiness can improve your physical health; feelings of positivity and fulfillment seem to benefit cardiovascular health, the immune system, inflammation levels, and blood pressure, among other things. Happiness has even been linked to a longer lifespan as well as a higher quality of life and well-being.

Attaining happiness is a global pursuit. Researchers find that people from every corner of the world rate happiness more important than other desirable personal outcomes, such as obtaining wealth, acquiring material goods, and getting into heaven.

Happiness is not the result of bouncing from one joy to the next; researchers find that achieving happiness typically involves times of considerable dis comfort. Genetic makeup, life circumstances, achievements, marital status, social relationships, even your neighbors—all influence how happy you are. Or can be. So do individual ways of thinking and expressing feelings. Research shows that much of happiness is under personal control.

Regularly indulging in small pleasures, getting absorbed in challenging activities, setting and meeting goals , maintaining close social ties, and finding purpose beyond oneself all increase life satisfaction. It isn't happiness per se that promotes well-being, it’s the actual pursuit that’s key.

For more, see How to Find Happiness.

Happy people live with purpose. They find joy in lasting relationships, working toward their goals, and living according to their values. The happy person is not enamored with material goods or luxury vacations. This person is fine with the simple pleasures of life—petting a dog, sitting under a tree, enjoying a cup of tea. Here are a few of the outward signs that someone is content.

• Is open to learning new things
• Is high in humility and patience
• Smiles and laughs readily
• Goes with the flow
• Practices compassion
• Is often grateful
• Exercises self-care
• Enjoys healthy relationships
• Is happy for other people
• Gives and receives without torment
• Lives with meaning and purpose
• Does not feel entitled and has fewer expectations
• Is not spiteful or insulting
• Does not hold grudges
• Does not register small annoyances
• Does not angst over yesterday and tomorrow
• Does not play games
• Is not a martyr or victim
• Is not stingy with their happiness

For more, see How To Find Happiness.

Misperceptions abound when it comes to what we think will make us happy. People often believe that happiness will be achieved once they reach a certain milestone, such as finding the perfect partner or landing a particular salary.

Humans, however, are excellent at adapting to new circumstances, which means that people will habituate to their new relationship or wealth, return to a baseline level of happiness, and seek out the next milestone. Fortunately, the same principle applies to setbacks—we are resilient and will most likely find happiness again.

Regarding finances specifically, research shows that the sweet spot for yearly income is between $60,000 and $95,000 a year, not a million-dollar salary. Earnings above $95,000 do not equate to increased well-being; a person earning $150,000 a year will not necessarily be as happy as a person earning a lot less.

The type of thoughts below exemplify these misconceptions about happiness:

• "I’ll be happy when I’m rich and successful."
• "I’ll be happy when I’m married to the right person."
• "Landing my dream job will make me happy."
• "I can’t be happy when my relationship has fallen apart."
• "I will never recover from this diagnosis."
• "The best years of my life are over."

For more, see The Science of Happiness.

Positive psychology is the branch of psychology that explores human flourishing. It asks how individuals can experience positive emotions, develop authentic relationships, find flow, achieve their goals, and build a meaningful life.

Propelled by University of Pennsylvania psychologist Martin Seligman , the movement emerged from the desire for a fundamental shift in psychology—from revolving around disease and distress to providing the knowledge and skills to cultivate growth, meaning, and fulfillment. For more, see Positive Psychology.

Every person has unique life experiences, and therefore unique experiences of happiness. That being said, when scientists examine the average trajectory of happiness over the lifespan, some patterns tend to emerge. Happiness and satisfaction begin relatively high, decrease from adolescence to midlife , and rise throughout older adulthood.

What makes someone happy in their 20s may not spark joy in their 80s, and joy in someone’s 80s may have seemed irrelevant in their 20s. It’s valuable for people to continue observing and revising what makes them happy at a given time to continue striving for fulfillment throughout their lifetime.

For more, see Happiness Over the Lifespan.

Health and happiness are completely intertwined. That’s not to say that people with illnesses can’t be happy, but that attending to one’s health is an important—and perhaps underappreciated—component of well-being.

Researchers have identified many links between health and happiness—including a longer lifespan—but it’s difficult to distinguish which factor causes the other. Making changes to diet , exercise, sleep, and more can help everyone feel more content.

For more, see Happiness and Health .

The recent World Happiness Report revealed a shocking decline in happiness among today's youth. Teens are at midlife-crisis levels of discontent. Adults need to create change.

How this essential brain chemical works and why it’s important for your health.

In life, there's always going to be someone with more. Jealousy and envy only make you feel worse. Fortunately, sympathetic joy offers a better path forward for you and others.

Quid-pro-quo kindness can be damaging to a relationship. Here's how to avoid it.

If any society seriously wishes to improve levels of wellbeing and overall harmony, the best place to start is childhood.

When friends are sexually involved, but don't consider their relationship romantic, some enjoy greater freedom regarding life and sexuality.

Discover how challenges that are not fun in the moment—but rewarding in retrospect—can grow resilience, deepen life satisfaction, and lead to transformative personal growth.

Having a supportive partner can encourage you to take creative risks and look for opportunities to continue to learn and grow.

There are lessons to be learned about our approach to life from how we play poker.

A new study suggests that happiness among singles and those in couples is similar.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Happiness Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on happiness.

Happiness is something which we can’t describe in words it can only be felt from someone’s expression of a smile. Likewise, happiness is a signal or identification of good and prosperous life. Happiness is very simple to feel and difficult to describe. Moreover, happiness comes from within and no one can steal your happiness.

Can Money Buy You Happiness?

Every day we see and meet people who look happy from the outside but deep down they are broken and are sad from the inside. For many people, money is the main cause of happiness or grief. But this is not right. Money can buy you food, luxurious house, healthy lifestyle servants, and many more facilities but money can’t buy you happiness.

And if money can buy happiness then the rich would be the happiest person on the earth. But, we see a contrary image of the rich as they are sad, fearful, anxious, stressed, and suffering from various problems.

In addition, they have money still they lack in social life with their family especially their wives and this is the main cause of divorce among them.

Also, due to money, they feel insecurity that everyone is after their money so to safeguard their money and them they hire security. While the condition of the poor is just the opposite. They do not have money but they are happy with and stress-free from these problems.

In addition, they take care of their wife and children and their divorce rate is also very low.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Happiness Comes from Within

As we now know that we can’t buy happiness with money and there is no other shortcut to happiness. It is something that you feel from within.

In addition, true happiness comes from within yourself. Happiness is basically a state of mind.

Moreover, it can only be achieved by being positive and avoiding any negative thought in mind. And if we look at the bright side of ourselves only then we can be happy.

Happiness in a Relationship

People nowadays are not satisfied with their relationship because of their differences and much other reason. But for being happy in a relationship we have to understand that there are some rules or mutual understanding that keeps a relationship healthy and happy.

Firstly, take care of yourself then your partner because if you yourself are not happy then how can you make your partner happy.

Secondly, for a happy and healthy relationship give you partner some time and space. In addition, try to understand their feeling and comfort level because if you don’t understand these things then you won’t be able to properly understand your partner.

Most importantly, take initiative and plan to go out with your partner and family. Besides, if they have plans then go with them.

To conclude, we can say that happiness can only be achieved by having positive thinking and enjoying life. Also, for being happy and keeping the people around us happy we have to develop a healthy relationship with them. Additionally, we also have to give them the proper time.

FAQs about Happiness

Q.1 What is True Happiness? A.1 True happiness means the satisfaction that you find worthy. The long-lasting true happiness comes from life experience, a feeling of purpose, and a positive relationship.

Q.2 Who is happier the rich or the poor and who is more wealthy rich or poor? A.2 The poor are happier then the rich but if we talk about wealth the rich are more wealthy then the poor. Besides, wealth brings insecurity, anxiety and many other problems.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

The art of happiness: an explorative study of a contemplative program for subjective well-being.

• 1 Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Trento, Italy
• 2 Department of Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
• 3 Institute Lama Tzong Khapa, Pisa, Italy

In recent decades, psychological research on the effects of mindfulness-based interventions has greatly developed and demonstrated a range of beneficial outcomes in a variety of populations and contexts. Yet, the question of how to foster subjective well-being and happiness remains open. Here, we assessed the effectiveness of an integrated mental training program The Art of Happiness on psychological well-being in a general population. The mental training program was designed to help practitioners develop new ways to nurture their own happiness. This was achieved by seven modules aimed at cultivating positive cognition strategies and behaviors using both formal (i.e., lectures, meditations) and informal practices (i.e., open discussions). The program was conducted over a period of 9 months, also comprising two retreats, one in the middle and one at the end of the course. By using a set of established psychometric tools, we assessed the effects of such a mental training program on several psychological well-being dimensions, taking into account both the longitudinal effects of the course and the short-term effects arising from the intensive retreat experiences. The results showed that several psychological well-being measures gradually increased within participants from the beginning to the end of the course. This was especially true for life satisfaction, self-awareness, and emotional regulation, highlighting both short-term and longitudinal effects of the program. In conclusion, these findings suggest the potential of the mental training program, such as The Art of Happiness , for psychological well-being.

Introduction

People desire many valuable things in their life, but—more than anything else—they want happiness ( Diener, 2000 ). The sense of happiness has been conceptualized as people's experienced well-being in both thoughts and feelings ( Diener, 2000 ; Kahneman and Krueger, 2006 ). Indeed, research on well-being suggests that the resources valued by society, such as mental health ( Koivumaa-Honkanen et al., 2004 ) and a long life ( Danner et al., 2001 ), associate with high happiness levels. Since the earliest studies, subjective well-being has been defined as the way in which individuals experience the quality of their life in three different but interrelated mental aspects: infrequent negative affect, frequent positive affect, and cognitive evaluations of life satisfaction in various domains (physical health, relationships, and work) ( Diener, 1984 , 1994 , 2000 ; Argyle et al., 1999 ; Diener et al., 1999 ; Lyubomksky et al., 2005 ; Pressman and Cohen, 2005 ). A growing body of research has been carried out aimed at identifying the factors that affect happiness, operationalized as subjective well-being. In particular, the construct of happiness is mainly studied within the research fields of positive psychology or contemplative practices, which are grounded in ancient wisdom traditions. Positive psychology has been defined as the “the scientific study of human strengths and virtues” ( Sheldon and King, 2001 ), and it can be traced back to the reflections of Aristotle about different perspectives on well-being ( Ryan and Deci, 2001 ). On the other end, contemplative practices include a great variety of mental exercises, such as mindfulness, which has been conceived as a form of awareness that emerges from experiencing the present moment without judging those experiences ( Kabat-Zinn, 2003 ; Bishop et al., 2004 ). Most of these exercises stem from different Buddhist contemplative traditions such as Vipassana and Mahayana ( Kornfield, 2012 ). Notably, both perspective share the idea of overcoming suffering and achieving happiness ( Seligman, 2002 ). Particularly, Buddhism supports “the cultivation of happiness, genuine inner transformation, deliberately selecting and focusing on positive mental states” ( Lama and Cutler, 2008 ). In addition, mindfulness has been shown to be positively related to happiness ( Shultz and Ryan, 2015 ), contributing to eudemonic and hedonic well-being ( Howell et al., 2011 ).

In fact, although the definition of happiness has a long history and goes back to philosophical arguments and the search for practical wisdom, in modern times, happiness has been equated with hedonism. It relies on the achievement of immediate pleasure, on the absence of negative affect, and on a high degree of satisfaction with one's life ( Argyle et al., 1999 ). Nonetheless, scholars now argue that authentic subjective well-being goes beyond this limited view and support an interpretation of happiness as a eudemonic endeavor ( Ryff, 1989 ; Keyes, 2006 ; Seligman, 2011 ; Hone et al., 2014 ). Within this view, individuals seem to focus more on optimal psychological functioning, living a deeply satisfying life and actualizing their own potential, personal growth, and a sense of autonomy ( Deci and Ryan, 2008 ; Ryff, 2013 ; Vazquez and Hervas, 2013 ; Ivtzan et al., 2016 ). In psychology, such a view finds one of its primary supports in Maslow's (1981) theory of human motivation. Maslow argued that experience of a higher degree of satisfaction derives from a more wholesome life conduct. In Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory, once lower and more localized needs are satisfied, the unlimited gratification of needs at the highest level brings people to a full and deep experience of happiness ( Inglehart et al., 2008 ). Consequently, today, several scholars argue that high levels of subjective well-being depend on a multi-dimensional perspective, which encompasses both hedonic and eudemonic components ( Huta and Ryan, 2010 ; Ryff and Boylan, 2016 ). Under a wider perspective, the process of developing well-being reflects the notion that mental health and good functioning are more than a lack of illness ( Keyes, 2005 ). This approach is especially evident if we consider that even the definition of mental health has been re-defined by the World Health Organization (1948) , which conceives health not merely as the absence of illness, but as a whole state of biological, psychological, and social well-being.

To date, evidence exists suggesting that happiness is, in some extent, modulable and trainable. Thus, simple cognitive and behavioral strategies that individuals choose in their lives could enhance happiness ( Lyubomirsky et al., 2005 ; Sin and Lyubomirsky, 2009 ). In the history of psychology, a multitude of clinical treatments have been applied to minimize the symptoms of a variety of conditions that might hamper people from being happy, such as anger, anxiety, and depression (for instance, see Forman et al., 2007 ; Spinhoven et al., 2017 ). In parallel with this view, an alternative—and less developed—perspective found in psychology focuses on the scientific study of individual experiences and positive traits, not for clinical ends, but instead for personal well-being and flourishing (e.g., Fredrickson and Losada, 2005 ; Sin and Lyubomirsky, 2009 ). Yet, the question of exactly how to foster subjective well-being and happiness, given its complexity and importance, remains open to research. Answering this question is of course of pivotal importance, both individually and at the societal level. Positive Psychology Interventions encompass simple, self-administered cognitive behavioral strategies intended to reflect the beliefs and behaviors of individuals and, in response to that, to increase the happiness of the people practicing them ( Sin and Lyubomirsky, 2009 ; Hone et al., 2015 ). Specifically, a series of comprehensive psychological programs to boost happiness exist, such as Fordyce's program ( Fordyce, 1977 ), Well-Being Therapy ( Fava, 1999 ), and Quality of Life Therapy ( Frisch, 2006 ). Similarly, a variety of meditation-based programs aim to develop mindfulness and emotional regulatory skills ( Carmody and Baer, 2008 ; Fredrickson et al., 2008 ; Weytens et al., 2014 ), such as Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR; Kabat-Zinn, 1990 ) and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT; Teasdale et al., 2000 ). Far from being a mere trend ( De Pisapia and Grecucci, 2017 ), those mindfulness-based interventions have been shown to lead to increased well-being ( Baer et al., 2006 ; Keng et al., 2011 ; Choi et al., 2012 ; Coo and Salanova, 2018 ; Lambert et al., 2019 ) in several domains, such as cognition, consciousness, self, and affective processing ( Raffone and Srinivasan, 2017 ). Typically, mindfulness programs consist of informal and formal practice that educate attention and develop one's capacity to respond to unpredicted and/or negative thoughts and experiences ( Segal and Teasdale, 2002 ). In this context, individuals are gradually introduced to meditation practices, focusing first on the body and their own breath, and later on thoughts and mental states. The effects of these programs encompass positive emotions and reappraisal ( Fredrickson et al., 2008 ; Grecucci et al., 2015 ; Calabrese and Raffone, 2017 ) and satisfaction in life ( Fredrickson et al., 2008 ; Kong et al., 2014 ) and are related to a reduction of emotional reactivity to negative affect, stress ( Arch and Craske, 2006 ; Jha et al., 2017 ), and aggressive behavior ( Fix and Fix, 2013 ). All these effects mediate the relationship between meditation frequency and happiness ( Campos et al., 2016 ). This allows positive psychology interventions to improve subjective well-being and happiness and also reduce depressive symptoms and negative affect along with other psychopathologies ( Seligman, 2002 ; Quoidbach et al., 2015 ). Engaging in mindfulness might enhance in participants the awareness of what is valuable to them ( Shultz and Ryan, 2015 ). This aspect has been related to the growth of self-efficacy and autonomous functioning and is attributable to an enhancement in eudemonic well-being ( Deci and Ryan, 1980 ). Moreover, being aware of the present moment provides a clearer vision of the existing experience, which in turn has been associated with increases in hedonic well-being ( Coo and Salanova, 2018 ). Following these approaches, recent research provides evidence that trainings that encompass both hedonic and eudemonic well-being are correlated with tangible improved health outcomes ( Sin and Lyubomirsky, 2009 ).

Although there is a consistent interest in scientific research on the general topic of happiness, such studies present several limitations. Firstly, most of the research has focused on clinical studies to assess the effectiveness of happiness-based interventions—in line with more traditional psychological research, which is primarily concerned with the study of mental disorders ( Garland et al., 2015 , 2017 ; Groves, 2016 ). Secondly, most of the existing interventions are narrowly focused on the observation of single dimensions (i.e., expressing gratitude or developing emotional regulation skills) ( Boehm et al., 2011 ; Weytens et al., 2014 ). Moreover, typically studies involve brief 1- to 2-week interventions ( Gander et al., 2016 ), in contrast with the view that eudemonia is related to deep and long-lasting aspects of one's personal lifestyle. Furthermore, while the effectiveness of mindfulness-based therapies is well-documented, research that investigates the effects of mindfulness retreats has been lacking, which are characterized by the involvement of more intense practice from days to even years [for meta-analysis and review, see Khoury et al. (2017) , McClintock et al. (2019) , Howarth et al. (2019) ].

In this article, we report the effects on subjective well-being of an integrated mental training program called The Art of Happiness , which was developed and taught by two of the authors (CM for the core course subject matter and NDP for the scientific presentations). The course lasted 9 months and included three different modules (see Methods and Supplementary Material for all details), namely, seven weekends (from Friday evening to Sunday afternoon) dedicated to a wide range of specific topics, two 5-day long retreats, and several free activities at home during the entire period. The course was designed to help practitioners develop new ways to nurture their own happiness, cultivating both self-awareness and their openness to others, thereby fostering their own emotional and social well-being. The basic idea was to let students discover how the union of ancient wisdom and spiritual practices with scientific discoveries from current neuropsychological research can be applied beneficially to their daily lives. This approach and mental training program was inspired by a book of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso and the psychiatrist Lama and Cutler (2008) . The program rests on the principle that happiness is inextricably linked to the development of inner equilibrium, a kinder and more open perspective of self, others, and the world, with a key role given to several types of meditation practices. Additionally, happiness is viewed as linked to a conceptual understanding of the human mind and brain, as well as their limitations and potentiality, in the light of the most recent scientific discoveries. To this end, several scientific topics and discoveries from neuropsychology were addressed in the program, with a particular focus on cognitive, affective, and social neuroscience. Topics were taught and discussed with language suitable for the general public, in line with several recent books (e.g., Hanson and Mendius, 2011 ; Dorjee, 2013 ; Goleman and Davidson, 2017 ). The aim of this study was to examine how several psychological measures, related to psychological well-being, changed among participants in parallel with course attendance and meditation practices. Given the abovementioned results of the positive effects on well-being ( Baer et al., 2006 ; Fredrickson et al., 2008 ; Keng et al., 2011 ; Choi et al., 2012 ; Kong et al., 2014 ; Coo and Salanova, 2018 ; Lambert et al., 2019 ), we predicted to find a significant increase in the dimensions of life satisfaction, control of anger, and mindfulness abilities. Conversely, we expected to observe a reduction of negative emotions and mental states ( Arch and Craske, 2006 ; Fix and Fix, 2013 ; Jha et al., 2017 )—i.e., stress, anxiety and anger. Moreover, our aim was to explore how those measures changed during the course of the mental training program, considering not only the general effects of the course (longitudinal effects) but also specific effects within each retreat (short-term effects). Our expectation for this study was therefore that the retreats would have had an effect on the psychological dimensions of well-being linked to the emotional states of our participants, while the whole course would have had a greater effect on the traits related to well-being. The conceptual distinction between states and traits was initially introduced in regard to anxiety by Cattell and Scheier (1961) , and then subsequently further elaborated by Spielberger et al. (1983) . When considering a mental construct (e.g., anxiety or anger), we refer to trait as a relatively stable feature, a general behavioral attitude, which reflects the way in which a person tends to perceive stimuli and environmental situations in the long term ( Spielberger et al., 1983 ; Spielberger, 2010 ). For example, subjects with high trait anxiety have indeed anxiety as a habitual way of responding to stimuli and situations. The state, on the other hand, can be defined as a temporary phase within the emotional continuum, which, for example, in anxiety is expressed through a subjective sensation of tension, apprehension, and nervousness, and is associated with activation of the autonomic nervous system in the short term ( Spielberger et al., 1983 ; Saviola et al., 2020 ). Here, in the adopted tests and analyses, we keep the two time scales separated, and we investigate the results with the aim of understanding the effects of the program on states and traits of different emotional and well-being measures. As a first effect of the course, we expect that the retreats affect mostly psychological states (as measured in the comparison of psychological variables between start and end of each retreat), whereas the full course is predicted to affect mainly psychological traits (as measured in the comparison of the psychological variables between start, middle, and end of the entire 9-month period).

Materials and Methods

Participants.

The participants in the mental training program and in the related research were recruited from the Institute Lama Tzong Khapa (Pomaia, Italy) in a 9-month longitudinal study (seven modules and two retreats) on the effects of a program called The Art of Happiness (see Supplementary Material for full details of the program). Twenty-nine participants followed the entire program (there were nine dropouts after the first module). Their mean age was 52.86 years (range = 39–66; SD = 7.61); 72% were female. Participants described themselves as Caucasian, reaching a medium-high scholarly level with 59% of the participants holding an academic degree and 41% holding a high school degree. The participants were not randomly selected, as they were volunteers in the program. Most of them had no serious prior experience of meditation, only basic experience consisting of personal readings or watching video courses on the web, which overall we considered of no impact to the study. The only exclusion criteria were absence of a history of psychiatric or neurological disease, and not being currently on psychoactive medications. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sapienza University of Rome, and all participants gave written informed consent. The participants did not receive any compensation for participation in the study.

The overall effectiveness of the 9-month training was examined using a within-subjects design, with perceived stress, mindfulness abilities, etc. (Time: pre–mid–end) as the dependent variable. The effectiveness of the retreats was examined using a 2 × 2 factor within-subjects design (condition: pre vs. post; retreat: 1 vs. 2), with the same dependent variables. The specific contemplative techniques that were applied in the program are described in the Supplementary Material , the procedure is described in the Procedure section, and the measurements are described in the Materials section.

Mental Training Program

The program was developed and offered at the Institute Lama Tzong Khapa (Pomaia, Italy). It was one of several courses that are part of the Institute's ongoing programs under the umbrella of “Secular Ethics and Universal Values.” These various programs provide participants with opportunities to discover how the interaction of ancient wisdom and spiritual practices with contemporary knowledge from current scientific research in neuropsychology can be applied extensively and beneficially to improve the quality of their daily lives.

Specifically, The Art of Happiness was a 9-month program, with one program activity each month, either a weekend module or a retreat; there were two retreats—a mid-course retreat and a concluding retreat (for full details on the program, see Supplementary Material ). Each thematic module provided an opportunity to sequentially explore the topics presented in the core course text, The Art of Happiness by the Lama and Cutler (2008) .

In terms of the content of this program, as mentioned above, the material presented and explored has been drawn on the one hand from the teachings of Mahayana Buddhism and Western contemplative traditions, and current scientific research found in neuropsychology on the other hand. On the scientific side, topics included the effects of mental training and meditation, the psychology and neuroscience of well-being and happiness, neuroplasticity, mind–brain–body interactions, different areas of contemplative sciences, the placebo effects, the brain circuits of attention and mind wandering, stress and anxiety, pain and pleasure, positive and negative emotions, desire and addiction, the sense of self, empathy, and compassion (for a full list of the scientific topics, see Supplementary Material ).

The overall approach of the course was one of non-dogmatic exploration. Topics were presented not as undisputed truths, but instead as information to be shared, explored, examined, and possibly verified by one's own experience. Participants were heartily invited to doubt, explore, and test everything that was shared with them, to examine and experience firsthand whether what was being offered has validity or not.

The course was, essentially, an informed and gentle training of the mind, and in particular of emotions, based on the principle that individual well-being is inextricably linked to the development of inner human virtues and strengths, such as emotional balance, inner self-awareness, an open and caring attitude toward self and others, and clarity of mind that can foster a deeper understanding of one's own and others' reality.

The program provided lectures and discussions, readings, and expert videos introducing the material pertinent to each module's topic. Participants engaged with the material through listening, reading, discussing, and questioning. Participants were provided with additional learning opportunities to investigate each topic more deeply, critically, and personally, through the media of meditation, journaling, application to daily life, exercises at home, and contemplative group work with other participants in dyads and triads. Participants were then encouraged to reflect repeatedly on their insights and on their experiences, both successful and not, to apply their newly acquired understandings to their lives, by incorporating a daily reflection practice into their life schedule. The two program retreats also provided intensive contemplative experiences and activities, both individual and in dialogue with others.

On this basis, month after month in different dedicated modules, participants learned new ways to nurture their own happiness, to cultivate their openness to others, to develop their own emotional and social well-being, and to understand some of the scientific discoveries on these topics.

The specific topics addressed in corresponding modules and retreats, each in a different and consecutive month, were as follows: (1) The Purpose of Life: Authentic Happiness; (2) Empathy and Compassion; (3) Transforming Life's Suffering; (4) Working with Disturbing Emotions I: Hate and Anger; first retreat (intermediate); (5) Working with Disturbing Emotions II: The Self Image; (6) Life and Death; (7) Cultivating the Spiritual Dimension of Life: A Meaningful Life; second retreat (final). Full details of the entire program are reported in the Supplementary Material .

Participants were guided in the theory and practice of various contemplative exercises throughout the course pertaining to all the different themes. Recorded versions of all the various meditation exercises were made available to participants, enabling them to repeat these practices at home at their own pace.

Participants were encouraged to enter the program already having gained some basic experience of meditation, but this was not a strict requirement. In fact, not all participants in this experiment actually fulfilled this (only five), although each of the other participants had previous basic experiences of meditation (through personal readings, other video courses, etc.). In spite of this variety, by the end of the 9-month program, all participants were comfortable with contemplative practices in general and more specifically with the idea of maintaining a meditation practice in their daily lives.

During the various Art of Happiness modules, a variety of basic attentional and mindful awareness meditations were practiced in order to enhance attentional skills and cultivate various levels of cognitive, emotional, social, and environmental awareness.

Analytical and reflective contemplations are a form of deconstructive meditation ( Dahl et al., 2015 ), which were applied during the course in different contexts. On the one hand, these types of meditations were applied in the context of heart-opening practices—for example, in the cultivation of gratitude, forgiveness, loving-kindness toward self and others, self-compassion, and compassion for others. Analytical and reflective meditations were also practiced as a learning tool for further familiarization with some of the more philosophical subject matter of the course—engaging in a contemplative analysis of impermanence (for example, contemplating more deeply and personally the transitory nature of one's own body, of one's own emotions and thoughts, as well as of the material phenomena that surround us). These analytical meditations were also accompanied by moments of concentration (sustained attention) at the conclusion of each meditation focusing on what the meditator has learned or understood in the meditative process, in order to stabilize and reinforce those insights more deeply within the individual.

Additional contemplative activities were also included in the program: contemplative art activities, mindful listening, mindful dialogue, and the practice of keeping silence during the retreat. Participants were, in addition, encouraged to keep a journal of their experiences during their Art of Happiness journey, especially in relation to their meditations and the insights and questions that emerged within themselves, in order to enhance their self-awareness and cultivate a deeper understanding of themselves, their inner life and well-being, and their own inner development during the course and afterward.

During the two retreats, the previous topics were explored again (modules 1–4 for the intermediary retreat and modules 5–7 for the final retreat), but without discussing the theoretical aspects (i.e., the neuroscientific and psychological theories), instead only focusing on the contemplative practices, which were practiced extensively for the whole day, both individually and in group activities (for a full list of the contemplative practices and retreat activities, see Supplementary Material ).

We collected data at five-time points, always during the first day (either of the module or the retreat): at baseline (month 1 - T0), at pre (T1) and post (P1) of the mid-course retreat (month 5–Retreat 1), and at pre (T2) and post (R2) of the final retreat (month 9–Retreat 2), as shown in Figure 1 . Participants filled out the questionnaires on paper all together within the rooms of the Institute Lama Tzong Khapa at the beginning of each module or retreat, and at the end of the retreats, with the presence of two researchers. The order of the questionnaires was randomized, per person and each questionnaire session lasted less than an hour.

Figure 1 . The timing of the course and the experimental procedure, including the modules, the retreats, and the 5 data collections (from T0 to P2).

The adopted questionnaires were those commonly used in the literature to measure a variety of traits and states linked to well-being. An exhaustive description of the self-reported measures follows below.

Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS)

The SWLS ( Diener et al., 1985 ) was developed to represent cognitive judgments of life satisfaction. Participants indicated their agreement in five items with a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Scores range from 5 to 35, with higher scores representing higher levels of satisfaction. Internal consistency is very good with Cronbach's α = 0.85 [Italian version of the normative data in Di Fabio and Palazzeschi (2012) ].

Short Version of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10)

The PSS ( Cohen et al., 1983 ) was designed to assess individual perception and reaction to stressful daily-life situations. The questionnaire consists of 10 questions related to the feelings and thoughts of the last month, with a value ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (very often) depending on the severity of the disturbance caused. Scores range from 0 to 40. Higher scores represent higher levels of perceived stress, reflecting the degree to which respondents find their lives unpredictable or overloaded. Cronbach's α ranges from 0.78 to 0.93 [Italian version of the normative data by Mondo et al. (2019) ].

State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)

The STAI ( Spielberger et al., 1983 ) was developed to assess anxiety. It has 40 items, on which respondents evaluate themselves in terms of frequency with a four-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 4 (almost always). The items are grouped in two independent subscales of 20 items each that assess state anxiety, with questions regarding the respondents' feelings at the time of administration, and trait anxiety, with questions that explore how the participant feels habitually. The scores range from 20 to 80. Higher scores reflect higher levels of anxiety. Internal consistency coefficients for the scale ranged from 0.86 to 0.95 [Italian version of the normative data by Spielberger et al. (2012) ].

Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS)

PANAS ( Watson et al., 1988 ) measures two distinct and independent dimensions: positive and negative affect. The questionnaire consists of 20 adjectives, 10 for the positive affect subscale and 10 for the negative affect scale. The positive affect subscale reflects the degree to which a person feels enthusiastic, active, and determined while the negative affect subscale refers to some unpleasant general states such as anger, guilt, and fear. The test presents a five-point Likert scale (1 = very slightly or not at all; 5 = extremely). The alpha reliabilities are acceptably high, ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 for positive affect and from 0.84 to 0.87 for negative affect [Italian version of the normative data by Terracciano et al. (2003) ].

Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ)

The FFMQ ( Baer et al., 2008 ) was developed to assess mindfulness facets through 39 items rated on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (never or very rarely true) to 5 (very often or always true). A total of five subscales are included: attention and observation of one's own thoughts, feelings, perceptions, and emotions ( Observe ); the ability to describe thoughts in words, feelings, perceptions, and emotions ( Describe ); act with awareness, with attention focused and sustained on a task or situation, without mind wandering ( Act-aware ); non-judgmental attitude toward the inner experience ( Non-Judge ); and the tendency to not react and not to reject inner experience ( Non-React ). Normative data of the FFMQ have demonstrated good internal consistency, with Cronbach's α ranging from 0.79 to 0.87 [Italian version by Giovannini et al. (2014) ].

State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2 (STAXI-2)

The STAXI-2 ( Spielberger, 1999 ) provides measures to assess the experience, expression, and control of anger. It comprises 57 items rated on a four-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (very much indeed). Items are grouped by four scales: the first, State Anger scale, refers to the emotional state characterized by subjective feelings and relies on three more subscales: Angry Feelings, Physical Expression of Anger, and Verbal Expression of Anger. The second scale is the Trait Anger and indicates a disposition to perceive various situations as annoying or frustrating with two subscales—Angry Temperament and Angry Reaction. The third and last scales are Anger Expression and Anger Control. These assess anger toward the environment and oneself according to four relatively independent subscales: Anger Expression-OUT, Anger Expression-IN, Anger Control-OUT, and Anger Control-IN. Alpha coefficients STAXI-2 were above 0.84 for all scales and subscales, except for Trait Anger Reaction, which had an alpha coefficient of 0.76 [Italian version by Spielberger (2004) ].

Statistical Analysis

The responses on each questionnaire were scored according to their protocols, which resulted in one score per participant and a time point for each of the 22 scale/subscale questionnaires examined. Missing values (<2%) were imputed using the median. Descriptive statistics for all variables were analyzed and are summarized in Table 1 and in the first panel (column) of Figures 2 – 5 . Prior to conducting primary analyses, the distribution of scores on all the dependent variables was evaluated. Because the data were not normally distributed, we used non-parametric tests. Permutation tests are non-parametric tests as they do not rely on assumptions about the distribution of the data and can be used with different types of scales and with a small sample size.

Table 1 . Descriptive statistics of the depended variables among time points.

Figure 2 . Results of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), State and Trait Anxiety Index (STAI), and Positive and Negative Affect Scales (PANAS). The first (left) panel depicts pooled mean raw data per time point estimating 95% confidence interval. The second (central) panel represents changes in pooled mean ( y -axis) between retreats. The solid line represents retreat 1 and the dotted line denotes retreat 2 derived from the contrasts of the two-way ANOVA. The third (right) panel depicts bar charts representing the changes in mean between the 3 time points derived from the one-way ANOVA. Note that scores are on the y -axis and time is on the x -axis. Time points legend: baseline (month 1—T0), pre (T1), post (P1), mid-course retreat (month 5—retreat 1), pre (T2), and post (R2) of the final retreat (month 9—retreat 2). Statistical significance, * p < 0.05.

Figure 3 . Results for the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire FFMQ (Observe, Describe, Act with Awareness, Non-judge, and Non-react). The first (left) panel depicts pooled mean raw data per time point estimating 95% confidence interval. The second (central) panel represents changes in pooled mean ( y -axis) between retreats. The solid line represents retreat 1 and the dotted line denotes retreat 2 derived from the contrasts of the two-way ANOVA. The third (right) panel depicts bar charts representing the changes in mean between the 3 time points derived from one-way ANOVA. Note that scores are on the y -axis and time id on the x -axis. Time points legend: baseline (month 1—T0), pre (T1), post (P1), mid-course retreat (month 5—retreat 1), pre (T2), and post (P2) of the final retreat (month 9—retreat 2). Statistical significance, * p < 0.05.

Figure 4 . Results of the first part of the State Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI-2): State Anger, State Anger Feelings, State Anger Physical, State Anger Verbal, Trait Anger, and Trait Anger Temperament. The first (left) panel depicts pooled mean raw data per time point estimating 95% confidence interval. The second (central) panel represents changes in pooled mean ( y -axis) between retreats. The solid line represents retreat 1 and the dotted line denotes retreat 2 derived from the contrasts of the two-way ANOVA. The third (right) panel depicts bar charts representing the changes in mean between the 3 time points derived from one-way ANOVA. Note that scores are on the y -axis and time is on the x -axis. Time points legend: baseline (month 1—T0), pre (T1), post (P1), mid-course retreat (month 5—retreat 1), pre (T2), and post (R2) of the final retreat (month 9—retreat 2). Statistical significance, ** p < 0.01 and * p < 0.05.

Figure 5 . Results from the second part of the State Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI-2): Trait Anger Reaction, Anger Expression-IN, Anger Expression-OUT, Anger Control-IN, and Anger Control OUT. The first (left) panel depicts pooled mean raw data per time point estimating 95% confidence interval. The second (central) panel represents changes in pooled mean ( y -axis) between retreats. The solid line represents retreat 1 and the dotted line denotes retreat 2 derived from the contrasts of the two-way ANOVA. The third (right) panel depicts bar charts representing the changes in mean between the 3 time points derived from one-way ANOVA. Note that scores are on the y -axis and time is on the x -axis. Time points legend: baseline (month 1—T0), pre (T1), post (P1), mid-course retreat (month 5—Retreat 1), pre (T2), and post (R2) of the final retreat (month 9—Retreat 2). Statistical significance, * p < 0.05.

The longitudinal effects of the program were analyzed to determine whether scores changed between the start, mid-point (5 months), and the end (9 months) of the course. To achieve this, we compared the main effect of the program on the score , considering Time as a unique factor with three levels: at the baseline (T0), at the pre of the mid-retreat (T1), and at the pre of the final retreat (T2). Here, we used a one-way permutation Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance (RM ANOVA) with the aovperm() function from the Permuco package v. 1.0.2 in R ( Frossard and Renaud, 2018 ), which implements a method from Kherad-Pajouh and Renaud (2014) . The difference between the traditional and the permutation ANOVA is that, while the traditional ANOVA tests the equality of the group mean, the permutation version tests the exchangeability of the group observations. In this study, the number of permutations was set to 100,000 and the alpha level was set to 0.05; therefore, the p -value was computed as the ratio between the number of permutation tests that have an F value higher than the critical F value and the number of permutations performed. Effect size estimates were calculated using partial eta squared. Post hoc testing used pairwise permutational t -tests with the “pairwise.perm.t.test” function from the “RVAideMemoire” package in R ( Hervé and Hervé, 2020 ). To account for Type I errors introduced by multiple pairwise tests and Type II errors introduced by small sample size, we applied the false discovery rate (FDR) correction method of Benjamini and Hochberg (1995) and set statistical significance at p = 0.05. Results are summarized in Table 2 and in the third panel (column) of Figures 2 – 5 .

Table 2 . One-way ANOVA and pairwise comparison results with 100,000 permutations.

The short-term effects of the contemplative program on each retreat were analyzed to determine whether scores changed post-retreats and whether these changes occurred in both retreats. Thus, we used a two-way permutation RM ANOVA, with the score of each scale/subscale as the dependent variable and the within-subject factors Retreat (1, 2) and Condition (Pre T1/T2, Post P1/P2) as independent variables. Results are summarized in Table 3 and in the second panel (column) of Figures 2 – 5 .

Table 3 . Results of the two-way permutation RM ANOVAs.

In addition, we explored differences attributed to the course and to the retreats using a paired permutation t test with the “perm.t.test()” function in R. We compare those psychological measures at the beginning of the course (T0) with its very end (P2), which coincided with the end of the second retreat. In this way, we illustrate a summary of changes due both to the second retreat and to the whole course. The results are summarized in Table 4 and depicted in a radar plot in Figure 6 .

Table 4 . Overall changes between the start (T0) and the end of the course (P2).

Figure 6 . Results of the permutation t -test between the start and the end of the course. All values ranged from 0 to 1. Variables: SWLS, Satisfaction with Life Scale; S-Ang/F, Feeling Angry; S-Ang/V, Feel like Expressing Anger Verbally; S-Ang/P, Feel like Expressing Anger Physically; T-Ang/T, Angry Temperament; T-Ang/R, Angry reaction; AX-O, Anger Expression-OUT; AX-I, Anger Expression-IN; AC-O, Anger Control-OUT; AC-I, Anger Control-IN; PSS, Perceived Stress Scale; STAI-Y1, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory—State; STAI-Y2, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory—Trait; PA and NA, Positive and Negative Affect Scales, respectively; OBS, Observe; DES, Describe; AWA, Act with awareness, Njudge, Non-judge; NReact, Non-react. To make consistent that an increase of the specific scale corresponds to an improvement in well-being, negative scales were reversed, namely: PSS, STAI-Y1, STAI-Y2, PANAS-NA, S-Ang, S-Ang/F, S-Ang/P, S-Ang/V, T-Ang, T-Ang/T, S-Ang/R, AX-O, AX-I. Concerning the statistical significance, *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, and * p < 0.05.

Effects of the Program

Results from one-way permutation RM ANOVA showed a statistically significant effect of the program on SWLS at the p = 0.008 level over the Time course factor with a large effect size (ηp 2 = 0.16). Post hoc analysis revealed that the SWLS score was significantly higher at T2 with respect to T2 (mean difference = 2.48; p = 0.016). Similarly, SWLS was higher T2 as compared to T1 (mean difference = 1.38; p = 0.032).

Results also provided statistically significant evidence of changes in the PSS over the Time course ( p = 0.009), showing a large effect size (ηp 2 = 0.16). Post-hoc results showed a difference between T0 and T1, revealing that the PSS was significantly lower at T1 (mean difference = −2, p = 0.02).

Results revealed a significant effect of the Time course for Trait Anxiety ( p = 0.009, ηp 2 = 0.16). Post-hoc tests revealed a reduction in Trait Anxiety from the start of the course (T0) to the first day of the second retreat (T2) (M diff. = −3.21, p = 0.25).

Results also showed a significant effect of the Time course for negative affect ( p = 0.004, ηp 2 = 0.19). Post hoc analysis revealed that contemplative practice led to a reduction in negative affect from the baseline (T0) to the first day of the first retreat (T1) (mean difference = −2.42) and between T0 and first day of the second retreat (T2) (mean difference = −2.92), which differed significantly with p = 0.021 and p = 0.012, respectively.

Moreover, a significant effect of the Time course was found for several subscales of the FFMQ. First, the observe scale was found at the p = 0.023 level showing a large effect size (ηp 2 = 0.13). Post-hoc comparisons revealed an increasing capacity to observe one's own thoughts, from the middle of the course (T1) to the first day of the second retreat (T2) (mean difference = 1.58, p = 0.038). Likewise, there was a significant difference for the capacity to Act with Awareness ( p = 0.036, ηp 2 = 0.12). Post hoc comparisons revealed an increased level at T2 as compared to T1 (mean difference = 2.07, p = 0.043). The Time course had a significant effect on the Non-Judge subscale with a large effect size ( p = 0.002, ηp 2 = 0.20). Post hoc analysis indicated a significant increase from T0 to T1 (mean difference = 2.07, p = 0.013), as well as from T0 to T2 (mean difference = 3.31, p = 0.013).

In regard to the STAXI-2, we found Time course significant effects on Trait Anger ( p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.23) and its subscales, Trait Anger Temperament ( p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.22) and Trait Anger Reaction ( p = 0.016, ηp 2 = 0.14). Post-hoc comparisons revealed a significance difference on the Trait Anger Scale, which decreased from the beginning of the course (T0) to 5 months later (T1) (mean difference = −1.83, p = 0.041) and also from T0 to the end of the course (T2) (mean difference = −3.24, p = 0.002). Similarly, State Anger Temperament significantly decreased from T0 to T1 (mean difference = −0.79, p = 0.016) and from T0 to T2 (mean difference = −1.38, p = 0.008). Additionally, Trait Anger Reaction decreased from T0 to T2 (mean difference = −1.24, p = 0.023). Finally, the longitudinal effect of the course on the STAXI-2 led to significant results in the Anger Control-IN subscale over the Time course ( p = 0.03, ηp 2 = 0.12). Here, post-hoc comparisons showed a statistically significant difference between T0 and T2, which increased (mean difference = 1.76, p =.044). For more details, see Table 2 and the third panel (column) of Figures 2 – 5 .

Effects of the Retreats

Two-way permutation RM ANOVAs showed a significant main effect for Retreat on SWLS ( p = 0.002, ηp 2 = 0.16), Trait Anxiety ( p = 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.19), positive affect ( p = 0.044, ηp 2 = 0.07), Observe ( p = 0.008, ηp 2 = 0.12), Act with awareness ( p ≤ 0.001, ηp 2 = 0.22), Non-Judge ( p = 0.045, ηp 2 =.07), Non-React ( p = 0.02, ηp 2 = 0.10), Trait Anger ( p = 0.008, ηp 2 = 0.12), Trait Anger Temperament ( p = 0.022, ηp 2 = 0.09), Trait Anger Reaction ( p = 0.019, ηp 2 = 0.10), and Anger Control-IN ( p = 0.029, ηp 2 = 0.08). A main effect of the Condition (Pre vs. Post) was found only for the State Anxiety scale with p = 0.004 and a large effect size (ηp 2 = 0.14). Analysis results including F statistics are summarized in Table 3 ; a visual representation of the data is presented in the second panel (column) of Figures 2 – 5 .

Overall Effects of the Course and Retreats

As predicted, permutation t -test analysis revealed that participants increased their reported level of SWLS from the start (T0) to the end (P2) of the course (mean difference = 2.83, p = 0.008). Two subscales from the FFMQ, namely, the capacity to observe one's own thoughts (mean difference = 1.86, p = 0.039) and non-judgmental attitude toward the inner experience (mean difference = 3.24, p = 0.006), also significantly increased from the start to the end of the course. On the other hand, the affect linked to the progression from the start (T0) to the very end of the course (P2) was related to a significant decrease in the negative affect (mean difference = −3.62, p = 0.001). In the same way, the average level of stress of the sample decreased significantly (mean difference = −1.9, p = 0.033) along with a significant decrease of Trait Anxiety (M diff = −3.97, p ≤ 0.001). Participants also decreased on almost all STAXI-2 subscales. Here, the results from permutation paired t -test reveal a significant difference in scores, which decreased from T0 to P2 on all the subscales of Trait Anger (mean difference = −3.55, p ≤ 0.001; Trait Anger Temperament: mean difference = −1.34, p ≤ 0.001; Trait Anger Reaction: mean difference = −1.52, p ≤ 0.001), with an increased value for the subscales Anger Control-OUT (mean difference = 1.93, p ≤ 0.009) and Anger Control-IN (mean difference = 1.93, p = 0.017). For more details, see Table 4 and Figure 6 .

The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of an integrated 9-month mental training program called The Art of Happiness , which was developed to increase well-being in a general population. By a range of well-established psychometric assessment tools, we quantified how several psychological well-being variables changed with course attendance. We took into account both the trait effects of the course acting at a long timescale (over the 9-month duration of the full course) and the state effects of intensive retreat experiences acting at a short time scale (over the course of each of the two retreats). Several psychological well-being measures related to states and—more importantly—traits gradually improved as participants progressed from the beginning to the end of the course.

On the one hand, the program produced a significant longitudinal effect (9 months) revealing a progressive increase in the volunteer's levels of life satisfaction and of the capacities to reach non-judgmental mental states, to act with awareness, to non-react to inner experience, and to exercise control over attention to the internal state of anger, in line with other contemplative interventions ( Fredrickson et al., 2008 ; Keng et al., 2011 ; Baer et al., 2012 ; Kong et al., 2014 ). Conversely, after the completion of the program, there were decreases in levels of trait anxiety, trait anger (including both the anger temperament and reaction subscales), and negative affect, showing a progressive reduction during the intervention. These results support prior research that demonstrated the longitudinal positive effects of a multitude of contemplative practices on well-being measures linked to—among others—decreased trait anxiety, trait anger, and negative affect ( Fix and Fix, 2013 ; Khoury et al., 2015 ; Gotink et al., 2016 ). Such findings highlight the gradual development of mental states related to subjective well-being in parallel with ongoing contemplative practices over a time scale of months, with a gradual increase of wholesome mental states, and a gradual decrease of unwholesome mental states. Notably, as in other mindfulness interventions ( Khoury et al., 2015 ; Gotink et al., 2016 ), there was a significant reduction in the level of perceived stress already in the first few months of the program (T0–T1).

Additionally, these results show the specific effects between retreat experiences within the program as an intervention for fostering happiness. Specifically, the retreats had a positive effect on the participants' perceived well-being, which improved between the two retreats (with a 4-month interval). Among other assessed dimensions, between the retreats, there were significantly increased levels of life satisfaction, positive affect, and mindful abilities to act with awareness, to observe, non-react, and non-judge inner experience and the capacity to control anger toward oneself. Conversely, there were significantly lower levels of trait anxiety and trait anger (including both the anger temperament and reaction subscales) between the retreats (over a period of 4 months).

Regarding the very short effects of the course, we highlight significant changes within the first part of the training and prior to the first retreat (T0–T1). Here, some variables related to happiness changed most, suggesting their independence from retreat. Particularly, PSS notably decreased along with negative affect and Trait Anger (the subscale of Angry Temperament), while the capacity of non-judgmental attitude toward the inner experience significantly increased, providing useful information for future interventions.

Moreover, participants' state anxiety significantly decreased in a very short time (5 days), between pre and post of both retreats. These findings are consistent with previous studies, which demonstrated the positive effects of contemplative training and practices on these measures in retreats ( Khoury et al., 2017 ; Howarth et al., 2019 ; McClintock et al., 2019 ). In Figure 6 , we make a general and integrated comparison between the various psychological measures, comparing the very beginning of the course with its very end, which also coincided with the end of the second retreat. In this way, we illustrate both state changes (due to the second retreat) and trait changes (due to the whole course). This representation allows an integrated view of all the changes that took place at different time scales. This graph might suggest that the only measures that did not change significantly from the beginning to the end of the course are those in which the participants already had a score strongly oriented toward well-being, and therefore with little room for a change. Thus, future studies could take into account individual differences when evaluating happiness programs.

Although the present findings are promising, this study presents several limitations that need to be taken into consideration. The two main limitations rely on the absence of a randomized control group and in the fact that participants were self-selected. This lack of verification makes it difficult to determine whether the results are attributable to the program or to other factors, for example, simply arising due to spending time in a happiness-oriented activity. It is also important to note that despite examining several assessments within persons, the sample size was restricted to 29. Furthermore, responses to the questionnaires may have been biased toward the socially desirable response as the course's staff administered them, and another active group could have controlled for these effects. Consequently, it is recommended to conduct future studies with larger samples and a well-designed and controlled trial, in order to achieve more conclusive findings. Another limitation is that, while all the participants attended the whole course with a comparable (coherent) level of commitment to the practices (including the retreats), we did not verify their course-related activity and practices at home, and therefore, we have no way to check whether they actually did the practice activities at home as suggested during the modules.

Possible new directions of exploration of this study concern the age range of the participants, which, in our case, was limited to middle-aged individuals (39–66), and therefore, the effects on younger or older individuals remain currently unexplored. Another interesting direction would be to conduct follow-up measurements to assess the stability of the longitudinal effects months or years after the end of the program. Finally, while well-being and happiness are individual and subjective narratives of one's life as good and happy ( Bauer et al., 2008 ), and therefore self-assessments through questionnaires are a valid and common tool of investigation, in interventions such as The Art of Happiness , it would be appropriate to also explore individual differences, more objective psychophysiological effects, as well as cultural and social aspects influencing the inner model of happiness.

Despite these methodological limitations and still unexplored directions of research, the results described here suggest that The Art of Happiness may be a promising program for fostering well-being in individuals, improving mental health and psychological functioning. Longitudinal integrated contemplative programs with retreats offer a unique opportunity for the intensive development of the inner attitudes related to the capacity to be happy, reducing mental health symptoms and improving a more stable eudemonic well-being in healthy adults.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Nicola De Pisapia, upon reasonable request.

Ethics Statement

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Ethics Committee of the Sapienza University of Rome. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author Contributions

ND, CM, and AR designed the study. ND, CM, LC, and AR collected the data. CR analyzed the data. CR and ND wrote the original draft. All authors edited and reviewed the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Institute Lama Tzong Khapa (Pomaia, Italy) for the support in various phases of this experiment. We also wish to express our gratitude to the reviewers for their thoughtful comments and efforts toward improving the manuscript.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.600982/full#supplementary-material

Arch, J. J., and Craske, M. G. (2006). Mechanisms of mindfulness: emotion regulation following a focused breathing induction. Behav. Res. Ther. 44, 1849–1858. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2005.12.007

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Argyle, M., Kahneman, D., Diener, E., and Schwarz, N. (1999). Well-Being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology , eds D. Kahneman, E. Diener, and N. Schwarz. Russell Sage Found.

Google Scholar

Baer, R. A., Lykins, E. L. B., and Peters, J. R. (2012). Mindfulness and self-compassion as predictors of psychological wellbeing in long-term meditators and matched nonmeditators. J. Posit. Psychol. 7, 230–238. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2012.674548

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Hopkins, J., Krietemeyer, J., and Toney, L. (2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment 13, 27–45. doi: 10.1177/1073191105283504

Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., et al. (2008). Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples. Assessment 15, 329–342. doi: 10.1177/1073191107313003

Bauer, J. J., McAdams, D. P., and Pals, J. L. (2008). Narrative identity and eudaimonic well-being. J. Happiness Stud. 9, 81–104. doi: 10.1007/s10902-006-9021-6

Benjamini, Y., and Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 57, 289–300. doi: 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x

Bishop, S. R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L., Anderson, N. D., Carmody, J., et al. (2004). Mindfulness: a proposed operational definition. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 11, 230–241. doi: 10.1093/clipsy.bph077

Boehm, J. K., Lyubomirsky, S., and Sheldon, K. M. (2011). A longitudinal experimental study comparing the effectiveness of happiness-enhancing strategies in Anglo Americans and Asian Americans. Cogn. Emot. 25, 1263–1272. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2010.541227

Calabrese, L., and Raffone, A. (2017). Gli aspetti della pratica della mindfulness e la centralita ‘della regolazione del se’. G. Ital. di Psicol. 44, 271–274. doi: 10.1421/87330

Campos, D., Cebolla, A., Quero, S., Bretón-López, J., Botella, C., Soler, J., et al. (2016). Meditation and happiness: Mindfulness and self-compassion may mediate the meditation-happiness relationship. Pers. Individ. Dif. 93, 80–85. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.040

Carmody, J., and Baer, R. A. (2008). Relationships between mindfulness practice and levels of mindfulness, medical and psychological symptoms and well-being in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program. J. Behav. Med. 31, 23–33. doi: 10.1007/s10865-007-9130-7

Cattell, R. B., and Scheier, I. H. (1961). The Meaning and Measurement of Neuroticism and Anxiety . New York, NY: The Ronald Press Company

Choi, Y., Karremans, J. C., and Barendregt, H. (2012). The happy face of mindfulness: mindfulness meditation is associated with perceptions of happiness as rated by outside observers. J. Posit. Psychol. 7, 30–35. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2011.626788

Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences . New York, NY: Routledge.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., and Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. J. Health Soc. Behav. 24, 385–396. doi: 10.2307/2136404

Coo, C., and Salanova, M. (2018). Mindfulness can make you happy-and-productive: a mindfulness controlled trial and its effects on happiness, work engagement and performance. J. Happiness Stud. 19, 1691–1711. doi: 10.1007/s10902-017-9892-8

Dahl, C. J., Lutz, A., and Davidson, R. J. (2015). Reconstructing and deconstructing the self: cognitive mechanisms in meditation practice. Trends Cogn. Sci. 19, 515–523. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.07.001

Danner, D. D., Snowdon, D. A., and Friesen, W. V. (2001). Positive emotions in early life and longevity: findings from the nun study. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 80, 804–813. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.80.5.804

De Pisapia, N., and Grecucci, E. A. (2017). Mindfulness: fashion or revolution? G. Ital. di Psicol. 44, 249–270. doi: 10.1421/87329

CrossRef Full Text

Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (1980). Self-determination theory: when mind mediates behavior. J. mind Behav. 1, 33–43.

Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: an introduction. J. Happiness Stud. 9, 1–11. doi: 10.1007/s10902-006-9018-1

Di Fabio, A., and Palazzeschi, L. (2012). The Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS): Un contributo alla validazione italiana con lavoratori adulti [The Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS): A contribution to Italian validation with adult workers]. Counseling 5, 207–215.

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychol. Bull . 95, 542–575. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542

Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: progress and opportunities. Soc. Indicat. Res. 31, 103–157.

Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. Am. Psychol. 55, 34–43. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsem, R. J., and Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. J. Pers. Assess. 49, 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., and Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 125:276. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276

Dorjee, D. (2013). Mind, Brain and the Path to Happiness . London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315889580

Fava, G. A. (1999). Well-being therapy: conceptual and technical issues. Psychother. Psychosom. 68, 171–179. doi: 10.1159/000012329

Fix, R. L., and Fix, S. T. (2013). The effects of mindfulness-based treatments for aggression: a critical review. Aggress. Violent Behav. 18, 219–227. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2012.11.009

Fordyce, M. W. (1977). Development of a program to increase personal happiness. J. Couns. Psychol. 24, 511–521. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.24.6.511

Forman, E. M., Herbert, J. D., Moitra, E., Yeomans, P. D., and Geller, P. A. (2007). A randomized controlled effectiveness trial of acceptance and commitment therapy and cognitive therapy for anxiety and depression. Behav. Modif. 31, 772–799. doi: 10.1177/0145445507302202

Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., and Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives: positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 95, 1045–1062. doi: 10.1037/a0013262

Fredrickson, B. L., and Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. Am. Psychol. 60, 678–686. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.7.678

Frisch, M. B. (2006). Quality of Life Therapy: Applying a Life Satisfaction Approach to Positive Psychology and Cognitive Therapy . New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 535.

Frossard, J., and Renaud, O. (2018). Permuco: Permutation Tests for Regression, (Repeated Measures) ANOVA/ANCOVA and Comparison of Signals. R Package Version 1.0.0.

Gander, F., Proyer, R. T., and Ruch, W. (2016). Positive psychology interventions addressing pleasure, engagement, meaning, positive relationships, and accomplishment increase well-being and ameliorate depressive symptoms: a randomized, placebo-controlled online study. Front. Psychol. 7:686. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00686

Garland, E. L., Geschwind, N., Peeters, F., and Wichers, M. (2015). Mindfulness training promotes upward spirals of positive affect and cognition: multilevel and autoregressive latent trajectory modeling analyses. Front. Psychol. 6:15. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00015

Garland, E. L., Kiken, L. G., Faurot, K., Palsson, O., and Gaylord, S. A. (2017). Upward spirals of mindfulness and reappraisal: testing the mindfulness-to-meaning theory with autoregressive latent trajectory modeling. Cognit. Ther. Res. 41, 381–392. doi: 10.1007/s10608-016-9768-y

Giovannini, C., Giromini, L., Bonalume, L., Tagini, A., Lang, M., and Amadei, G. (2014). The Italian five facet mindfulness questionnaire: a contribution to its validity and reliability. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 36, 415–423. doi: 10.1007/s10862-013-9403-0

Goleman, D., and Davidson, R. (2017). The Science of Meditation: How to Change Your Brain, Mind and Body . New York, NY: Penguin Random House.

Gotink, R. A., Meijboom, R., Vernooij, M. W., Smits, M., and Hunink, M. G. M. (2016). 8-week mindfulness based stress reduction induces brain changes similar to traditional long-term meditation practice – a systematic review. Brain Cogn. 108, 32–41. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2016.07.001

Grecucci, A., De Pisapia, N., Thero, D. K., Paladino, M. P., Venuti, P., and Job, R. (2015). Baseline and strategic effects behind mindful emotion regulation: behavioral and physiological investigation. PLoS ONE 10:e0116541. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116541

Groves, P. (2016). Mindfulness in psychiatry–where are we now? BJPsych Bull. 40, 289–292. doi: 10.1192/pb.bp.115.052993

Hanson, R., and Mendius, R. (2011). The Practical Neuroscience of Happiness, Love and Wisdom. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications Inc. doi: 10.5214/ans.0972.7531.1118110

Hervé, M. M., and Hervé, M. M. (2020). Package ‘RVAideMemoire.’

Hone, L. C., Jarden, A., Schofield, G., and Duncan, S. (2014). Measuring flourishing: the impact of operational definitions on the prevalence of high levels of wellbeing. Int. J. Wellbeing 4, 62–90. doi: 10.5502/ijw.v4i1.4

Hone, L. C., Jarden, A., and Schofield, G. M. (2015). An evaluation of positive psychology intervention effectiveness trials using the re-aim framework: a practice-friendly review. J. Posit. Psychol. 10, 303–322. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.965267

Howarth, A., Smith, J. G., Perkins-Porras, L., and Ussher, M. (2019). Effects of brief mindfulness-based interventions on health-related outcomes: a systematic review. Mindfulness 10, 1957–1968. doi: 10.1007/s12671-019-01163-1

Howell, A. J., Dopko, R. L., Passmore, H.-A., and Buro, K. (2011). Nature connectedness: associations with well-being and mindfulness. Pers. Individ. Dif. 51, 166–171. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.037

Huta, V., and Ryan, R. M. (2010). Pursuing pleasure or virtue: the differential and overlapping well-being benefits of hedonic and eudaimonic motives. J. Happiness Stud. 11, 735–762. doi: 10.1007/s10902-009-9171-4

Inglehart, R., Foa, R., Peterson, C., and Welzel, C. (2008). Development, freedom, and rising happiness: a global perspective (1981–2007). Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 3, 264–285. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00078.x

Ivtzan, I., Young, T., Martman, J., Jeffrey, A., Lomas, T., Hart, R., et al. (2016). Integrating mindfulness into positive psychology: a randomised controlled trial of an online positive mindfulness program. Mindfulness 7, 1396–1407. doi: 10.1007/s12671-016-0581-1

Jha, A. P., Morrison, A. B., Parker, S. C., and Stanley, E. A. (2017). Practice is protective: mindfulness training promotes cognitive resilience in high-stress cohorts. Mindfulness 8, 46–58. doi: 10.1007/s12671-015-0465-9

Kabat-Zinn, J. (1990). Full Catastrophe Living: The Program of the Stress Reduction Clinic at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center . Available online at: lelandshields.com (accessed October 28, 2019).

Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 10, 144–156. doi: 10.1093/clipsy.bpg016

Kahneman, D., and Krueger, A. B. (2006). Developments in measurements of subjective well-being. J. Econ. Perspect. 20, 3–24. doi: 10.1257/089533006776526030

Keng, S. L., Smoski, M. J., and Robins, C. J. (2011). Effects of mindfulness on psychological health: a review of empirical studies. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 31, 1041–1056. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2011.04.006

Keyes, C. L. M. (2005). Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 73, 539–548. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.3.539

Keyes, C. L. M. (2006). Subjective well-being in mental health and human development research worldwide: an introduction. Soc. Indic. Res. 77, 1–10. doi: 10.1007/s11205-005-5550-3

Kherad-Pajouh, S., and Renaud, O. (2014). A general permutation approach for analyzing repeated measures ANOVA and mixed-model designs. Stat. Pap. 56, 947–967. doi: 10.1007/s00362-014-0617-3

Khoury, B., Knäuper, B., Schlosser, M., Carrière, K., and Chiesa, A. (2017). Effectiveness of traditional meditation retreats: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Psychosom. Res. 92, 16–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.11.006

Khoury, B., Sharma, M., Rush, S. E., and Fournier, C. (2015). Mindfulness-based stress reduction for healthy individuals: a meta-analysis. J. Psychosom. Res. 78, 519–528. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2015.03.009

Koivumaa-Honkanen, H., Kaprio, J., Honkanen, R., Viinamäki, H., and Koskenvuo, M. (2004). Life satisfaction and depression in a 15-year follow-up of healthy adults. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 39, 994–999. doi: 10.1007/s00127-004-0833-6

Kong, F., Wang, X., and Zhao, J. (2014). Dispositional mindfulness and life satisfaction: the role of core self-evaluations. Pers. Individ. Dif. 56, 165–169. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.09.002

Kornfield, J. (2012). Teachings of the Buddha . Boston, MA: Shambhala Publications.

Lama, D., and Cutler, H. (2008). The art of happiness: A handbook for living. Penguin.

Lambert, L., Passmore, H. A., and Joshanloo, M. (2019). A positive psychology intervention program in a culturally-diverse university: boosting happiness and reducing fear. J. Happiness Stud. 20, 1141–1162. doi: 10.1007/s10902-018-9993-z

Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., and Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: does happiness lead to success? Psychol. Bull. 131, 803–855. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.803

Lyubomksky, S., Sheldon, K. M., and Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: the architecture of sustainable change. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 9, 111–131. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.111

Maslow, A. H. (1981). Motivation and Personality . New York, NY: Harper.

McClintock, A. S., Rodriguez, M. A., and Zerubavel, N. (2019). The effects of mindfulness retreats on the psychological health of non-clinical adults: a meta-analysis. Mindfulness 10, 1443–1454. doi: 10.1007/s12671-019-01123-9

Mondo, M., Sechi, C., and Cabras, C. (2019). Psychometric evaluation of three versions of the Italian perceived stress scale. Curr. Psychol. 1–9. doi: 10.1007/s12144-019-0132-8

Pressman, S. D., and Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence health? Psychol. Bull. 131, 925. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.925

Quoidbach, J., Mikolajczak, M., and Gross, J. J. (2015). Positive interventions: an emotion regulation perspective. Psychol. Bull . 141, 655–693. doi: 10.1037/a0038648

Raffone, A., and Srinivasan, N. (2017). Mindfulness and cognitive functions: toward a unifying neurocognitive framework. Mindfulness 8, 1–9. doi: 10.1007/s12671-016-0654-1

Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: a review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 52, 141–166. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.141

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57, 1069–1081. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069

Ryff, C. D. (2013). Psychological well-being revisited: advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia. Psychother. Psychosom. 83, 10–28. doi: 10.1159/000353263

Ryff, C. D., and Boylan, J. M. (2016). “Linking happiness to health: Comparisons between hedonic and eudaimonic well-being,” in Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Happiness and Quality of Life (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited).

Saviola, F., Pappaianni, E., Monti, A., Grecucci, A., Jovicich, J., and De Pisapia, N. (2020). Trait and state anxiety are mapped differently in the human brain. Sci. Rep. 10:11112. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-68008-z

Segal, Z. V., and Teasdale, J. (2002). Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression: : A New Approach to Preventing Relapse . New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Guilford Publications.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). “Positive psychology, positive prevention, and positive therapy,” in Handbook of Positive Psychology , eds C. R. Snyder and S. J. Lopez (New York, NY: Oxford University Press), 3–9.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being . New York, NY: Free Press.

Sheldon, K. M., and King, L. (2001). Why positive psychology is necessary. Am. Psychol. 56, 216–217. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.216

Shultz, P. P., and Ryan, R. M. (2015). “The ‘why,’ ‘what,’ and ‘how’ of healthy self-regulation: Mindfulness and well-being from a self-determination theory perspective,” in Handbook of Mindfulness and Self-Regulation (New York, NY: Springer), 81–94. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2263-5_7

Sin, N. L., and Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: a practice-friendly meta-analysis. J. Clin. Psychol. 65, 467–487. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20593

Spielberger, C. (2004). STAXI-2 State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2. Adattamento Italiano a Cura di Anna Laura Comunian. Florence: Giunti OS Organizzazioni speciali.

Spielberger, C. D. (1999). Professional Manual for the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2 (STAXI-2). Odessa, FL.

PubMed Abstract

Spielberger, C. D. (2010). State-Trait anger expression inventory. Corsini Encycl. Psychol. 1. doi: 10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0942

Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L., Lushene, R., Vagg, P. R., and Jacobs, G. A. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory . Palo, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Spielberger, C. D., Pedrabissi, L., and Santinello, M. (2012). STAI State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Forma Y: Manuale. Firenze: Giunti OS Organizzazioni speciali.

Spinhoven, P., Huijbers, M. J., Ormel, J., and Speckens, A. E. M. (2017). Improvement of mindfulness skills during mindfulness-based cognitive therapy predicts long-term reductions of neuroticism in persons with recurrent depression in remission. J. Affect. Disord. 213, 112–117. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.02.011

Teasdale, J. D., Segal, Z. V., Williams, J. M. G., Ridgewaya, V. A., Soulsby, J. M., and Lau, M. A. (2000). Prevention of relapse/recurrence in major depression by mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 68, 615–623. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.68.4.615

Terracciano, A., McCrae, R. R., and Costa, P. T. (2003). Factorial and construct validity of the Italian positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 19, 131–141. doi: 10.1027//1015-5759.19.2.131

Vazquez, C., and Hervas, G. (2013). Addressing current challenges in cross-cultural measurement of well-being: the pemberton happiness index. Well Being Cult. 3, 31–49. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4611-4_3

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., and Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54, 1063–1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063

Weytens, F., Luminet, O., Verhofstadt, L. L., and Mikolajczak, M. (2014). An integrative theory-driven positive emotion regulation intervention. PLoS ONE 9:e95677. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095677

World Health Organization (1948). Constitution Basic Documents WHO World Health Organization. World Health Organization, Constitution . Geneva: Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia Globalization.

Keywords: meditation, wisdom, happiness, well–being, mindfulness

Citation: Rastelli C, Calabrese L, Miller C, Raffone A and De Pisapia N (2021) The Art of Happiness: An Explorative Study of a Contemplative Program for Subjective Well-Being. Front. Psychol. 12:600982. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.600982

Received: 31 August 2020; Accepted: 11 January 2021; Published: 11 February 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Rastelli, Calabrese, Miller, Raffone and De Pisapia. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Nicola De Pisapia, nicola.depisapia@unitn.it

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

You are here: Home » Blog » Misc

What Is Happiness? – My Essay On Defining Your Happiness

Reviewed and fact-checked

We are committed to the highest standards of accuracy and reliability in our content. Every statement made on our website is meticulously fact-checked and supported by authoritative studies.

Read more about our processes here .

Updated on July 11, 2023

Happiness is probably the most pursued factor in life, above wealth, health, and good relationships. We all want to be happy, above everything else, right? Who cares about money when you’re not happy? Who cares about friends when you’re not happy with who you are? Who cares about good health if you’re lonely and depressed?

Happiness is the thing that most people want, yet it is one of the most difficult aspects of life to quantify. How do we measure happiness? How do we define happiness? What is happiness!? This is an essay that explores the many different faces of happiness. As you’ll learn, happiness doesn’t have a single universal definition. Its definition is unique for every single human being out there. Including you.

After reading this essay, you’ll know exactly what happiness is, how to define it for yourself, and even how to find it based on actionable advice.

Definition of happiness

Happiness synonyms, different kinds of happiness, a happy balance, why eternal happiness doesn’t exist, why eternal happiness can still be pursued, defining your own happiness, closing words, what is happiness.

Before starting this essay about happiness, we must at least have a broad idea of what happiness is. Let’s first have a look at how happiness is defined across the web.

Definitions of happiness vary quite a bit across multiple sources. Google thinks happiness is defined as follows:

The state of being happy

You can see how Google is pretty vague about the definition of happiness. Furthermore, it quickly follows with a long list of synonyms.

Wikipedia has a much more interesting definition of what happiness is.

The feeling of an emotion such as pleasure or joy, the appraisal of life satisfaction or the quality of life, subjective well-being and eudaimonia.

Lesson learned? It is really difficult to find a universally correct and agreed-upon definition of what happiness really is.

💡 By the way : If you want to start feeling better and more productive, I’ve condensed the information of 100’s of our articles into a 10-step mental health cheat sheet here. 👇

This Cheat Sheet Will Help You Be Happier and More Productive

Thrive under stress and crush your goals with these 10 unique tips for your mental health.

Think of all the synonyms that we use to describe feelings that are similar to happiness.

What I like about Google is that it shows synonyms of happiness to people that are looking for its definition.

It’s like they’re saying: “Hey, we don’t know exactly how to define happiness, but here are a couple of concepts that we believe are very much similar!”

The list of synonyms is quite big:

• Contentment
• Satisfaction
• Carefreeness

I think there is a lot we can learn just from the fact that happiness has so many synonyms.

Why? Because these synonyms are all specific variants of what happiness means to me. And I bet you feel the same.

All these different emotions are part of what happiness truly is. And that’s what makes happiness so incredibly difficult to define and measure. It’s a weighted average of all these different synonyms, and the equation of happiness truly changes per person . I’ll even go as far as to say that the happiness equation changes per person per day.

If pleasure makes me happy today, it doesn’t mean that that same amount of pleasure makes me happy tomorrow.

If short-term satisfaction made me happy yesterday, then it won’t necessarily make me happy next week.

What I want you to realize is that your personal definition of happiness is unique. What makes you happy doesn’t necessarily make another person happy. In fact, your definition of happiness is likely a combination of satisfaction, cheeriness, merriment, and jollity.

But the way you personally define happiness will likely change from day to day as well.

And that’s one of the most critical aspects of happiness. That’s also why it’s supposedly so hard to measure and quantify. Here’s an entire article I wrote recently about how difficult it is to define happiness, but you can still try for yourself !

Still with me? Good, because I’m going to add yet another reason why happiness is such a difficult thing to measure!

There are different kinds of happiness. Not just in the way we define happiness, but also in the way we experience it.

As part of this essay, I want to introduce the concepts of short-term and long-term happiness.

Short-term happiness

Short-term happiness is relatively easy to explain. It’s based on small and easy to obtain, yet rather unsustainable happiness. When looking at the list of happiness synonyms, I think the following concepts are clearly centered around short-term happiness:

You see, short-term happiness is based on the release of the chemical dopamine in our brain . This organic chemical is released whenever we are stimulated by things that please us. Some examples are sex, having a laugh with friends, finishing a race, watching a funny video online, or watching an exciting game of football. A more extreme example is drugs.

These things result in short-term happiness because dopamine is released based on a single event. When this event is over, the pleasure is gone. That’s why I consider this to be short-term happiness.

And then there is long-term happiness.

Long-term happiness

Long-term happiness is a little bit harder to explain because it revolves around other concepts of happiness. Instead of joy, pleasure, and ecstasy, the concepts that make up long-term happiness are:

I hope you can spot the difference here. Long-term happiness is created by feeling happy about your purpose in life, the successes that you’ve had and/or the satisfaction of who you are and what you’ve accomplished. Long-term happiness is based on concepts that are not created by a single event. For example, I’m happy at the moment because I’m grateful for the life that I have right now. This happiness is not caused by something I’m doing at this very moment. No, I’m happy because I work hard and have achieved things that I am proud of. I have created a situation in which I am happy by default, without having to rely on single events.

Now that you are aware of these two different kinds of happiness, I want you to picture some scenarios.

• Picture a life in which you spent your youth partying, doing whatever you want to do, using drugs and living without planning for a good future. Sure, you feel pretty happy when doing these things, but you can probably see how this lifestyle will eventually catch up with you, right?

You might have guessed it, but this scenario is focused exclusively on short-term happiness. And the simple fact is that pursuing nothing but short-term happiness does not lead to a sustainable happy life.

Now picture the following scenario:

• You’re in your early twenties and want to become the next Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk. You have great ambitions and are incredibly disciplined and inspired to become everything that you think you can become. You spend an incredible amount of time working on your projects, and you even make sacrifices just for the sake of your goals. You don’t have time for sleep, social activities or relationships. Hell, even your health starts to decline. It doesn’t matter though, because you eventually want to reach your goals, and then you’ll be happy right?

This is another extreme example of happiness. You can probably see how this person is very likely unhappy. He is spending the best years of his life making sacrifices in anticipation of what he eventually wants to become. For a lot of people, this sounds like a logical decision. But to me, this sounds like a huge mistake. You might feel satisfied with the progress you’re making, but are you truly happy? If you get in a fatal car crash tomorrow, would you have any regrets?

I want you to think about this for a moment since a lot of people in industrialized countries have the urge to constantly be planning for the future. And while this is not a bad thing in principle, we often take it too far. As a result, we are constantly sprinting from one deadline to the other. Sure, you want to plan for a happy future, but what’s the point of all of this when you’re not happy in the process itself?

The thing is, these extreme examples are not something that you should want. You can only lead a truly happy life when you actively pursue both short-term and long-term happiness.

It’s important to find out what your perfect balance is.

I’m not here to tell you that you should focus 50% of your attention on short-term happiness and the other 50% on long-term happiness. No. I’m here to tell you that you should be aware of your own happiness. Every single person on this planet has a different definition of happiness. You need to find out what happiness means to you, and how you want to pursue it.

They say happiness is a journey and not a destination. I think happiness can – and should – be both.

For me personally, I often notice how much short-term happiness I’m sacrificing in anticipation of long-term happiness. Some examples:

• I go out for a long-distance training run in the pouring rain because I want to eventually finish another marathon in 3 months. I don’t even enjoy the long-distance run but I think that it will eventually lead to a great finish time, and thus long-term happiness.
• Instead of just playing a videogame, I decide to write an essay about my understanding of happiness. Why? Because I think it will grow my website, which will make me happy in the long run.
• I skip a nice snack because I want to maintain my weight

These are some real examples of how I’ve been sacrificing my short-term happiness for long-term happiness. I want you to think of a couple of examples for yourself. Have you ever made a bad decision that resulted in a decreased level of happiness?

Think about some real scenarios that you’ve experienced and whether you should have acted differently.

I’m not saying that sacrificing short-term happiness for long-term happiness is bad. I just want you to know that you need to find a balance. For example, I do actually want to finish my next marathon within a decent time, but I’m not going to make myself miserable by pushing myself to the limit in preparation. That’s not the balance that I’m after.

The thing is, realizing the difference between short-term and long-term happiness makes it easier for us to pursue happiness in our lives.

Pursue happiness, you ask?

Yes! I believe that happiness can actively be pursued and that you can steer your life in the best direction possible by doing this. However, there are a number of people that believe that pursuing happiness is a loser’s game. These people argue that by pursuing happiness , you’ll be more tempted to choose short-term happiness over long-term happiness. This is where the hedonic treadmill will quickly evaporate whatever happiness you’ve created for yourself.

The hedonic treadmill

Imagine something that you would really like to do right now.

What did you think of? Taking a long warm bath? Drinking wine with your friends? Going to an amusement park?

Wouldn’t it be great if you could do that right now? That would definitely have a positive influence on your happiness, right?

Now think about doing that exact thing every day, for the rest of your life, until the day you die.

Do you think you’d still be happy from doing that same thing after the 10th time? Or the 100th time? Or the 1000th time?

The answer is probably no. Even though this example is extreme, the theory of diminishing returns applies here. When repeated, the effect of the same event on your happiness will diminish to zero. That’s because the norms of what defines your happiness are constantly adapting. Your happiness equation transforms with your changing life, whether it’s for better or worse.

One of the best examples of this hedonic treadmill is the following:

Think of a big salary bump. You receive a raise of 50%! Congratulations, you now have money to spend on all kinds of things that make you and your family happy ! Will that happiness sustain into the future? Unfortunately not. Instead of appreciating the luxury of your raise, you will grow accustomed to this extra money and will slowly take it for granted. This adaptation is known as the hedonic treadmill , and it is generally conceived as the arch-enemy of happiness.

Now that you know what this hedonic treadmill is, it might seem like a waste of time to continue reading this essay, right?

NO! While the hedonic treadmill is very much real – I’ll never deny that – I don’t want you to think that greater happiness can’t be achieved. You just need to be willing to actively look for it in the right places.

See, nobody on the internet will be able to define happiness for you. What makes you happy is a constantly changing equation that is unique in every way. Why would you believe some scientist when he or she claims that happiness is impossible to pursue? What does that scientist know about you? Nothing!

It’s up to you to define what makes you happy.

How to find your own happiness

By now, you should know 3 things:

• Your happiness equation is unique. Nobody can tell you what exactly to do in order to be happy.
• You can pursue both short-term happiness and long-term happiness. The key is to find the perfect balance between the two. You can be happy on the journey towards a happy future.
• The hedonic treadmill will diminish the effect events have on your happiness over time.

Let’s combine this knowledge. I want you to realize that you can learn more about your own happiness equation. You can find out what it is that makes you happy.

Got it? Good, because the next step is to define what the difference is between short-term and long-term happiness. You have to find out how much you value your happiness on the journey itself and how much of that happiness you want to sacrifice by investing in a potentially happier future.

Now, what if I told you that a perfect balance between long-term and short-term happiness can limit the effect that the hedonic treadmill has on you?

Yes, by consciously varying the pursuit of short-term and long-term happiness, you can vary the factors in your life in a way that leads to greater happiness. If you are aware of your own happiness equation, you’re able to pursue happiness in the areas where it matters the most.

What I want you to do is consider your personal happiness again for a moment.

Think back at the last week, and remember what things or events had a positive influence on your happiness. Think of the things that really made you smile or feel satisfied with where you were or how you acted.

What came to your mind? Was it work? Was it your relationship? Was it that silly movie you watched? Was it a nice sunny day spent outside? It could be literally anything! What I want most of all now is that you realize how you just measured a part of your happiness.

You see, even though happiness is claimed to be the factor of life that’s the most difficult to measure, you can still measure what is currently part of your happiness equation. It’s simple. For me personally, when I think back to yesterday, I remember that I really enjoyed spending time with my girlfriend, walking through the woods on a sunny day, and just relaxing (a.k.a. doing nothing!)

These are happiness factors that were a vital part of my happiness equation yesterday. It was a weekend day after a long and busy week at work, so I was really trying to find some short-term happiness. The things that I did yesterday were perfect, as it was a very happy day for me.

You should not be surprised if I told you that I was consciously trying to be happy by spending my day doing things that satisfied my short-term happiness.

You can do exactly the same. All you need to do is to define your own happiness.

And with that said, I want to conclude this essay about happiness. Happiness is different for every single human being on this planet. If you arrived at this essay without having a clear idea of what happiness is, I hope you now know that your personal happiness can be defined, measured, and quantified. But only YOU can do this, no one else will be able to tell you what happiness really is. If you are willing to actively pursue greater happiness, I believe you can steer your life in the best direction.

Now it’s time to hear from you! How do you define your own happiness right now? What has been your biggest happiness factor last week? Do you think you can learn from your own happiness?

I’d love to hear all about it in the comments!

Founder of Tracking Happiness, with over 100 interviews and a focus on practical advice, our content extends beyond happiness tracking. Hailing from the Netherlands, I’m a skateboarding enthusiast, marathon runner, and a dedicated data junkie, tracking my happiness for over a decade.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

• Essay Guides
• Other Essays
• Happiness Essay: Definition, Outline & Examples
• Speech Topics
• Basics of Essay Writing
• Essay Topics
• Main Academic Essays
• Research Paper Topics
• Basics of Research Paper Writing
• Miscellaneous
• Chicago/ Turabian
• Data & Statistics
• Methodology
• Admission Writing Tips
• Admission Advice
• Other Guides
• Student Life
• Studying Tips
• Understanding Plagiarism
• Academic Writing Tips
• Basics of Dissertation & Thesis Writing

• Research Paper Guides
• Formatting Guides
• Basics of Research Process
• Admission Guides
• Dissertation & Thesis Guides

Happiness Essay: Definition, Outline & Examples

Table of contents

Use our free Readability checker

A happiness essay is an academic paper that explores the concept of happiness, and how it can be achieved and maintained in our lives. The purpose of a happiness essay is to explore the psychological, social, and cultural factors that contribute to happiness. On this type of essay, students should provide insights into how individuals can cultivate a happy and fulfilling life.

In this article, we will explore the definition of happiness and its various components and outline the key elements of happiness essay structure. Whether you are seeking how to write a happiness essay or want to know more about this feeling, this is the right article. You will also find en example for your inspiration. Struggling with your writing? Say goodbye to stress and let our experts handle your ' write my essay for me ' challenge. Our team of skilled writers is ready to tackle any topic and deliver top-notch papers tailored to your instructions.

What Is a Happiness Essay?

The definition of a happiness essay can differ, but in general, a happiness essay is a paper that examines emotions, experiences, and perspectives related to the pursuit of contentment. Likewise, it may explore the philosophical and psychological aspects of delight and how it is affected by factors like wealth, relationships, and personal circumstances. A happiness essay provides a deeper understanding of enjoyment, how it can be achieved, and its influence on society. It is an opportunity to take readers on a reflective and stimulating journey, exploring the essence of joy. Writing a thematic essay on happiness is also a chance for writers to share their thoughts and observations with other people. Let's dive in and explore what delight really means to you!

Purpose of an Essay on Happiness

The reason for writing an essay about happiness is to explore the concept of delight to understand what it means to different people. For example, many believe it primarily depends on external factors such as wealth, success, or material possessions. However, it can be illustrated that true joy largely comes from internal factors, like one's outlook, personal growth, and relationships, especially with family and friends. A happiness essay helps to dispel common misconceptions about what satisfaction truly is. Writing a paper on this subject can describe a deeper, healthy understanding of this universal pursuit.

Ideas to Write a Happiness Essay on

When you want to write a happiness essay , first, it is important to ask: What is happiness to you? How can it be understood? One approach is to define happiness and examine its various dimensions, such as psychological, emotional, and physiological.  For example, career satisfaction is a crucial factor in achieving contentment. When people enjoy their jobs and feel fulfilled, they tend to report higher levels of delight. It's worth exploring the link between happiness and career satisfaction and how people can find meaning in their work.  Another idea of how to be happy would look at factors like relationships, personal growth, and achievement. Besides, the connection between money and happiness can also be a significant factor in the quality of life. Can you buy satisfaction?  The pursuit of happiness is a fundamental aspect of life, and analyzing its various dimensions can help us gain valuable insights into what leads to a happy life.

Happiness Essay Outline

An outline for a happiness essay serves as a roadmap for writers to keep their paper organized. It helps to break down researched content into manageable sections while ensuring that all necessary information is included.  The essay outline on happiness example might look something like this:

• Topic definition
• Topic importance
• Thesis statement
• Topic sentence
• Supporting evidence
• Concluding sentence, connected to your thesis
• Summarizing main points
• Final thoughts and future recommendations
• Encouraging readers to reflect on their delight

This outline provides a comprehensive format for an essay about happiness, ensuring that articles are well-structured, easy to understand, and cover all the necessary information.

Structure of a Happiness Essay

Happiness essay structure is critical to a successful article because it helps to organize the ideas clearly and coherently. It is easier for readers to follow and understand writers' perspectives on this complex and multifaceted topic if the essay has the following sections: Introduction:  provides context for the topic with a clear thesis statement. Body:  delves into the details while providing evidence to support the thesis. Conclusion:  summarizes the main points while restating the thesis statement in a new way. By following this structure, writers can produce compelling essays on happiness in life that engage and inform readers.

Happiness Essay Introduction

The introduction of a happiness essay is critical to setting the stage for the article’s body. Good introductions should have three key elements: a hook, background information, and a thesis statement.  The hook draws readers in and keeps them engaged, but a boring or generic one may make them lose interest. The background information provides context for the topic and gives the audience a better understanding of why the essay is being written. Lastly, the thesis statement states the writer's stance on contentment, providing a roadmap for the rest of the essay.  An essay about happiness introduction is an important part that sets the tone and lays the foundation for the paper. By following this structure, authors can ensure that the introduction of their paper is well-organized, concise, and effective in drawing the readers into their piece.

Happiness Essay Introduction Example

An introduction to your paper should be engaging, interesting, brief, and to the point. It clearly states the objectives of the research and introduces readers to the key arguments that will be discussed. Here is an example of a happiness essay introduction:

Happiness Essay Thesis Statement

A happiness essay thesis statement is the backbone of an article and a crucial element in your paper. A good thesis statement about happiness should be arguable, specific, and relevant to the topic. It is important for defining the scope of an article and highlighting its focus while also identifying what it will not cover.  Finally, the thesis statement tells readers the writer's point of view and sets a standard for judging whether the essay achieves its goal. By creating an effective statement, writers can significantly impact their paper's quality by providing direction and focus to the author’s argument.

Happiness Thesis Statement Example

This thesis statement defines the pursuit of delight and outlines its contributing factors. Here is an example of a happiness essay thesis statement sample:

Happiness Essay Body

A happiness body paragraph is a component of the body section of an article that provides evidence, examples, and supporting arguments to develop an essay's central idea. Good paragraphs cover a topic in-depth and engage readers, prompting them to reflect on what brings joy and how to pursue it. A paragraph about happiness should be well-structured and focused, analyzing factors contributing to contentment in a logical and coherent manner. A well-crafted essay body on happiness includes several paragraphs, each focused on specific aspects of enjoyment while supporting an article's overall argument. Following these guidelines, writers can create persuasive essay paragraphs.

Happiness Body Paragraph Example

Body paragraphs should provide a deeper understanding of the topic while engaging readers with relevant, thought-provoking information. Happiness body paragraph example:

Happiness Essay Conclusion

A conclusion is the last section of an essay that summarizes the main points while offering a final perspective on the topic. To write a strong conclusion on a happiness essay, consider these key elements: 

• summarize the main arguments
• provide closure
• include a final thought or reflection
• leave a lasting impression
• avoid introducing new information.

A good conclusion can make the difference between a forgettable essay and one that stays with the reader long after they've finished. Following these guidelines ensures that your essay conclusion about happiness effectively wraps up the argument and provides readers with memorable final impressions.

Happiness Essay Conclusion Sample

Conclusion helps readers better understand the topic by providing a sense of resolution or insight. Here is an example of a happiness essay conclusion:

How to Write an Essay on Happiness?

If you want to write an essay on happiness, remember that it can be a hard yet rewarding experience. Whether you are doing it for a class assignment, a job, a scholarship application, or personal growth, exploring what contentment means to you can be the journey of self-discovery.  You should clearly understand the topic and have a well-structured plan. The steps to effective happiness essay writing include defining satisfaction, conducting research, and organizing thoughts. When writing, it's crucial to consider factors that contribute to delight and obstacles that can hinder the process. Following the steps below, you can craft an article that effectively communicates your perspective on this topic.

1.  Pick a Topic About Happiness

Choosing a topic about happiness essay can be daunting, but with some guidance and creativity, you may find a subject that is both interesting and relevant. When brainstorming for happiness essay topics, follow these steps:

• Start with a broad idea related to your issue. Narrow the focus to a specific aspect, gather information, list potential cases, evaluate options, refine the matter, and check for relevance to your audience.
• Gather information, consider the different perspectives, and take note of the arguments you come across.
• Come up with five to ten potential concerns and evaluate each, asking questions such as if it is interesting, has enough information available, and if you can find a unique approach.
• Refine your chosen discussion to make it specific, focused, relevant, and interesting to your audience.

2. Do In-Depth Research

Gathering information from credible sources is crucial when writing an essay about happiness. Here are some tips to ensure that you collect accurate and relevant facts:

• Research from trustworthy sources like academic journals, books by experts, and government websites.
• Evaluate information's credibility and reliability. When you are reading, take notes on the information that you find. Write down the author, title, and publication date of each source to keep track of your research.
• Use multiple sources to broaden your understanding of your topic.
• Organize your research with a citation manager or bibliography.

Following these tips, you can delve into a wealth of credible sources for your happiness essays to elevate your article to new heights of insight.

3. Create an Outline for a Happiness Essay

Crafting an outline is essential in writing an essay on happiness and can give your work the structure and direction it needs to succeed. Here's how to create an effective happiness essay outline:

• Framework Start by outlining the main sections of your essay - introduction, body, and conclusion.
• Pinpoint your ideas Determine the key points you want to convey in each section.
• Supplement with specifics Add details that reinforce and support your ideas under each main point.
• Follow the guide Use the happiness essay outline example above as a starting point, but feel free to customize depending on the situation.

By following these steps and utilizing an essay outline , you'll have a clear map to guide you as you craft your paper, ensuring that your ideas are coherently organized, and your writing flows effortlessly.

4. Write an Essay About Happiness

In this essay about happiness, we will delve into the elusive and complex nature of this emotion. Here is an example to follow when you write your happiness essay.

5. Proofread Your Happiness Essay

When proofreading your happiness essay, make sure to take your time and approach it methodically. Follow these steps:

• Read through the entire essay to get a sense of its overall structure and flow.
• Pay close attention to the introduction, as this sets the tone for the entire piece.
• Look for typos, grammatical errors, and awkward phrasing .
• Ensure your paragraphs are well-organized, with clear transitions between ideas. Check that your happy essay accurately reflects your thoughts and clearly conveys the message you want.
• Finally, read the paper out loud to yourself, or have someone else read it to you.

This can help you pick up on any errors that you might have missed during your initial proofreading. Finally, the article will leave a lasting impression on your reader and enhance your credibility as a writer.

Happiness Essay Examples

If you're looking to write truly captivating happiness essays, it's always helpful to seek inspiration from various sources. Consider checking out these excellent essay examples about happiness:  Happiness essay example 1

Essay example about happiness 2

Happiness essay sample 3

Essay on happiness example 4

Example of a happiness essay 5

They offer a rich tapestry of perspectives on what enjoyment truly means. Whether you draw on your own experiences or delve into the experiences of others, a happiness essay example will serve as a valuable resource as you strive to make your mark on this timeless topic.

Happiness Essay Writing Tips

When writing a happiness essay, there are key tips to keep in mind to help you create a compelling piece of work. Here are a few suggestions to get you started in happiness essays writing:

• Explore the concept from a cultural or historical perspective, looking at how attitudes towards your topic have changed over time across different societies.
• Consider how relationships, community, and social connections shape our enjoyment. How can these factors interact?
• Weigh the benefits and drawbacks of different approaches, such as positive or negative thinking, mindfulness, and self-care, offering a well-rounded perspective on the topic.
• Reflect on the connection between happiness and success, considering whether one necessarily leads to the other or can be pursued independently of success.
• Incorporate humor and lightheartedness into your writing, making your essay entertaining.

By going about integrating these unique tips into your writing day by day, you'll be able to craft essays on happiness that are both original and memorable, capturing the reader's imagination from start to finish. Students can explore a vast range of topics through our platform, from an essay about true friendship  and a  family essay to an illustration essay that will show how to convey complex ideas in a clear and engaging way.

Bottom Line on Happiness Essay Writing

To write a happiness essay, you should consider providing long and in-depth ways to explore what truly brings us joy. Instead of repeating common knowledge, take a personal approach and reflect on the things that delight you. Consider the fact that relationships, gratitude, mindfulness, and activities all contribute to shaping our joy. Your happiness essays should also showcase your introspective side. Examine any challenges or obstacles you have faced in your journey toward contentment. This will make your paper not only unique but also relatable and insightful. The goal is to create a piece that offers a fresh perspective on the concept of happiness and a true reflection of your experiences.

Buy custom essay online from StudyCrumb and get a happiness paper delivered on time. Top-notch quality is guaranteed!

Daniel Howard is an Essay Writing guru. He helps students create essays that will strike a chord with the readers.

You may also like

Satisfaction is never a straightforward and easily attainable idea. It has intrigued philosophers, religious figures, and people alike for centuries. Some say contentment is found inside a material wealth lifestyle, and others believe it is a state of mind or a result of spiritual fulfillment. But what is happiness, really? And how can we cultivate it in our own lives?

True happiness comes from family, friends, and learning to be content in life, while money can only purchase momentary happiness.

Contentment brings a smile to our faces, peace to our hearts, and a skip in our steps. It's what many of us strive for every day, and it turns out it's not just good for our spirits but our health too! Studies have linked contentment to lower stress, reduced risk of heart disease, and elevated life satisfaction. Delight can come from doing what you love, being with loved ones, or having a sense of purpose. Or, it may simply be found in everyday moments like a sunny day, a good meal, or a breathtaking sunset. Although joy can be fleeting and affected by life events, we can still work to cultivate it in our lives.

In conclusion, delight is a difficult and multi-faceted concept that can influence various factors, including personal relationships, life events, and individual perspectives. The pursuit of contentment is a common initiative for all humans, and it is evident that becoming content requires a perfect balance and order of internal and external factors. This article presents evidence that helps you see clearly that contentment is not a fixed state. It is a journey that needs effort, reflection, and self-awareness to enjoy. I hope this paper has helped you realize a deeper understanding of this topic and become better equipped to embark on your pursuit of joy. 

Contentment is a subjective experience that varies significantly from person to person. It is often considered the ultimate goal of human life, and many people spend their entire lives searching for it. Despite its elusive nature, it is a crucial component of well-being and has been linked to numerous benefits for physical, mental, and emotional health. The reasons to smile or experience joy are varied and can be both internal and external. Some individuals find joy in the simple things in life, like being with family, pursuing their passions, or exploring new experiences. On the other hand, others may find it through accomplishing personal goals, acquiring material goods, or attaining financial security. Nonetheless, it's crucial to keep in mind that these external sources of happiness may not always be possible and may not alleviate suffering. Conversely, true joy comes from within and is characterized by a sense of being content, satisfied, and with purpose. It can be cultivated through mindfulness, gratitude, and self-reflection. By focusing on personal growth, forming meaningful relationships, and finding meaning and purpose in life, individuals, including children, can develop a deep sense of satisfaction that is not dependent on external circumstances and is not easily disturbed by life's problems. In conclusion, delight is a complex and multifaceted experience that both internal and external factors can influence. While external sources can bring temporary joy, true and lasting contentment can only be found within. Individuals can create a foundation for joy that will endure throughout their lives by focusing on personal growth and cultivating a positive mindset.

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

Happiness: A Very Short Introduction

Author webpage

• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Happiness: A Very Short Introduction considers the true nature of happiness and the current thinking on the subject, from psychology to philosophy. What is happiness? Is it subjective or can we put an objective value on it? How can and should we pursue happiness? Happiness is an everyday term in our lives, and most of us strive to be happy, but defining happiness can be difficult. There are many diverse routes to happiness. How much of our view on what constitutes happiness is influenced by secular Western ideas on the contemporary pursuit of a good life?

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
• Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

• Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

External resource

• In the OUP print catalogue
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions Essay

Introduction, personal view about happiness, suggestions on how to be happy, works cited.

Happiness means different things for different people. This notwithstanding, every person is concerned about being happy. Drawing from a study by Radwan (1), defining what happiness is a very difficult task. For certain people, happiness is as a result of being content. It is a unique reaction by a person who feels that everything is going the way he or she desires. To some, it is a feeling that one experiences after attaining set goals.

According to Carlin and Capps (185), most people tend to describe happiness in ways that are quite vivid than definitions of happiness. Despite the fact that people have no problem identifying an expression of happiness when they come across one, no agreement on definitions of happiness exists. This view is also supported by Selin and Davey (294), who argued that defining happiness has been complicated by the fact that no common measurement parameters exist.

A major challenge when it comes to defining happiness has to do with the fact that it has many different faces (Lawrence and Lawrence 6). Despite the huge interest expressed by people in happiness and how to define it, it is very rare that most people will spend time thinking about the concept. Personally, I believe that happiness should be defined as that experience that causes an individual to feel alive. Despite the fact that defining happiness is complicated, there are certain things that can be said about happiness.

First, happiness depends on an individual’s way of looking at things. By and large, what makes one person happy may not trigger happiness in another person. For instance, while money will bring happiness to some people, it may not create happiness for others. Secondly, happiness may be realized by a person who gets what meets a need in his or her life. An individual who is financially insecure may experience happiness when he or she finally gets a job with a stable income. I am also of the opinion that happiness just occurs as people go about their businesses.

I strongly believe that true happiness always comes from within a person. It is a feeling of self assurance. While some people are of the opinion that individuals are the best judges of their own happiness, others are convinced that outsiders are better placed when it comes to judging happiness. Unlike the happiness that is from within, happiness due to external factors is bound to disappear after sometime. For example, any happiness that is as a result of one having all the money he or she desires to have fades away when the money gets depleted. While some people will be happy because they have money and everything else they may require, others are not bothered with material wealth and will be happy with or without money.

In order to maximize happiness, nations and communities should put a number of things into consideration when formulating public policies. Among other things, policy makers should come up with plans to ensure that individuals can get rid of all negative emotions that often lead to unhappiness. It is also imperative for policy makers to see to it that public policies include a training component about happiness. Without a doubt, it is necessary to train everyone about happiness and how to go about getting happiness. As has already been explained, one approach of creating happiness in an individual is to ensure that all bad feelings are done away with. Through training, individuals may also be advised on the best way possible to determine what creates happiness for them.

Another requirement for an individual’s happiness is the ability for one to think positively. It is therefore important for policy makers to figure out how to encourage people to be positive thinkers even in the face of serious challenges. As pointed out by Radwan (1), being positive opens an avenue for an individual to be hopeful and this in turn leads to a feeling of happiness. For an individual to increase his or her level of happiness, it is necessary to be aware of the things that make him or her happy. Nations and communities can take advantage of this fact to help people to be happy. Policy makers should be tasked with the responsibility of coming up with policies that lead to the creation of an environment that leads to the availability of those things that make people happy.

A number of factors have been identified as having an impact on the happiness of individuals (Selin and Davey 297). They include income, security, democracy, freedom, culture, and values. Although the actual connection between income and happiness is not very clear, research undertaken by some research professionals indicate that the level of an individual’s income has a huge effect on his or her happiness. According to McEachern (180), happiness is a basic human right that cannot be taken away from an individual and improving the economy is one strategy that a nation or a community can adopt to create happiness. Arguably, the same can also be said about democracy and happiness. In addition, culture plays a very important role in determining a person’s level of happiness. For this reason, it is imperative for policy makers to think about integrating these factors in the formulation of policies that are meant to promote happiness in people’s lives. Security is equally important when considering happiness and state governments must see to it that people live in a secure environment. According to Biswas-Diener (76), every development should be geared towards promoting happiness in the society.

Without a doubt, happiness is a very important need for every human being. For this reason, efforts must be made to come up with policies that will create a healthy environment for happiness to be realized. State governments are therefore expected to do everything possible to create an environment where individuals can be free to pursue happiness. Security also plays a critical role in promoting happiness.

Biswas-Diener, Robert. Positive Psychology as Social Change. Amherst, MA: Springer Science & Business Media, 2011. Print.

Carlin, Nathan and Donald Capps. 100 Years of Happiness: Insights and Findings from the Experts. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2012. Print.

Lawrence, Denis And Anne Lawrence. Happiness Makes You Healthy: Research and Practice. USA, Lulu, 2013. Print.

McEachern, William. Macroeconomics: A Contemporary Approach. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning, 2012. Print.

Radwan, Farouk. Definition of Happiness and How to be Happy in Life . 2014. Web.

Selin, Helaine and Gareth Davey. Happiness across Cultures: Views of Happiness and Quality of Life in Non-Western Cultures, Amherst, MA: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. Print.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, June 23). Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions. https://ivypanda.com/essays/happiness-personal-view-and-suggestions/

"Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions." IvyPanda , 23 June 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/happiness-personal-view-and-suggestions/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions'. 23 June.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions." June 23, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/happiness-personal-view-and-suggestions/.

1. IvyPanda . "Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions." June 23, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/happiness-personal-view-and-suggestions/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Happiness: Personal View and Suggestions." June 23, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/happiness-personal-view-and-suggestions/.

• Happiness Meaning and Theories
• Happiness: Common and Personal Criteria
• UCLA Students Longitudinal Study
• If “Love Is a Fallacy,” Are the “Loves” or Romantic Relationships Portrayed in the Story Logical or Illogical (Fallacious)?
• Love Portrayal in Modern Day Film and Literature
• Love Concept: "Butterfly Lovers" and "Love Is a Fallacy"
• Analyzing Love and Love Addiction in Relationships
• The Nature of Humor: What Makes People Laugh

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Helen Garner on happiness: ‘It’s taken me 80 years to figure out it’s not a tranquil, sunlit realm’

In a series of short essays, writers consider what happiness means to them now, after the reckoning of the past few years

• Read more in the What makes me happy now series

W hat is happiness, anyway? Does anybody know? It’s taken me 80 years to figure out that it’s not a tranquil, sunlit realm at the top of the ladder you’ve spent your whole life hauling yourself up, rung by rung. It’s more like the thing that Christians call grace: you can’t earn it, you can’t strive for it, it’s not a reward for virtue. It exists all right, it will be given to you, but it’s fluid, it’s evasive, it’s out of reach. It’s something you glimpse in the corner of your eye until one day you’re up to your neck in it. And before you’ve had time to take a big gasp and name it, it’s gone.

So I’m not going to spend what’s left of my life hanging round waiting for it. I’m going to settle for small, random stabs of extreme interestingness – moments of intense awareness of the things I’m about to lose, and of gladness that they exist. Things that remind me of other things. Tiny scenes. Words that people choose, their accidentally biblical turns of phrase. Hand-lettered signs, quotes from books, offhand remarks that make me think of dead people, or of living ones I can no longer stand the sight of. I plan to keep writing them down, praising them, arranging them like stepping stones into the dark. Maybe they’ll lead me somewhere good before I shrivel up and blow away.

On a shop window, somewhere up in Coburg: “Halal Meats, All the Fishes and Groceries.”

“Resentment is like taking poison and hoping that someone else will die.”

The under-16s footy coach leaning on the fence and muttering between clenched teeth, “ Don’t turn your back on the play. ”

The fact that the footy season exists, that it’s coming around again. The poetry of footy journalism: a player who “slides out of the pack like a gymnast’s ribbon”.

A family who, in the Age death notices, salutes their father in two words: “Our champion.”

Twenty minutes into a bout of gardening, when I notice I’m moving very slowly from task to task; when haste and impatience have left me.

One driver to another, on the 59 tram: “Quin. She was heavy drinker, you know? Quin? Of England? She die ressently, you know? She drink every day. That why she live a good age.”

An art critic on Delacroix: “… the deep appeal of violence in life and art, and the place of aggression in any realistic account of human purposes.”

My grandsons, who once curled in my lap and sucked their thumbs, striding down the steps into my kitchen: a room suddenly full of man.

The closing words of an article about a theatre company: “For the loneliness. For the forgiveness.”

Sitting shoulder to shoulder with the murdered man’s mother, leafing through magazines, laughing and sighing over trashy celebrities and pretty, ill-cut Chinese garments you can buy online. How hard she hugs me, when I leave.

Gospel shouters. The fact that Aretha Franklin once walked this earth.

The theatre nurse gripping my hand at the moment the anaesthetic knocks me out.

The surprise of feeling my face soften at the theme music of the Japanese series Midnight Diner.

Realising that I have an enormous vocabulary.

How one of our chooks crouches and shivers and tramples with her feet when I open the gate.

My granddaughter getting a mullet and a job making cocktails and a gig singing jazz in a bar.

Finding a clean hanky in my apron pocket.

Learning how little it takes to please me.

Stuck in traffic on Brunswick Road, listening to Glen Campbell singing By the Time I Get to Phoenix . I know every note, every pause, every beautiful American place-name – Albuquerque, Oklahoma – and the freight of what’s left unsung. Why is he leaving? Why didn’t she believe he would? The singer’s voice hovers over the woman, her door, her work, her bed, while he vanishes down the endless highway – he’s a tail-light, a pin-point, and he’s gone.

Helen Garner is the author of The Spare Room, Joe Cinque’s Consolation and Helen Garner’s Diaries, volumes 1-3

• Helen Garner
• What makes me happy now
• Australian books

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

• Latest Latest
• The West The West
• Sports Sports
• Opinion Opinion
• Magazine Magazine

Want to be happy? Try helping other people

The author of ‘purpose’ explains the benefits of helping others, with no thought of reward.

By Samuel Wilkinson

We all want to be happy. This is the driving force behind so much of what we do in life. But it’s not always intuitive what types of activities and situations actually lead to happiness. Predicting how we are going to feel in a given circumstance is what psychologists refer to as affective forecasting. All of us make such predictions every day without thinking, and it shapes how we prioritize our lives. Unfortunately, it turns out that we are surprisingly poor judges of what makes us happy. This is one of the reasons why life is so complicated. We end up spending loads of time investing in pursuits that don’t necessarily lead to deep and enduring happiness.

As a case in point, if you were asked whether you would prefer to win the lottery or suffer a terrible accident that left you paraplegic, your answer would be obvious. Why? Because you predict that you would be much happier as a lottery winner than an accident victim. Such a study was actually done , by the way. In the 1970s, Philip Brickman and his colleagues compared happiness and well-being between paraplegic accident victims and lottery winners. Surprisingly — and as a testament to our collective inability to predict how we will feel in a given situation— in terms of their abilities to enjoy everyday pleasures, there was no difference between the lottery winners and the accident victims. If anything, the lottery winners had a bit less ability to enjoy things (though this difference wasn’t statistically significant).

So, why is it that we’re so bad at predicting what will makes us happy? Well, part of the answer is that our brains evolved in a time of relative scarcity. Because of this, our intuitions often lead us to believe that more material possessions (which, at one point in our distant past, helped us survive) will make us happier. We are psychologically wired to believe that if we can just obtain more material goods or get that promotion with higher pay, then we will finally be happy. But nature hasn’t really prepared us to live in a time of relative abundance. We aren’t equipped with a psychological gauge that indicates when we have enough for our happiness.

As Adam Smith rightly observed: “The desire of food is limited in every man by the narrow capacity of the human stomach; but the desire of the conveniences and ornaments of building, dress, equipage, and household furniture, seems to have no limit or certain boundary.”

Modern psychological studies have repeatedly made clear that, beyond having sufficient to meet our basic needs, more wealth does not lead to more happiness.

Here’s another example of how we’re bad at predicting what leads to happiness: a long list of experiments has shown that helping others leads to deep feelings of reward and satisfaction, sometimes more so than when we help ourselves. Yet most of us don’t walk around thinking, If I could only find more people to help today, then I could be happier . (Can you imagine how different the world would be if we intuitively realized that helping others will increase our happiness?) But the evidence suggests that such thinking would be more psychologically accurate than the natural intuitions that we actually have.

In one study published in the prestigious journal Science, university students were given some money in an envelope. Half of the students were instructed to spend the money on themselves — either on a bill, an expense or a personal gift — by the end of the day. The other half were told to spend it on someone else or donate it to a charity. Surprising to most people (including the students themselves), those who spent the money on others were happier by the end of the day. Similar experiments have confirmed the finding that altruism is rewarding.

Encouragingly, the happiness-inducing characteristic of generosity may even be hard-wired into human nature. Evidence for this comes from the observation that this phenomenon seems to emerge quite early in childhood. Among toddlers younger than two years of age, those who give away treats are happier than those who receive treats. And, curiously, what researchers refer to as “costly giving” seems to lead to more happiness than non-costly giving. In other words, giving away something that is yours (which requires sacrifice), as opposed to giving away something that isn’t yours, brings more emotional reward.

None of this is to say that we shouldn’t spend time on self-care. We all need time for relaxation and recreation. But if we’re not careful, our brains unwittingly lead us in the direction of over-investing in ourselves and our careers and under-investing in helping others (which can be a recipe for loneliness, and hence unhappiness).

If you’re considering enhancing your altruistic footprint to maximize your happiness, it’s important to note that not all giving is created equal. Here are a few rules to keep in mind:

1. Unpaid service is generally more emotionally rewarding than if you are compensated for your time and labor. (Remember the finding that service that requires sacrifice is more rewarding than service that doesn’t.) Why is this the case? It seems that extrinsic rewards, such as money, can paradoxically undermine our intrinsic motivations and rewards for helping. Relatedly, being compensated for service may make the interaction more transactional and less about the goodwill of giving.

2. Begrudged service isn’t very rewarding. In fact, it could lead to resentment and, therefore, less happiness. This doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea to lovingly coax your teenage children into doing chores or volunteering at a rest home. It just means that they (and you) will maximize the emotional reward reaped from service by having a good attitude.

3. Face-to-face giving seems to be the gold standard. Serving others in a way you can interact with them and experience their gratitude produces more emotional reward than virtual or anonymous service. This likely has to do with the fact that we evolved in relatively small, nonvirtual communities where face-to-face interactions were the norm. It’s not that virtual or anonymous types of service aren’t important. But if you’re trying to maximize the bang for your buck, try to find opportunities to help in your backyard.

4. For the purposes of producing happiness, political activism (even if it’s unpaid) is not the same as helping others. Spending time in the service of a political cause is often a zero-sum game. When the side you’re on wins, it can be elating. But when you lose, you can be left with feelings of deep disappointment and nihilism. On top of this, as Arthur Brooks has noted , so much of modern political activism breeds deep feelings of “anger and contempt for people on the ‘wrong side’ of the issue.” These sorts of feelings can clearly take a psychological toll on our happiness. This isn’t to say there aren’t important causes to rally behind. But if you spend all your discretionary time as an activist and none of it in other kinds of service, your mental health will suffer.

So, the next time you find yourself with some unexpected time that you’re not sure how to fill, remember that you’re not very good at predicting what will make you happy. Your brain will tell you that you should catch up on a work assignment, check your email or engage in some other activity to “get ahead.” But if you want to maximize your happiness, try doing something for someone else.

Dr. Samuel Wilkinson is an associate professor at the Yale School of Medicine and associate director of the Yale Depression Research Program. This essay is adapted from his book, “Purpose: What Evolution and Human Nature Imply About the Meaning of Our Existence,” published by Pegasus Books.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

The Happiness Gap Between Left and Right Isn’t Closing

By Thomas B. Edsall

Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C., on politics, demographics and inequality.

Why is it that a substantial body of social science research finds that conservatives are happier than liberals?

A partial answer: Those on the right are less likely to be angered or upset by social and economic inequities, believing that the system rewards those who work hard, that hierarchies are part of the natural order of things and that market outcomes are fundamentally fair.

Those on the left stand in opposition to each of these assessments of the social order, prompting frustration and discontent with the world around them.

The happiness gap has been with us for at least 50 years, and most research seeking to explain it has focused on conservatives. More recently, however, psychologists and other social scientists have begun to dig deeper into the underpinnings of liberal discontent — not only unhappiness, but also depression and other measures of dissatisfaction.

One of the findings emerging from this research is that the decline in happiness and in a sense of agency is concentrated among those on the left who stress matters of identity, social justice and the oppression of marginalized groups.

There is, in addition, a parallel phenomenon taking place on the right as Donald Trump and his MAGA loyalists angrily complain of oppression by liberals who engage in a relentless vendetta to keep Trump out of the White House.

There is a difference in the way the left and right react to frustration and grievance. Instead of despair, the contemporary right has responded with mounting anger, rejecting democratic institutions and norms.

In a 2021 Vox article, “ Trump and the Republican Revolt Against Democracy ,” Zack Beauchamp described in detail the emergence of destructive and aggressive discontent among conservatives.

Citing a wide range of polling data and academic studies, Beauchamp found:

More than twice as many Republicans (39 percent) as Democrats (17 percent) believe that “if elected leaders won’t protect America, the people must act — even if that means violence.”

Fifty-seven percent of Republicans consider Democrats to be “enemies” compared with 41 percent of Democrats who view Republicans as enemies.

Among Republicans, support for “the use of force to defend our way of life,” as well as for the belief that “strong leaders bend rules” and that “sometimes you have to take the law in your own hands,” grows stronger in direct correlation with racial and ethnic hostility.

Trump himself has repeatedly warned of the potential for political violence. In January, he predicted bedlam if the criminal charges filed in federal and state courts against him damaged his presidential campaign:

I think they feel this is the way they’re going to try and win, and that’s not the way it goes. It’ll be bedlam in the country. It’s a very bad thing. It’s a very bad precedent. As we said, it’s the opening of a Pandora’s box.

Before he was indicted in New York, Trump claimed there would be “potential death and destruction” if he were charged.

At an Ohio campaign rally in March, Trump declared, “If I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a blood bath for the whole country.”

In other words, Trump and his allies respond to adversity and what they see as attacks from the left with threats and anger, while a segment of the left often but not always responds to adversity and social inequity with dejection and sorrow.

There are significant consequences for this internalization.

Jamin Halberstadt , a professor of psychology at the University of Otago in New Zealand and a co-author of “ Outgroup Threat and the Emergence of Cohesive Groups : A Cross-Cultural Examination,” argued in his emailed reply to my inquiry that “a focus on injustice and victimhood is by definition disempowering (isn’t that why we talk of ‘survivors’ rather than ‘victims’?), loss of control is not good for self-esteem or happiness.”

But, he pointed out:

This focus, while no doubt a part of the most visible and influential side of progressive ideology, is still just a part. “Liberalism” is a big construct, and I’m reluctant to reduce it to “a focus on social justice issues.” Some liberals have this view, but I suspect their influence is outsized because (a) they have the social media megaphone, and (b) we are in a climate in which freedom of expression, and in particular challenges to the worldview you characterize, have been curtailed.

Expanding on this line of argument, Halberstadt wrote:

I’m sure some self-described “liberals” have views that are counterproductive to their own happiness. One sub-ideology associated with liberalism is, as you describe, a sense of victimhood and grievance. But there is more than one way to respond to structural barriers. Within that group of the aggrieved, some probably see systemic problems that cannot be overcome, and that’s naturally demoralizing and depressing. But others see systemic problems as a challenge to overcome.

Taking Halberstadt’s assessment of the effects of grievance and victimhood a step farther, Timothy A. Judge , chairman of the department of management and human resources at Notre Dame, wrote in a 2009 paper, “ Core Self-Evaluations and Work Success ”:

Core self-evaluations (CSE) is a broad, integrative trait indicated by self-esteem, locus of control, generalized self-efficacy, and (low) neuroticism (high emotional stability). Individuals with high levels of CSE perform better on their jobs, are more successful in their careers, are more satisfied with their jobs and lives, report lower levels of stress and conflict, cope more effectively with setbacks, and better capitalize on advantages and opportunities.

I asked Judge and other scholars a question: Have liberal pessimists fostered an outlook that spawns unhappiness as its adherents believe they face seemingly insurmountable structural barriers?

Judge replied by email:

I do share the perspective that a focus on status, hierarchies and institutions that reinforce privilege contributes to an external locus of control. And the reason is fairly straightforward. We can only change these things through collective, and often, policy initiatives — which tend to be complex, slow, often conflictual, and outside our individual control. On the other hand, if I view “life’s chances” (Virginia Woolf’s term) to be mostly dependent on my own agency, this reflects an internal focus, which will often depend on enacting initiatives largely within my control.

Judge elaborated on his argument:

If our predominant focus in how we view the world is social inequities, status hierarchies, societal unfairness conferred by privilege, then everyone would agree that these things are not easy to fix, which means, in a sense, we must accept some unhappy premises: Life isn’t fair; outcomes are outside my control, often at the hands of bad, powerful actors; social change depends on collective action that may be conflictual; an individual may have limited power to control their own destiny, etc. These are not happy thoughts because they cause me to view the world as inherently unfair, oppressive, conflictual, etc. It may or may not be right, but I would argue that these are in fact viewpoints of how we view the world, and our place in it, that would undermine our happiness.

Last year, George Yancey , a professor of sociology at Baylor University, published “ Identity Politics, Political Ideology, and Well-being : Is Identity Politics Good for Our Well-being?”

Yancey argued that recent events “suggest that identity politics may correlate to a decrease in well-being particularly among young progressives and offer an explanation tied to internal elements within political progressiveness.”

By focusing on “political progressives, rather than political conservatives,” Yancey wrote, “a nuanced approach to understanding the relationship between political ideology and well-being begins to emerge.”

Identity politics, he continued, focuses “on external institutional forces that one cannot immediately alleviate.” It results in what scholars call the externalization of one’s “locus of control” or viewing the inequities of society as a result of powerful if not insurmountable outside forces including structural racism, patriarchy and capitalism — as opposed to believing that individuals can overcome such obstacles through hard work and collective effort.

As a result, Yancey wrote, “identity politics may be an important mechanism by which progressive political ideology can lead to lower levels of well-being.”

Conversely, Yancey pointed out, “a class-based progressive cognitive emphasis may focus less on the group identity, generating less of a need to rely on emotional narratives and dichotomous thinking, and may be less likely to be detrimental to the well-being of a political progressive.”

Yancey tested this theory using data collected in the 2021 Baylor Religion Survey of 1,232 respondents.

“Certain types of political progressive ideology can have contrasting effects on well-being,” Yancey wrote. “It is plausible that identity politics may explain the recent increase well-being gap between conservatives and progressives.”

Oskari Lahtinen , a senior researcher in psychology at the University of Turku in Finland, published a study in March, “ Construction and Validation of a Scale for Assessing Critical Social Justice Attitudes ,” that reinforces Yancey’s argument.

Lahtinen conducted two surveys of a total of 5,878 men and women to determine the share of Finnish citizens who hold “critical social justice attitudes” and how those who hold such views differ from those who do not.

Critical social justice proponents, on Lahtinen’s scale,

point out varieties of oppression that cause privileged people (e.g., male, white, heterosexual, cisgender) to benefit over marginalized people (e.g., woman, Black, gay, transgender). In critical race theory, some of the core tenets include that: (1) white supremacy and racism are omnipresent and “colorblind” policies are not enough to tackle them; (2) people of color have their own unique standpoint; and (3) races are social constructs.

What did Lahtinen find?

The critical social justice propositions encountered

strong rejection from men. Women expressed more than twice as much support for the propositions. In both studies, critical social justice was correlated modestly with depression, anxiety, and (lack of) happiness, but not more so than being on the political left was.

In an email responding to my inquiries about his paper, Lahtinen wrote that one of the key findings in his research is that “there were large differences between genders in critical social justice advocacy: 3 out of 5 women but only 1 out of 7 men expressed support for the critical social justice claims.”

In addition, he pointed out, “there was one variable in the study that closely corresponded to external locus of control: ‘Other people or structures are more responsible for my well-being than I myself am.’”

The correlation between agreement with this statement and unhappiness was among the strongest in the survey:

People on the left endorsed this item (around 2 on a scale of 0-4) far more than people on the right (around 0.5). Endorsing the belief was determined by political party preference much more than by gender for instance.

Such measures as locus of control, self-esteem, a belief in personal agency and optimism all play a major role in daily life.

In a December 2022 paper, “ The Politics of Depression : Diverging Trends in Internalizing Symptoms Among U.S. Adolescents by Political Beliefs,” Catherine Gimbrone , Lisa M. Bates , Seth Prins and Katherine M. Keyes , all at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health, noted that “trends in adolescent internalizing symptoms diverged by political beliefs, sex and parental education over time, with female liberal adolescents experiencing the largest increases in depressive symptoms, especially in the context of demographic risk factors including parental education.”

“These findings” they added, “indicate a growing mental health disparity between adolescents who identify with certain political beliefs. It is therefore possible that the ideological lenses through which adolescents view the political climate differentially affect their mental well-being.”

Gimbrone and her co-authors based their work on studies of 85,000 teenagers from 2005 to 2018. They found that

while internalizing symptom scores worsened over time for all adolescents, they deteriorated most quickly for female liberal adolescents. Beginning in approximately 2010 and continuing through 2018, female liberal adolescents reported the largest changes in depressive affect, self-esteem, self-derogation, and loneliness.

In conclusion, the authors wrote, “Socially underprivileged liberals reported the worst internalizing symptom scores over time, likely indicating that the experiences and beliefs that inform a liberal political identity are ultimately less protective against poor mental health than those that inform a conservative political identity.”

From another vantage point, Nick Haslam , a professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne, argued in his 2020 paper “ Harm Inflation: Making Sense of Concept Creep ” that recent years have seen “a rising sensitivity to harm within at least some Western cultures, such that previously innocuous or unremarked phenomena were increasingly identified as harmful, and that this rising sensitivity reflected a politically liberal moral agenda.”

As examples, Haslam wrote that definition of “trauma” has been

progressively broadened to include adverse life events of decreasing severity and those experienced vicariously rather than directly. “Mental disorder” came to include a wider range of conditions, so that new forms of psychopathology were added in each revision of diagnostic manuals and the threshold for diagnosing some existing forms was lowered. “Abuse” extended from physical acts to verbal and emotional slights, and incorporated forms of passive neglect in addition to active aggression.

Haslam described this process as concept creep and argued that “some examples of concept creep are surely the work of deliberate actors who might be called ‘expansion entrepreneurs.’”

Concept expansion, Haslam wrote, “can be used as a tactic to amplify the perceived seriousness of a movement’s chosen social problem.” In addition, “such expansion can be effective means of enhancing the perceived seriousness of a social problem or threat by increasing the perceived prevalence of both ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators.’”

Haslam cited studies showing that strong “correlates of holding expansive concepts of harm were compassion-related trait values, left-liberal political attitudes, and forms of morality associated with both.” Holding expansive concepts of harm was also “associated with affective and cognitive empathy orientation, and most strongly of all with endorsement of harm- and fairness-based morality.” Many of these characteristics are associated with the political left.

“The expansion of harm-related concepts has implications for acceptable self-expression and free speech,” Haslam wrote. “Creeping concepts enlarge the range of expressions judged to be unacceptably harmful, thereby increasing calls for speech restrictions. Expansion of the harm-related concepts of ‘hate’ and ‘hate speech’ exemplifies this possibility.”

While much of the commentary on the progressive left has been critical, Haslam takes a more ambivalent position: “Sometimes concept creep is presented in an exclusively negative frame,” he wrote, but that fails to address the “positive implications. To that end, we offer three positive consequences of the phenomenon.”

The first is that expansionary definitions of harm “can be useful in drawing attention to harms previously overlooked. Consider the vertical expansion of abuse to include ‘emotional abuse.’”

Second, “concept creep can prevent harmful practices by modifying social norms.” For example, “changing definitions of bullying that include social exclusion and antagonistic acts expressed horizontally rather than only downward in organizational hierarchies may also entrench norms against the commission of destructive behavior.”

And finally:

The expansion of psychology’s negative concepts can motivate interventions aimed at preventing or reducing the harms associated with the newly categorized behaviors. For instance, the conceptual expansion of addiction to include “behavioral” addictions (e.g., gambling and internet addictions) has prompted a flurry of research into treatment options, which has found that a range of psychosocial treatments can be successfully used to treat gambling, internet, and sexual addictions.

Timothy Judge suggests an approach to this line of inquiry that he believes may offer a way for liberalism to regain its footing:

I would like to think that there is a version of modern progressivism that accepts many of the premises of the problem and causes of inequality but does so in a way that also celebrates the power of individualism, of consensus, and of common cause. I know this is perhaps naïve. But if we give in to cynicism (that consensus can’t be found), that’s self-reinforcing, isn’t it? I think about the progress on how society now views sexual orientation, and the success stories. The change was too slow, painful for many, but was there any other way?

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here's our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

Thomas B. Edsall has been a contributor to the Times Opinion section since 2011. His column on strategic and demographic trends in American politics appears every Wednesday. He previously covered politics for The Washington Post. @ edsall

Andriy Sodomora, "The Tears and Smiles of Things: Stories, Sketches, Meditations" (Academic Studies Press, 2024‪)‬ New Books in Literary Studies

Inspired by Virgil’s exquisitely ambivalent phrase “sunt lacrimae rerum” (there are tears of/for/in things), Andriy Sodomora, the Ukrainian “voice” of classical antiquity, has produced a series of original vignettes and essays about things: the big things in our lives (like happiness, loneliness, and aging); the small things we do or see daily, rarely paying attention to them (like a tree’s shadow or the kernels on an ear of corn); and the things (i.e., objects) to which we form connections. The selected stories presented here are the first English translations of Sodomora’s profoundly intellectual and intertextual prose. Through his nostalgic memories and recollections, Sodomora takes readers on a journey through western Ukraine, as well as through world literature, from ancient Greece and Rome to the poetry of Paul Verlaine and Federico García Lorca. The Tears and Smiles of Things: Stories, Sketches, Meditations (Academic Studies Press, 2024) has been published with the support of the Translate Ukraine Translation Program. The book was translated by Roman Ivashkiv and Sabrina Jassi. Garima Garg is a New Delhi based journalist and author. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

• More Episodes
• New Books Network

Top Podcasts In Arts

More by new books network.