The hedonic treadmill model is one of my favorite concepts. I heard about it a long time ago, and ended up forgetting what my source was (probably something like cracked.com), but it stuck with me even then as an important construct. What researchers say is a "pessimistic conclusion" (Waterman, 2007), I sought refuge in: we cannot truly impact our lifetime happiness in any permanent way (Brickman & Campbell, 1971). Some see this as we will always be our same, depressing selves no matter what we do or buy, but I thought of it as a license to take risks and a comforting mantra for when life got hard.
Diener, Lucas, and Scollon (2006), wrote an article discussing the pessimistic nature of the hedonic treadmill and how to revise it, focusing more on "qualifying" certain aspects of it. The changes revolved around two main ideas: that individuals are different (coping strategies, individual set points), and that this affective adaptation is not as bad as it sounds (set points are not neutral, happiness set points can change). In the spirit of half-done classwork, I was going to stop there. I decided, however, to gather at least one or two other sources for the hedonic treadmill idea so I wasn't basing all of my ideas on one article.
I am really glad I did that.
In response to the originally assigned reading, A. S. Waterman (2007) wrote about a concept I had never heard before called eudaimonia. While hedonia is the pursuit of physical pleasures, eudaimonia is the pursuit of pleasure through the mastery of self and one's skills. To reference my precious article about "flow," eudaimonia is essentially the lifelong pursuit of flow experiences. Eudaimonic happiness is suggested by Waterman to be much longer-lasting and sustainable, and the adaptation process for it is much better understood. He was the one that used the term "staircase" in this situation, as "the opportunities for increasing levels of challenge in any endeavor are almost limitless" (2007).
This information has sent me down a rather exciting rabbit hole, but that's for a different article. In the meantime, I will still think of the hedonic treadmill as being comforting (as I currently like my happiness set point), but will also think about taking the "staircase" much more often.
References:
Brickman, P. & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H. Appley (Ed.), Adaptation level theory: A symposium (pp. 287-302). New York: Academic Press.
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist, 61, 305-314.
Waterman, A. S. (2007). On the importance of distinguishing hedonia and eudaimonia when contemplating the hedonic treadmill. American Psychologist, 62(6), 612-613.
Thursday, February 13, 2014
Friday, February 7, 2014
Flow
This is a wishy-washy sounding word, with an even wishy-washy-er sounding definition. Until you actually understand what it is about.
"Flow" is the feeling you get when you do something that is just the right amount of easy and challenging and is something you enjoy doing. It is like when you can't put down a particular book, or you get lost in the moment while playing an instrument. When experiencing flow, you lose track of time, and even after hours of doing this activity you feel mentally refreshed.
Once you have found this activity and engage in it frequently, the balance starts to shift. The challenge of it starts to diminish and you must find a way to make it more challenging in order to continue the flow experience. The awesome thing is you may not even realize that it's happening (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2003).
For example:
In middle school, I played the flute. I started because I had to have an intramural class and I didn't like my other choices. When I first started, by band director had us playing with just the mouthpieces, but gradually we worked our way up to playing several notes in a succession that somewhat sounded like music.
After playing my first real song (probably something like "Hot Crossed Buns"), I was hooked. I would sit at home and play literally for hours. I moved ahead in the book to more complex pieces because I got bored of the same three notes. I used the fingering chart in the back to learn more, my parents hired a wonderful woman to give me private lessons, and I got new scores to play from. Soon, I was one of the best in the band and it became a source of great pride for me. At my peak I played an average of seven hours a day, just for fun. (I also didn't have any friends, but that's beside the point!)
That is flow. And it is awesome.
References:
Nakamura, J. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). The construction of meaning through vital engagement. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (p.83-104). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
There is also a video I got some information from, but it was in class. I'll have to get the info from my professor so I can cite it here.
"Flow" is the feeling you get when you do something that is just the right amount of easy and challenging and is something you enjoy doing. It is like when you can't put down a particular book, or you get lost in the moment while playing an instrument. When experiencing flow, you lose track of time, and even after hours of doing this activity you feel mentally refreshed.
Once you have found this activity and engage in it frequently, the balance starts to shift. The challenge of it starts to diminish and you must find a way to make it more challenging in order to continue the flow experience. The awesome thing is you may not even realize that it's happening (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2003).
For example:
In middle school, I played the flute. I started because I had to have an intramural class and I didn't like my other choices. When I first started, by band director had us playing with just the mouthpieces, but gradually we worked our way up to playing several notes in a succession that somewhat sounded like music.
After playing my first real song (probably something like "Hot Crossed Buns"), I was hooked. I would sit at home and play literally for hours. I moved ahead in the book to more complex pieces because I got bored of the same three notes. I used the fingering chart in the back to learn more, my parents hired a wonderful woman to give me private lessons, and I got new scores to play from. Soon, I was one of the best in the band and it became a source of great pride for me. At my peak I played an average of seven hours a day, just for fun. (I also didn't have any friends, but that's beside the point!)
That is flow. And it is awesome.
References:
Nakamura, J. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). The construction of meaning through vital engagement. In C. L. M. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well-lived (p.83-104). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
There is also a video I got some information from, but it was in class. I'll have to get the info from my professor so I can cite it here.
Sunday, February 2, 2014
The Value of Positive Emotions
Week two readings for my class started with:
Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). The value of positive emotions. American Scientist, 91, 330-335.
This article is also aptly named. The basic summary is that Fredrickson has done research on the short term and long term effects of emotions, both positive and negative, and looked at it from an evolutionary perspective.
According to this researcher, negative emotions have been studied more than positive ones for a couple of reasons: a) they are easier to differentiate, and b) they negatively effect humanity (imagine that). Therefore we have much more information on what these emotions do to us mentally and physically.
The theories behind negative emotions and why we have them, all come down to survival. Fear sends a larger amount of blood to the extremities, facilitating the "fight or flight" response. Disgust invokes a need to "expectorate" (such a nice word!) Anger prepares the body for an offensive attack (2003).
The big mystery was why do we have positive emotions? The leading theories had still revolved around survival, that positive emotions were just a signal that there were no threats around. But Fredrickson has conducted and studied others' experiments that give a little more insight. Inducing participants with a positive affect seemed momentarily to broaden their thoughts, increasing creativity and creating mental "room" to think about larger concepts. This would suggest that positive affect would allow for our ancestors to switch from the narrow concept of survival to broader ideas of growth, curiosity, and a pursuit of novelty. This is a lot like tracing a tree's growth through the winter and summer; the darker, thinner rings are due to slowed growth in winter as the tree merely "survives" (actually goes dormant, but you get the idea), with accelerated growth in the summer.
The long-term effects of positive emotions seem to be building a resilience against negative events in the future, protecting one from depression. I mentioned this before, kinda, in the "article #2" post:
Another long-term effect is an "undoing" of what negative affect does to us. When we are in the "fight or flight" mode mentioned earlier, the increased cardiovascular activity damages our heart and blood vessels, leading to atherosclerosis. Positive emotions and experiences helps to repair ourselves (Fredrickson, 2003)--which makes a lot of evolutionary sense: get chased by tiger, harm body; outrun tiger, have a laugh with our monkey buddies, recover body and repair damage. There are, of course, a lot of other physiological problems caused by stress that can be repaired in time with a positive affect, but this is the particular example (minus the monkeys) that the article touches on.
The author ends with saying that an artificial injection of positivity with humor or something similar may be beneficial, but not always appropriate in hard times. She suggests "finding benefits within adversity, [...] infusing ordinary events with meaning, and [...] effective problem solving" (2003).
Image provided courtesy of nuttakit / FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). The value of positive emotions. American Scientist, 91, 330-335.
This article is also aptly named. The basic summary is that Fredrickson has done research on the short term and long term effects of emotions, both positive and negative, and looked at it from an evolutionary perspective.
According to this researcher, negative emotions have been studied more than positive ones for a couple of reasons: a) they are easier to differentiate, and b) they negatively effect humanity (imagine that). Therefore we have much more information on what these emotions do to us mentally and physically.
The theories behind negative emotions and why we have them, all come down to survival. Fear sends a larger amount of blood to the extremities, facilitating the "fight or flight" response. Disgust invokes a need to "expectorate" (such a nice word!) Anger prepares the body for an offensive attack (2003).
 |
| Tree rings show minimal or "narrowed" growth in the winter and accelerated or "broadened" growth in the summer. |
The long-term effects of positive emotions seem to be building a resilience against negative events in the future, protecting one from depression. I mentioned this before, kinda, in the "article #2" post:
In the first sentence of the article, it talks about preventing pathologies "that arise when life is barren and meaningless" (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).However, I do stand by Fredrickson's conclusion on this topic. She talks about resilience, not about whether or not our life has meaning. Which, by the way, I believe to be a really subjective measurement. What makes me believe my life has meaning may not at all be what you think gives my life meaning (if you even think my life does have meaning).
"Don't you mean, perceived as barren and meaningless?"
To say it any other way implies that people with meaningful lives simply cannot develop mental illness, and while I believe (and evidence suggests) that meaning in one's life can help to prevent or lessen mental illness, it still happens. Or am I just wrong about this?
Another long-term effect is an "undoing" of what negative affect does to us. When we are in the "fight or flight" mode mentioned earlier, the increased cardiovascular activity damages our heart and blood vessels, leading to atherosclerosis. Positive emotions and experiences helps to repair ourselves (Fredrickson, 2003)--which makes a lot of evolutionary sense: get chased by tiger, harm body; outrun tiger, have a laugh with our monkey buddies, recover body and repair damage. There are, of course, a lot of other physiological problems caused by stress that can be repaired in time with a positive affect, but this is the particular example (minus the monkeys) that the article touches on.
The author ends with saying that an artificial injection of positivity with humor or something similar may be beneficial, but not always appropriate in hard times. She suggests "finding benefits within adversity, [...] infusing ordinary events with meaning, and [...] effective problem solving" (2003).
Image provided courtesy of nuttakit / FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)