ON THE HEDONIC TREADMILL TO NOWHERE

Positive Psychology (PP) is a relatively recent scientific field defined in many ways. It focuses on the positive aspects of human thoughts, feelings, and behavior. One of Positive Psychology’s main areas includes the study of happiness. Psychologists are mainly interested about two things; what it is and what produces it. Unfortunately, one’s happiness is a complicated phenomenon that is signaled by the ambiguity that surrounds it, starting with its definition. Finding a definition of happiness is like eating from a cheap Chinese buffet. There are plenty of options to choose from, but nothing fits perfectly. Merriam-Webster defines it as “a state of well-being and contentment”, according to the Oxford dictionary happiness is “the quality or condition of being happy”. The Dalai Lama goes against this notion, claiming that “happiness is not necessarily some pleasure experience, but a neutral sort of experience that can bring deep satisfaction”. Religions equate happiness with certain behaviors and virtuous activities. Not even Seligman, the father of positive psychology, provided us with a clear definition but instead identified three ways – initially - that leads to happiness; 1, Positive Emotion, 2, Strength, 3, Virtue which later were supplemented by Relation and Achievement and established as the “building blocks of happiness” giving it a clearer meaning but not yet a definition.

Happiness meant different things over time, and it only has been associated with pleasure and something that can be attained by self in the past two centuries. Happiness evolved from virtue, prosperity, luck, fertility, divine favor, to what it is today. Today, happiness encompasses most aspects of life, from workplace culture to neuroscience. While happiness used to be associated with something unexpected that just happens to a person, today, we developed a profound sense of entitlement for it. So much so, that countries like India, the UAE, and the UK amongst many others have taken significant steps toward the implementation of Happiness Programs, suggesting that it is a learnable skill or behavior. The field of Positive Psychology that happiness programs are embedded in also leads us to the belief that through its interventions, we can learn to be happier.

The benefits of happiness are well documented in the literature; therefore, it is easy to see why nations are keen on adding happiness programs to their national curriculums and the field of Psychology to therapeutic interventions. Happiness predicts, correlates with, and may even be the source of positive social relationships, physical health, academic & professional performance, creativity, and many others. However, happiness remains complex with its infinite number of variables, ambiguous, and indeterminate leaving us all to wonder; Is it possible to teach people to be happier? If so, what are the barriers and facilitators to this? To provide answers to these questions, I critically examined some of the biological factors of happiness, the efficacy of PPI tools, and the ethical and moral issues around PPI programs.

The emotion of happiness is part of the primal emotional system built into our DNA and requires no learning. Panksepp’s work demonstrated that each primary emotional system is linked to the reward and punishment system waiting to be activated by the individual’s experience that is uniquely perceived based on personality traits, memories, traumas, and other contributing factors. One could argue that just because something is innate, it could still require learning, which leads to the next point. Teaching/learning implies the acquisition of new skills or knowledge which in relation to happiness would be an incorrect term to use. We are born with the ability to feel happy, and we know it when it occurs. Teaching people how to be happy would be like teaching women how to give birth. Women have an inherent ability to give birth naturally. Evolution taught us how to do it even if we don’t understand it, even if we have never done it. When women go into labor, their innate instinct kicks in, and most are or would be able to give birth without any medical intervention. Unfortunately, the fear of birth in general and the fear of; our body not being able to handle birth naturally, inhibits natural delivery. Happiness also manifests unaided when factors are present – whatever they may be – and emotions naturally surface. Just like love & lust when there is chemistry between two people, like anger when the wrong buttons are pushed, just like fear/panic when something unknown is happening, or the feeling of care evoked by babies.

As established above, emotions do occur naturally, however, they can easily be disrupted or altered by various factors in which case the control of long-term disruptive emotions may be appropriate. PPIs developed for this purpose for clinical population based on the PERMA and other models are tools to facilitate the discovery of possible experiences that may help to restore the balance of natural feelings. In his milestone study, Seligman demonstrated that positive psychology exercises could yield long-term positive effects on depression and happiness. A 2012 replica study somewhat confirms that result but with lower effect size. This may be due to differences in sample sizes (577 vs. 1447) and gender distribution (58% vs. 83%), which is an important factor, as women, in average, score higher on negative emotions. Interestingly, both studies indicated similar or higher short-term results in the placebo group suggesting that a simple act of being paid attention to can give a sudden boost to happiness irrespective of PPI.

Due to the limitations of the above studies, a further two largescale meta-analyses were examined. The first paper analyzed 136 studies and found small overall effect on well-being and zero on depressive symptoms. The examined studies were riddled with methodological flows as small sample size effect not accounted for, pre-post correlation data were not available which is important for calculating effect sizes, and some studies were sensitive to outliers which once removed, effect size significantly decreased.The second study resulted in similar findings with the small but significant effect size for the general enhancement of well-being but no significant finding for depressive symptoms during follow up (3-6 months). It also raised concerns about publication bias for all outcomes, low-quality studies, and lack of divers and large scale samples. Even when people reported decreased depressive symptoms, it wasn’t clear why. Did PPI increase positive emotions or decrease negative ones or both? And if so, what exactly caused such fluctuation? We don’t know as most well-being studies are correlational, leaving causality unestablished. Another major flow of these studies, unfortunately, went mostly unacknowledged. Most interventions lasted for around a week and included repetition of the same exercise, disregarding our evolutionary ability to adapt to our ever-changing environment and circumstance rapidly.

It is suggested that long-term effects may be achieved through the sustained use of different PPI tools or intention activities, preferably the combination of present and future-focused methods to avoid hedonic adaptation. Some long-term school PPIs support this theory as year-long happiness curriculums produced a higher level of overall life-satisfaction and well-being. The studies acknowledged the lack of randomization and the likelihood of bias in self-reported well-being. During sustained interventions, people can apply frequent boosts to their happiness, however, it will inevitably return to its natural set point level due to our genetic predisposition that accounts for 50% of our well-being. This was also observed during a small scale school PPI. In other words, episodic boosts to set point level of happiness can be achieved by improving someone’s circumstances (10%) or through intentional activities (40%), but methods for permanent alteration to one’s set point level is currently unknown. These findings – lack of convincing evidence for effective PPIs and permanent increase of set point level -  ought to remind us of Lykken and Tellegen’s famous line; “It may be that trying to be happier is as futile as trying to be taller and therefore is counterproductive” . Based on these findings, the promise of happiness programs may come across to be unfounded and, therefore, morally and ethically questionable especially, if its agenda is to permanently elevate one’s natural set point level of happiness. If its agenda is the optimisation of set point level, moral and ethical issues still remain as there is no known way to determine whether or not a person operates at an optimum level - whatever that may be - including clinical population.

Given the growing focus on happiness curricula in educational settings, the examination of the ethical and moral aspects of these interventions might be a good starting point. Integrating happiness into the educational curriculum could convey the message that; a) by and large we are ill-equipped to experience and manage emotions without being taught, b) the population, in general, is unhappy so we need help from early on, c) happiness is a moral obligation a duty to perform. In the educational environment, happiness likely to be reduced to a taught subject, turned into a learnable method and potentially stopped being what it is, a naturally occurring positive or neutral emotional response to an experience. Once in the curriculum, it must be measured, and what can be measured is guaranteed to be turned into KPIs for schools and governments. The consequences of institutionalization of happiness in the form of school curriculums unknown yet. However, it is clear that pushing the boundaries of positive experience - experience it in excess or in inappropriate context - can easily become maladaptive in a healthy population and may turn negative in a deliberative mindset, resulting in behavior that is associated with clinical population. A longitudinal study of over 7 decades, with 1528 participants, and 4000+ variables, demonstrated that increased level of happiness (above median) during childhood, correlated with carefree lifestyle, risky behavior such as smoking, drinking, drug use, impulsivity, and thrill-seeking hobbies, highlighting the link between excessive happiness, lifestyle, and mortality rate. They reported that happier children - in comparison to their counterparts with median level of happiness - went on to lead an unhealthier lifestyle concerning their consumption, however, the study failed to produce a significant correlation to death. Other studies have similar findings of people with higher level of positive emotions are more likely to ignore threats and dangerous situations that may result in undesirable outcomes. Several studies have found that various aspects of well-being have an inverted U relationship with happiness, impacting it positively at its optimum level but has a reverse effect or adds no additional benefit once that point passed. But what is the optimum level of happiness? Gottman suggested a minimum of 5:1 ratio (positive to negative experience) to offset the greater power and effect of negative experience. However, a 2005 study lowered that to 2.9 and set the maximum number to 11.6, also acknowledging individual differences but emphasizing that above that number will likely be detrimental to one’s happiness. It seems that the “too much of anything” principle also applies to happiness, therefore, balance amongst all emotions must be maintained for one’s overall well-being.

Positive Psychology often overlooks the specific functions of negative emotions. Negative emotions are essential to our survival and progress from the physiological, psychological, and cognitive aspects. They evoke context-appropriate cognitive and physiological responses to prepare the body for suitable action and to focus attention towards situations that require cognitive problem-solving. Job dissatisfaction can push the person to find something else, anxiety can be turned into problem-solving, anger transformed into greater understanding of each other, and benevolent envy (upward comparison) can stimulate students to perform better. Simply put, change in one’s circumstances can be the solution to happiness, but the teachings of Positive Psychology could actually be a barrier to this if it teaches individuals to count their blessings or build resilience for current circumstances rather than change them. Such an approach can significantly hinder individual and social progress because it focuses on positively looking at one’s situation – i.e. “I hate my job, but at least I have a job” – instead of embracing the feeling and allowing it to push the individual to action. Acceptance therapy acknowledges and leverages appropriate – in intensity and in context - negative emotions, demonstrating its positive effect on psychological well-being. Context relevant studies show that people wanting to experience negative emotions when they are useful may achieve greater overall happiness and success in life These findings demonstrate that negative emotions are crucial for survival and progress, and that extreme level of happiness can be damaging so is the mere act of valuing it which may be the intent of PPIs that are used with healthy population. Despite our growing desire for a happier life, increasing number of studies are warning about the maladaptive nature of deliberate pursuit of happiness and its growing value in societies.

A 2011 study found that people who value and actively pursue happiness experienced less. They tended to set unrealistic, difficult to achieve goals to attain higher level of positive emotion, which led to disappointment. This demonstrates what could happen when we interfere with well-functioning healthy population by creating narratives that artificially places happiness higher in our value system than it naturally would occur. Emotions are orienting networks signaling whether we are in the right path, and the path is defined by the goal. If people are unhappy, it is possible that their goals are not where they should be. Goals that are set based on what the society or others value rather than the individuals themselves likely to result in disappointment, frustration, resentment, and in extreme cases, absolute misery. Due to the constant exposure to the happiness narrative, societies are increasingly becoming obsessed, creating a culture that resembles religion. PPIs further reinforce its value, triggering unnatural stimulus and potentially achieving the exact opposite. For example, individuals who took part in an experiment designed to induce to value happiness, reported less than those who were not told to cherish it. This finding is supported by several other studies highlighting the link between valued happiness, increased depressive symptoms and reduced level of well-being.

Educational curriculums could act as catalysts to shape cultures into one that values happiness by deliberately drawing individual’s attention to their own experiences and depict it as an ultimate goal that one ought to achieve through self-focus. The problem with that is that deliberate hedonistic introspection that involves reflection on one’s experience instead of just experiencing it in its full could lower overall well-being. Their findings suggested that participants experienced decreased level of positive emotion when they monitored their own emotional state or progress against their goal. Those who avoided monitoring and assessing their emotions and just got into “the flow”, the optimal experience – when they most enjoy themselves – achieved greater happiness. Intellectually knowing what happiness is and continually being measured against it misses the essence of the experience. Activity that serves as a means to an end - i.e. taking part in an activity that aims to increase happiness – can diminish the intrinsic reward, therefore, be counterproductive. Deliberate search of happiness likely to lead to increased level of self-focus that may negatively impact social connections depriving the individual of the very same thing s(he) pursues. Happiness achieved from conscious attention on oneself - PPIs are based on this approach - may be short-lived, whereas happiness caused by selfless focus more likely to create longer lasting positive experiences. Most reviewed school PPI framework use the self-focused approach where students are constantly reminded to monitor their emotions and engage in activities that are aimed to increase their well-being. Such self-centered approach to happiness could not only achieve the opposite in the long-term, it could also nurture values that are deemed important by governments and educators but may be against cultural, religious, family, and individual values.

Educational settings provide excellent opportunity to instill collective values because of their ability to reach all children. For the very same reason, they are also the perfect locations to teach well-being initiatives to tackle the growing number of mental health issues amongst children. Because of the widespread prevalence of childhood mental health issue, the implementation of Positive Psychology Curriculums are very much relevant, justified and even supported by parents. However, as discussed above, there are several ethical and moral areas that need to be considered. In addition to those, researchers continuously raise concerns about the lack of effectiveness of these interventions and the gap between scientific research and what actually being taught in classrooms. If education systems are pushing agendas that aren’t evidence-based and lacking efficacy, they are not only giving false promises to students and parents but are likely to instill misguided belief that may negatively impact nationwide well-being. Furthermore, because a lot of psychological problems we experience are actually circumstantial, it is a rather a difficult call to make when one could benefit from a change of perspective or from a change of circumstances. We also shouldn’t forget that PPIs have initially been designed for clinical population to treat depressive symptoms, therefore may not be appropriate for healthy population even with significant adjustments. As educators are not qualified and equipped to assess each student’s circumstances, standardized one-size-fit all PPI curriculums could be damaging to most students, therefore, ethically and morally be wrong.

I set out to seek answers to the questions of; Is it possible to teach people to be happier? If so, what are the barriers and facilitators to this? Unfortunately, there isn’t a straightforward answer as happiness as a term, likely to never be a distinct object of knowledge and will remain indeterminate, subjective to individual interpretation, and so will everything around it. Positive Psychology Interventions pose efficacy, generalizability, ethical and moral conundrum that are hard to solve. The use of PPIs may seem a good idea initially but a look beneath the surface and one’s view might swiftly change. First of all, emotions are innate therefore, they require no learning, but, controlling them may. The natural manifestation of emotions can be disrupted by trauma and other factors, in which case the use of PPI might be justifiable. However, meta-studies are far from convincing for several reasons, and researchers are expressing cautious optimism about their effectiveness. Furthermore, Positive Psychology tends to overlook significant elements of overall happiness such as genetic predisposition and other primal emotions that play a crucial role in one’s well-being. Teaching about one emotion in isolation to all others not only absurd but also counterproductive. While mental health statistics urging immediate action, as PPIs are taught today, may not be ideal. Firstly, there is no convincing evidence for their effectiveness in clinical and non-clinical population, secondly, educators, therapists, and psychologists have the responsibility to target the right population with the right intervention. It is imperative that evidenced based PPIs are administered to those who need it therefore, its teachings amongst healthy population might not be justified. Furthermore, PPIs should teach people about realistic or optimum level of happiness, about the importance of all primal emotions, and should move away from its self-centered approach. Developing a mean based personalized global approach to happiness that takes into account idiosyncratic circumstances may serve the best interest of everybody.