Module 3: Emotional Approaches

Unit 1: Positive Affectivity: Differentiating positive and negative affectivity, Measures of positive
affectivity, Structure of positive affectivity, Causes & correlates of positive affectivity, Significance of
positive affectivity
Unit 2: Broaden-and-build model of positive emotions.
Unit 3: Happiness and Subjective well-being: Living a pleasurable life.
Unit 4: Complete Mental Health: Emotional, Social and Psychological Well-being
Unit 5: Emotional Intelligence.
Unit 6: Socioemotional Selectivity.
Unit 7: Emotional Storytelling

Unit 1: Positive Affectivity

Throughout most of the 20th century, affect researchers typically studied basic negative
emotions such as fear/anxiety, sadness/depression, and anger/hostility; positive emotional
states such as joy and excitement were largely ignored. The dominant role of the negative
emotions reflected, in part, the seminal influence of Freud, who made the concept of anxiety
a cornerstone of psychoanalytic thought (e.g., Freud, 1936).
This focus on negative emotionality also was reinforced by Cannon (1929) and Selye (1936),
who established the adverse health consequences of prolonged fear and anger. Finally, this
preoccupation with the negative emotions can be attributed to their obvious survival value
(e.g., Nesse, 1991): For instance, fear motivates organisms to escape from situations of
potential threat or danger, whereas disgust helps to keep them away from noxious and toxic
substances.
The evolutionary functions of the positive emotions are less obvious, however, and took much
longer to establish. Gradually, however, interest in positive emotionality emerged during the
latter half of the century. The first major theoretical breakthrough occurred in 1975, with the
publication of Paul Meehl’s landmark examination of “hedonic capacity.” Meehl argued
forcefully that “clinicians and theoreticians ought to consider seriously the possibility that not
only are some persons born with more cerebral ‘joy-juice’ than others but also that this
variable is fraught with clinical consequences”. As this statement suggests, Meehl proposed
that individual differences in hedonic capacity were present at birth and partly heritable.

Furthermore, he posited that these innate, genotypic differences were associated with
substantial phenotypic variations in positive emotionality and the related trait of surgency
(now typically called “extraversion”). Of additional importance, Meehl assumed that
individual differences in hedonic capacity/positive emotionality were largely distinct and
separable from individual differences in negative emotions such as anxiety and anger.
In support of Meehl’s argument, subsequent researchers have established that two largely
independent factors—negative affect and positive affect—constitute the basic dimensions
of emotional experience. These two broad dimensions have been identified in both intra- and

1
interindividual analyses, and they emerge consistently across diverse descriptor sets, time
frames, response formats, languages, and cultures.
The Negative Affect dimension represents the extent to which an individual experiences
negative emotional states such as fear, anger, sadness, guilt, contempt, and disgust;
conversely, positive affect reflects the extent to which one experiences positive states such
as joy, interest, confidence, and alertness.
Both of these dimensions can be assessed either as a short-term state or as a long-term trait
(in which case they typically are referred to as “negative affectivity” and “positive affectivity,”
respectively). These two affect dimensions represent the subjective components of more
general biobehavioural systems that have evolved to address very different evolutionary
tasks.

Specifically, negative affect is a component of the withdrawal-oriented behavioral inhibition

system. The essential purpose of this system is to keep the organism out of trouble by
inhibiting behavior that might lead to pain, punishment, or some other undesirable
consequence.
In sharp contrast, positive affect is a component of the approach-oriented behavioral
facilitation system, which directs organisms toward situations and experiences that
potentially may yield pleasure and reward. This system is adaptive in that it ensures the
procuring of resources (e.g., food and water, warmth and shelter, the cooperation of others,
sexual partners) that are essential to the survival of both the individual and the species.

Given that they reflect very different evolutionary pressures, it is not surprising that negative
and positive affect naturally are highly distinctive dimensions that are associated with
fundamentally different classes of variables. For instance, as I will detail subsequently, they
correlate quite differently with general traits of personality. In light of these differential
correlates, it is essential that these dimensions be assessed and analyzed separately.
Measures of positive affectivity
Measures of positive affectivity can be divided into two basic types.
First, many widely used affect inventories have a “general” form (in which respondents rate
their typical, average feelings) that can be used to measure this trait. The DES, the MAACL-R,
and the PANAS-X all have trait versions that allow one to assess various aspects of the
dimension. Unfortunately, researchers have failed to examine the convergence among these
different trait instruments.
Second, many multi-trait personality inventories contain scales relevant to the construct;
examples include:

• The Activity and Positive Emotions facet scales of the Revised NEO Personality
Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992a)
• The Well-Being scale of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ;
Tellegen, in press)

2
 • The Positive Temperament scale of the General Temperament Survey (GTS; Clark &
Watson, 1990)
The Hierarchical Structure of Positive Affectivity
Self-rated affect is hierarchically structured and must be viewed at two fundamentally
different levels: a higher order level that consists of the general Negative and Positive Affect
dimensions and a lower order level that represents specific types of affect (Watson & Clark,
1992a, 1992b, 1997b). In other words, each of these broad dimensions can be decomposed
into several correlated yet ultimately distinct affective states, much like general intelligence
can be subdivided into specific abilities. In this hierarchical model, the upper level reflects the
overall valence of the affects (i.e., whether they represent pleasant or unpleasant mood
states), whereas the lower level reflects the specific content of mood descriptors (i.e., the
distinctive qualities of each specific type of affect).
Researchers have had little trouble identifying specific types of negative emotionality. Most
theories of emotion recognize several different negative affects, and virtually every model
includes at least three basic negative mood states: fear/anxiety, sadness/depression, and
anger/ hostility (Watson & Clark, 1992a, 1997b). In contrast, little agreement exists regarding
the specific positive affects.

The Differential Emotions Scale (DES; Izard, Libero, Putnam, & Haynes, 1993), for instance,
contains scales assessing Interest (i.e., feeling excited, interested, alert, and curious) and
Enjoyment (i.e., feeling happy and joyful).
The Multiple Affect Adjective Checklist-Revised (MAACL-R; Zuckerman & Lubin, 1985) also has
two lower order positive mood scales but subdivides the domain rather differently;
specifically, it includes a relatively broad measure of positive affect containing descriptors
relevant to both DES scales (e.g., happy, glad, interested), as well as a measure of sensation
seeking that assesses feelings of energy, adventurousness, and daring that are not
systematically measured in the DES.

Finally, the Profile of Mood States (POMS; McNair, Lorr, & Droppleman, 1971) simply includes
a single broad measure of vigor (i.e., feeling cheerful, lively, alert, and energetic) and does not
subdivide the domain at all. They were emphasizing a structural model that is based on
extensive factor analyses that he has conducted in collaboration with Lee Anna Clark. They
consistently have found three subcomponents of positive affect that are moderately to
strongly intercorrelated.
They, therefore included scales assessing each of these facets in our own instrument, the
Expanded Form of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule: (PANAS-X; Watson & Clark,
1994): Joviality (8 items; e.g., cheerful, happy, lively, enthusiastic), Self-Assurance (6 items;
e.g., confident, strong, daring), and Attentiveness (4 items; e.g., alert, concentrating,
determined).
Causes and Correlates of Positive Affectivity

• Genetic Evidence

3
The positive affectivity trait clearly is strongly heritable. Most of the available data are based
on measures of Extraversion. Heritability estimates for Extraversion derived from twin studies
generally fall in the .40 to .60 range, with a median value of approximately .50 (Clark &
Watson, 1999). Adoption studies yield somewhat lower heritability estimates, but this largely
may be due to their failure to assess nonadditive genetic variance.
Finally, based on results from both twin and adoption studies, it appears that the common
rearing environment (i.e., the effects of living together in the same household) exerts little
influence on this trait (Clark & Watson, 1999). Although the literature involving pure measures
of positive affectivity is much smaller, it has yielded very similar results. Researchers using the
MPQ Well-Being scale have reported heritability estimates in the .40 to .50 range (Finkel &
McGue, 1997; Tellegen et al., 1988).

Similarly, Jang et al. (1998) obtained heritabilities of .38 and .38, respectively, for the NEO PI-
R Activity and Positive Emotions scales. Moreover, consistent with the data for Extraversion,
these studies indicate that the common rearing environment essentially has no effect on the
development of positive affectivity.

• Neurobiological Basis of Positive Affectivity

Davidson, Tomarken, and their colleagues have demonstrated that happy individuals tend to
show relatively greater resting activity in the left prefrontal cortex than in the right prefrontal
area; conversely, dysphoric individuals display relatively greater right anterior activity.
Unfortunately, it has proven difficult to isolate the specific effects of left versus right
prefrontal activity in these studies.
Based on recent evidence, however, it appears that positive affectivity primarily reflects the
level of resting activity in the left prefrontal area, whereas negative affectivity is more
strongly associated with right frontal activation (Davidson, 1992; Tomarken & Keener, 1998).
This left prefrontal activity, in turn, can be linked to the mesolimbic dopaminergic system,
which has been strongly implicated in the operation of the behavioral facilitation system and
in the subjective experience of positive mood. This dopaminergic system arises from cell
groups located in the ventral tegmental area of the midbrain and has projections throughout
the cortex (Depue & Collins, 1999; Depue, Luciana, Arbisi, Collins, & Leon, 1994).
Consistent with the data reported by Davidson and Tomarken, these cortical projections tend
to be concentrated in the left hemisphere, with a particularly strong asymmetry in the frontal
region. The dopaminergic system mediates various approach-related behaviors, including
heightened appetitive motivation and enhanced behavioral approach to incentive stimuli
(Depue & Collins, 1999; Depue et al., 1994). Taken together, these data strongly suggest that
the dopaminergic system plays a key role in both left frontal activation and phenotypic
differences in positive affectivity. Depue et al. (1994) examined this idea by administering
biological agents known to stimulate dopaminergic activity, and then measuring the strength
of the system’s response.
Consistent with their expectation, Depue et al. found that various measures of dopaminergic
activity were strongly correlated with individual differences in positive affectivity but were

4
unrelated to negative affectivity. It therefore appears that variations in the dopaminergic
system may cause some individuals to have more of Meehl’s (1975) “cerebral joy-juice.”
Finally, some researchers have taken this analysis one step further and suggested that
because of these neurobiological differences, individuals high in positive affectivity may be
more responsive to—and better able to derive pleasure from—rewarding stimuli. In support
of this view, Extraversion scores predict increases in positive mood following a pleasant mood
induction, but are unrelated to negative mood changes following an unpleasant mood
induction.

• Demographic and Environmental Correlates

An enormous literature has examined how numerous demographic variables—age, gender,
marital status, ethnicity, income and socioeconomic status, and so on—are related to
individual differences in happiness, life satisfaction, and trait affectivity (for reviews, see
Argyle, 1987; Myers & Diener, 1995; Watson, 2000). From these studies, it is clear that
objective demographic factors are relatively weak predictors of happiness and positive
affectivity. For instance, as I discussed previously, positive affectivity scores are not
systematically related to age.
Along these same lines, variables such as annual income, level of educational attainment, and
socioeconomic status are, at best, weakly related to happiness and well-being. Diener,
Sandvik, Seidlitz, and Diener (1993), for example, found that income correlated only .13 with
well-being in a sample of nearly 5,000 American adults; similarly, Lykken and Tellegen (1996)
reported that income, educational attainment, and socioeconomic status each accounted for
less than 2% of the variance in scores on the MPQ Well-being scale. Thus, an individual’s
capacity for positive affectivity is not seriously limited by objective conditions such as age,
wealth, and status.
Two variables consistently have emerged as significant predictors of positive affectivity. First,
numerous studies have shown that positive affectivity—but not negative affectivity—is
moderately correlated with various indicators of social behavior, including number of close
friends, frequency of contact with friends and relatives, making new acquaintances,
involvement in social organizations, and overall level of social activity.
Second, people who describe themselves as “spiritual” or “religious” report higher levels of
happiness than those who do not; this effect has been observed both in the United States and
in Europe. Well-being levels are particularly elevated among individuals who (a) report a
strong, committed religious affiliation, (b) attend religious services regularly, and (c) espouse
traditional religious beliefs. Moreover, the researchers have found that religion and
spirituality are positively related to positive affectivity but are unrelated to negative
affectivity (Clark & Watson, 1999; Watson & Clark, 1993).
Significance of positive affectivity
Links to Psychopathology: Low levels of positive affectivity are associated with a number of
clinical syndromes, including social phobia, agoraphobia, posttraumatic stress disorder,
schizophrenia, eating disorder, and the substance disorders. However, low positive affectivity

5
plays a particularly salient role in the mood. It is strongly linked to the melancholic subtype of
major depression, which is characterized by either a “loss of pleasure in all, or almost all,
activities” or a “lack of reactivity to usually pleasurable stimuli” (American Psychiatric
Association, 1994).
It also is noteworthy that positive affectivity scores have predicted the subsequent
development of depression in prospective data. These findings raise the intriguing possibility
that lack of positive affectivity may be an important vulnerability factor for mood disorder
(Clark et al., 1994). This link with positive affectivity also may help to explain the cyclic course
of the mood disorders. This systematic temporal sequencing is an unusual component of the
symptom picture, one that is not nearly as salient in most other disorders.
For example, the intensity of phobic fear does not vary systematically as a function of the
hour of the day or the season of the year. In sharp contrast, most of the mood disorders are
characterized by well-defined cycles and episodes. This cyclicity is most apparent in the
bipolar disorders, in which the individual fluctuates between well-defined episodes of mania
(or hypomania) and depression.
Similarly, major depression tends to occur in episodes that may spontaneously remit over
time (American Psychiatric Association, 1994). Moreover, melancholic depression frequently
shows a marked diurnal pattern in which the symptoms are worst in the morning and then
lessen in strength over the course of the day. Finally, the mood disorders can show a marked
seasonal pattern, as is exhibited in seasonal affective disorder, which is characterized by the
onset of a prolonged depressive episode during the late fall or early winter.
Job and Marital Satisfaction: Individuals who are high in positive affectivity feel good about
themselves and their world. Consequently, they report greater satisfaction with important
aspects of their lives. For instance, positive affectivity is a significant predictor of job
satisfaction. Agho, Price, and Mueller (1992), for example, reported a .44 correlation between
positive affectivity and job satisfaction in a sample of 550 hospital employees.
Watson and Slack (1993) used a prospective design in which employees initially completed a
measure of positive affectivity (a short form of the MPQ Well Being scale) and then rated their
job satisfaction more than two years later (M interval 27 months). Positive affectivity
remained a significant, moderate predictor of various aspects of job satisfaction (with
correlations ranging from .27 to .44), even when the measures were separated by a
considerable time interval.
Staw, Bell, and Clausen (1986) report even more striking evidence along these same lines.
They found that a 17-item Affective Disposition scale (which appears to represent a
combination of high positive affectivity/low negative affectivity)—assessed when the
participants were adolescents—was a significant predictor of job satisfaction nearly 50 years
later, even after controlling for objective differences in work conditions. On the basis of these
data, one can conclude that trait affectivity plays an important etiological role in job
satisfaction.

6
Positive affectivity also is significantly correlated with marital and relationship satisfaction.
Watson, Hubbard and Wiese (in press) examined this issue in two different samples, one
consisting of 74 married couples, and the other composed of 136 dating couples. Positive
emotionality scores correlated .41 (women’s satisfaction) and .48 (men’s satisfaction) with
satisfaction in the married couples, and .24 (women’s satisfaction) and .40 (men’s
satisfaction) with satisfaction in the dating sample. These data are cross-sectional, so that it
is unclear whether scores on this dimension can predict relationship satisfaction
prospectively. There is considerable evidence, however, that negative affectivity scores
obtained early in a relationship predict its subsequent course. It therefore seems reasonable
to conclude that trait affectivity plays a significant etiological role in relationship satisfaction.

Unit 2 Broaden-and-build model of positive emotions.

Traditional approaches to the study of emotions have tended to ignore positive emotions and
squeeze them into purportedly emotion-general models, confuse them with closely related
affective states, and describe their function in terms of generic tendencies to approach or
continue. Sensing that these approaches did not do justice to positive emotions, researchers
developed an alternative model that better captures their unique effects. They call this the
broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions because positive emotions appear to broaden
people’s momentary thought-action repertoires and build their enduring personal resources
(Fredrickson, 1998).
The new model to traditional models based on specific action tendencies. Specific action
tendencies work well to describe the form and function of negative emotions and thus should
be retained for models of this subset of emotions. Without loss of theoretical nuance, a
specific action tendency can be redescribed as the outcome of a psychological process that
narrows a person’s momentary thought-action repertoire by calling to mind an urge to act in
a particular way (e.g., escape, attack, expel).
In a life-threatening situation, a narrowed thought-action repertoire promotes quick, decisive
action that carries direct and immediate benefit. Specific action tendencies called forth by
negative emotions represent the sort of actions that worked best to save our ancestors’ lives
and limbs in similar situations. Yet positive emotions seldom occur in life threatening
situations. As such, a psychological process that narrows a person’s momentary thought-
action repertoire to promote quick, decisive action may not be needed. Instead, he has
argued that positive emotions have a complementary effect: They broaden people’s
momentary thought-action repertoires, widening the array of the thoughts and actions that
come to mind.
Joy, for instance, creates the urge to play, push the limits, and be creative, urges evident not
only in social and physical behavior but also in intellectual and artistic behavior. Interest, a
phenomenologically distinct positive emotion, creates the urge to explore, take in new
information and experiences, and expand the self in the process. Contentment, a third distinct
positive emotion, creates the urge to sit back and savor current life circumstances and
integrate these circumstances into new views of self and of the world.

7
And love—which I view as an amalgam of distinct positive emotions (e.g., joy, interest, and
contentment) experienced within contexts of safe, close relationships—creates recurring
cycles of urges to play with, explore, and savor our loved ones. These various thought-action
tendencies—to play, to explore, or to savor and integrate—represent ways that positive
emotions broaden habitual modes of thinking or acting.
In contrast to negative emotions, which carry direct and immediate adaptive benefits in
situations that threaten survival, the broadened thought-action repertoires triggered by
positive emotions are beneficial in other ways. Specifically, I have argued that these
broadened mindsets carry indirect and long-term adaptive benefits because broadening
builds enduring personal resources. Take play as an example. Specific forms of chasing play
evident in juveniles of a species— like running into a flexible sapling or branch and catapulting
oneself in an unexpected direction—are re-enacted in adults of that species exclusively during
predator avoidance (Dolhinow, 1987). Such correspondences between juvenile play
maneuvers and adult survival maneuvers suggest that juvenile play builds enduring physical
resources (Boulton & Smith, 1992; Caro, 1988). Play also builds enduring social resources.
Social play, with its shared amusement and smiles, builds lasting social bonds and
attachments, which can become the locus of subsequent social support. Childhood play also
builds enduring intellectual resources by increasing levels of creativity (Sherrod & Singer,
1989) and fuelling brain development (Panksepp, 1998).
Similarly, the exploration prompted by the positive emotion of interest creates knowledge
and intellectual complexity, and the savoring prompted by contentment produces self-insight
and alters worldviews. So, each of these phenomenologically distinct positive emotions
shares the feature of augmenting individuals’ personal resources, ranging from physical and
social resources to intellectual and psychological resources. Importantly, the personal
resources accrued during states of positive emotions are durable.
They outlast the transient emotional states that led to their acquisition. By consequence,
then, the often-incidental effect of experiencing a positive emotion is an increase in one’s
personal resources. These resources can be drawn on in subsequent moments and in different
emotional states. So, through experiences of positive emotions people transform themselves,
becoming more creative, knowledgeable, resilient, socially integrated, and healthy
individuals.
Figure below represents these three sequential effects of positive emotions (i.e., broadening,
building, transforming) and also suggests that initial experiences of positive emotions
produce upward spirals toward further experiences of positive emotions, a point I will return
to in a subsequent section. In short, the broaden-and-build theory describes the form of
positive emotions in terms of broadened thought-action repertoires and describes their
function in terms of building enduring personal resources. In doing so, the theory provides a
new perspective on the evolved adaptive significance of positive emotions.
Those of our ancestors who succumbed to the urges sparked by positive emotions—to play,
explore, and so on—would have by consequence accrued more personal resources. When
these same ancestors later faced inevitable threats to life and limb, their greater personal

8
resources would have translated into greater odds of survival and, in turn, greater odds of
living long enough to reproduce. To the extent that the capacity to experience positive
emotions is genetically encoded, this capacity, through the process of natural selection, would
have become part of our universal human nature.

The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions.

Unit: 3
Happiness and Subjective well-being: Living a pleasurable life

Age-Old Definitions of Happiness

Buddha left home in search of a more meaningful existence and ultimately found
enlightenment, a sense of peace, and happiness. Aristotle believed that eudaimonia (human
flourishing associated with living a life of virtue), or happiness based on a lifelong pursuit of
meaningful, developmental goals (i.e., “doing what is worth doing”), was the key to the good
life (Waterman, 1993). America’s founders reasoned that the pursuit of happiness was just as
important as our inalienable rights of life and liberty. These age-old definitions of happiness,
along with many other conceptualizations of emotional well-being, have had clear influences
on the views of 20th- and 21st-century scholars, but more recent psychological theory and
genetic research have helped us to clarify happiness and its correlates.
Theories of happiness have been divided into three types: (1) need/goal satisfaction theories,
(2) process/activity theories, and (3) genetic/personality predisposition theories (Diener et
al., 2009).

9
In regard to need/goal satisfaction theories, the leaders of particular schools of
psychotherapy proffered various ideas about happiness. For example, psychoanalytic and
humanistic theorists (Sigmund Freud and Abraham Maslow, respectively) suggested that the
reduction of tension or the satisfaction of needs leads to happiness. In short, it was theorized
that we are happy because we have reached our goals. Such “happiness as satisfaction”
makes happiness a target of our psychological pursuits.
In the process/activity camp, theorists posit that engaging in particular life activities
generates happiness. For example, Mike Csikszentmihalyi, who was one of the first 20 th
century theorists to examine process/activity conceptualizations of happiness, proposed that
people who experience flow (engagement in interesting activities that match or challenge
task-related skills) in daily life tend to be very happy. Indeed, Csikszentmihalyi’s (1975/2000,
1990) work suggests that engagement in activity produces happiness. Other process/activity
theorists (e.g., Emmons, 1986; Snyder, 1994) have emphasized how the process of pursuing
goals generates energy and happiness. This pursuit-of-happiness perspective mirrors the U.S.
founders’ promise of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
Activities such as the practice of gratitude and kindness may also provide boosts in well-being
for some groups. Empirical evidence exists for the fact that regular engagement in these types
of positive acts can help individuals to improve their happiness over time by prescriptive use
of tasks such as the writing of gratitude letters and purposeful acts of kindness (Sin &
Lyubomirsky, 2009) or strategic use of optimism (Lyubomirsky, Dickerhoof, Boehm, &
Sheldon, 2011). Interestingly, however, well-being is not always improved by the same
activities in different cultural groups.
In a comparison of participants from the United States and those from South Korea, it was
found that while expressing gratitude benefited the U.S. participants with spikes in well-
being, this activity was significantly less helpful for South Korean participants, resulting in
decreases in well-being. This same study found that acts of kindness had the same effect in
both groups, however. The authors of this study suggest that a construct such as gratitude
may have different cultural meanings for the two groups.

In South Korea, feelings of gratitude may be more closely linked with feelings of indebtedness,
showing the dialectical pattern that is often found between positive and negative affect in
Asian groups. In U.S. samples, gratitude may not be linked to negative feelings in quite the
same way. Other research has shown that even when the same construct boosts well-being
in multiple cultures, there may be significant differences in the amounts of increases seen in
different groups (Boehm, Lyubomirsky, & Sheldon, 2011).
These differences may be decreased, however, by attending to specific definitions of these
constructs in the home culture. When Muslim students practiced gratitude that was based in
Islamic principles (e.g., linking good fortune to Allah), they showed higher happiness levels
overall in comparison to Muslim participants who used secular definitions of gratitude (Al-
Seheel & Noor, 2016).
Another study involving members of the Yup’ik tribe in Western Alaska showed that when
cultural context was taken into account in measuring and increasing wellness in this

10
population, more positive gains were made. In addition, differences have been found
between cultural groups in the administration of various interventions aimed to increase
positive affect (Shin & Lyubomirksy, 2017).

For example, self-administered interventions may be more beneficial and functional for Asian
and Asian American individuals, perhaps because they are less stigmatizing. Other research
has shown that activities that focus on prosocial behavior (both thinking about past times the
participant has engaged in this behavior and planning future activities) might help in
increasing well-being in Eastern cultural groups.
Finally, providing increases in social connectedness appears to influence well-being in Asian
American groups as well (Fu & Vong, 2016). Thus, we must consider which types of processes
and activities are valued and deemed positive by a particular cultural group and use
appropriate definitions before deciding which may have the desired effects on well-being.
Lyubomirsky and Layous (2013) suggest a model for determining whether certain activities
will provide the desired increases in wellbeing. Their parameters include looking closely at the
types of activities and their “dosage”, the effort and agency of the participant toward the
activity, and the fit between person and activity.

This last criterion can be attained by taking care to devise interventions and activities that
have cultural relevance for the group one is studying. Those who emphasize the genetic and
personality predisposition theories of happiness (Diener & Larsen, 1984; Watson, 2000) tend
to see happiness as stable, whereas theorists in the happiness-as-satisfaction and
process/activity camps view it as changing with life conditions.
On this latter point, Costa and McCrae (1988) found that happiness changed little over a 6-
year period, thereby lending credence to theories of personality-based or biologically
determined happiness. More recent research, however, found evidence that the links
between personality and happiness may be more idiographic than previously thought (e.g.,
personal set points for happiness may not be neutral and may be more dependent on
temperament, or individuals may vary in the type of adaptation to positive or negative
external experiences; Diener, Lucas, & Scollon, 2006).

In addition, these researchers believe that multiple set points for positive emotion may exist
for any one individual, and these set points may be able to be changed under some conditions.
More work is needed in this area to determine the nuances of these complex relationships
between happiness and personality. Further elucidating the link between happiness and
personality, Lucas and Fujita (2000) showed that extroversion and neuroticism, two of the Big
5 factors of personality (openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness,
neuroticism), were closely related to the characteristics of happiness. Shiota, Keltner, and
John (2006) found similar results with regard to these Big 5 personality factors and also link
positive affect to adult attachment styles.

The link between personality and life satisfaction has been found to occur in many cultures;
however, the strength of influence of personality on well-being has been shown to be
moderated by culture (Pavot & Diener, 2008). Thus, culture also plays a role in the
determinants of the strength of this relationship. Studies of the biological or genetic

11
determinants of happiness have found that up to 40% of positive emotionality and 55% of
negative emotionality are genetically based (Tellegen et al., 1988).
Obviously, this leaves about 50% of the variance in happiness that is not explained by
biological components. Overall, therefore, a thorough understanding of happiness
necessitates an examination of genetic factors and the variables suggested by need/goal
satisfaction and the activity/process theorists.
Subjective Well-Being as a Synonym for Happiness

Building on a utilitarian tradition and the tenets of hedonic psychology (which emphasizes the
study of pleasure and life satisfaction), Diener (1984, 2000; Diener et al., 2009) considers well-
being to be the subjective evaluation of one’s current status in the world. More specifically,
well-being involves our experience of pleasure and our appreciation of life’s rewards. Given
this view, Diener defines subjective well-being as a combination of positive affect (in the
absence of negative affect) and general life satisfaction.
Furthermore, he uses the term subjective well-being as a synonym for happiness. (The
satisfaction component often is measured with the Satisfaction with Life Scale; Diener,
Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985.) Subjective well-being emphasizes people’s reports of their
life experiences. Accordingly, the subjective report is taken at face value. This subjective
approach to happiness assumes that people from many cultures are comfortable focusing on
individualistic assessments of their affects and satisfaction and that people will be forthright
in such personal analyses (Diener et al., 2009).

These assumptions guide the researchers’ attempts to understand a person’s subjective

experiences in light of their objective circumstances. Determinants of Subjective Well-Being
When examining satisfaction in various life domains of college students from 31 nations,
financial status was more highly correlated with satisfaction for students in poor nations than
for those in wealthy nations (Diener & Diener, 1995). Moreover, the students in wealthy
nations generally were happier than those in impoverished nations.
Within-nation examination of this link between income and well-being reveals that, once
household income rises above the poverty line, additional bumps in income are not
necessarily associated with increases in well-being. When well-being data are divided further
by categories of economic status (very poor versus very wealthy), it appears that there is a
strong relationship between income and well-being among the impoverished but an
insignificant relationship between the two variables among the affluent (Diener, Diener, &
Diener, 1995).

It is important to note (as Diener et al., 1995, and others have) that basic needs may have to
be met before a higher level of well-being is established and able to be maintained, and this
may be the reason for the stronger relationship between income and well-being at the lower
end of the financial spectrum. In a study of people living in extreme poverty in Mozambique,
researchers found that only 16% of the respondents reported being happy and that many
participants stated that “when basic needs are not satisfied happiness is impossible”.

12
Other findings in this study showed that more interpersonal, social, and spiritual sources
appeared to lead individuals toward higher well-being once these more basic needs were met.
Other analyses have shown that the link between wealth and happiness may be strongest
when “wealth” is defined as economic status (as opposed to flow of income) and when
measures of life satisfaction are used (as opposed to measures of happiness) to determine
subjective well-being (Howell & Howell, 2008).
While some may feel that their road to happiness is by spending some of this wealth, studies
show that thrift is actually much more closely related to hedonic happiness! Although the
idea that thrift (as opposed to spending) could be a hedonic pleasure sounds like an
oxymoron, Chancellor and Lyubomirsky (2011) found that hedonic happiness can be derived
from refraining from spending with the goal of eliminating debt and savoring what one has as
opposed to replacing those materials. As overconsumption, materialism, and greed are all
detractors from a healthy society, these data bode well for our future. In summary, it is
important not to diminish the impact of meeting basic needs (shelter, food, safety, etc.) with
regard to the development and experience of well-being.
If looking at findings between wealth and happiness in general, it may be tempting to state
that “money can’t buy happiness.” It is true that money may not increase happiness as wealth
grows, but a base amount of money may be imperative at very low levels of income and buy
a certain amount of “freedom” for the individual (Jackson, 2017). Data specific to Western
samples indicate that married men and women alike report more happiness than those who
are not married (never married, divorced, or separated; Lee, Seccombe, & Shehan, 1991).
The link between subjective well-being and being married is different for people of all ages,
incomes, and educational levels, and it also varies across racial and ethnic backgrounds
(Argyle, 1987). Same-sex couples who have legalized unions (i.e., marriages and/or civil
unions) also report greater levels of well-being (Rothblum, Balsam, & Solomon, 2011). Not
surprisingly, marital quality also is positively associated with personal well-being (Sternberg
& Hojjat, 1997).
Although some believe that a dimming of passion and happiness is a natural by-product of
being in a long-term relationship, this is not always (or even often) the case. Couples who
practice certain behaviors in their relationships may have an even better chance at avoiding
this decrease. Bao and Lyubomirsky (2013) have created a list of ways to combat this “hedonic
adaptation”—that is, the tendency for people to adjust back to their baseline happiness after
a positive event such as the start of a relationship.

One interesting finding is that men who subscribe to a traditional hypermasculine gender
identity with regard to positive affect (e.g., endorse items such as “Caring is a weakness for
me” or “Only girly men care”) may have an aversion to experiencing these types of emotions.
In a study by Burris, Schrage, and Rempel (2016), this aversion to positive empathic emotion
was counteracted with statements like “Real men care” and “Caring is strength.”
When paired with statements that better fit with these men’s gender identity, they were
more empathic and able to experience the benefits that go along with these positive affective

13
states (Burris et al., 2016). Making sure that we help young men and boys to develop positive
ideas about constructs like empathy and caring may help them in myriad ways.
In a study of the happiest 10% of U.S. college students, Diener and Seligman (2002) found
that the qualities of good mental health and good social relationships consistently emerged
in the lives in the sample of happiest young adults. This has been replicated in many studies
since. Upon closer inspection of their data, analyses revealed that good social functioning
among the happiest subset of students was a necessary but not sufficient cause of happiness.
Physical health is often linked to happiness as well (e.g., Weech-Maldonao, Miller, & Lord,
2017).
Happiness + Meaning = Well-Being
Psychologists who support the hedonic perspective view subjective well-being and happiness
as synonymous. Alternatively, the scholars whose ideas about well-being are more consistent
with Aristotle’s views on eudaimonia believe that happiness and well-being are 244 not
synonymous. In this latter perspective, eudaimonia comprises happiness and meaning. Stated
in a simple formula, well-being = happiness + meaning.
To subscribe to this view of well-being, one must understand virtue and the social implications
of daily behavior. Furthermore, this view requires that those who seek well-being be
authentic and live according to their real needs and desired goals (Waterman, 1993). Thus,
living a eudaimonic life goes beyond experiencing “things pleasurable,” and it embraces
flourishing as the goal in all our actions. Both hedonistic and eudaimonic versions of happiness
have influenced the 21st-century definitions.
Twenty-First-Century Definitions of Happiness
Modern Western psychology has focused primarily on a post materialistic view of happiness
(Diener et al., 2002, 2009) that emphasizes pleasure, satisfaction, and life meaning. Indeed,
the type of happiness addressed in much of today’s popular literature emphasizes hedonics,
meaning, and authenticity. For example, Seligman (2002) suggests that a pleasant and
meaningful life can be built on the happiness that results from using our psychological
strengths.

Describing a new model of happiness, Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade (2005) propose
that “[a] person’s chronic happiness level is governed by three major factors: a genetically
determined set point for happiness, happiness-relevant circumstantial factors, and
happiness-relevant activities and practices”.
Lyubomirsky and colleagues’ “architecture of sustainable happiness” incorporates what is
known about the genetic components of happiness, the circumstantial/demographic
determinants of happiness, and the complex process of intentional human change. Based on
past research, which they summarize, Lyubomirsky et al. propose that genetics accounts for
50% of population variance for happiness, whereas life circumstances (both good and bad)
and intentional activity (attempts at healthy living and positive change) account for 10% and
40% of the population variance for happiness, respectively. This model of happiness
acknowledges the components of happiness that can’t be changed, but it also leaves room

14
for volition and the self-generated goals that lead to the attainment of pleasure, meaning,
and good health.
Twenty-first-century scholars will undoubtedly produce many more refined views of
happiness and its value depending on cultural differences and beliefs. Our prediction is that
the pursuit of happiness through positive psychological science and practice ultimately will
develop a better sense of the genetic, neural (Urry et al., 2004), and neurobiological correlates
and underpinnings of happiness and will embrace the contentment, peace, and happiness of
Eastern philosophy along with the folk wisdom of the Western world.
So, imagine a science of happiness that is grounded in what is known about the genetic and
biological bases of happiness and that examines the rigor and relevance of Buddha’s teachings
alongside Benjamin Franklin’s recommendations for virtuous living. Through good biological
and psychological science and an appreciation of philosophical stances on happiness, we can
increase the international relevance of our scholarship in positive psychology.

Unit 4: Complete Mental Health: Emotional, Social and Psychological Well-

being.
Ryff and Keyes combine many principles of pleasure to define complete mental health.
Specifically, they view optimal functioning as the combination of emotional well-being (as
they refer to subjective well-being; defined as the presence of positive affect and satisfaction
with life and the absence of negative affect), social well-being (incorporating acceptance,
actualization, contribution, coherence, and integration), and psychological well-being
(combining self-acceptance, personal growth, purpose in life, environmental mastery,
autonomy, positive relations with others).
Taking the symptoms of mental illness into consideration, they define “complete mental
health” as the combination of “high levels of symptoms of emotional well-being,
psychological well-being, and social well-being, as well as the absence of recent mental
illness”. This view of mental health combines all facets of well-being into a model that is both
dimensional (because extremes of mental health and illness symptomatology are reflected)
and categorical (because assignment to distinct diagnostic categories is possible). This
complete state model suggests that combined mental health and mental illness symptoms
may be always changing, resulting in fluctuations in states of overall well-being ranging from
complete mental illness to complete mental health.

15
 A Model of Complete Mental Health

Increasing Happiness in Your Life

Although there are numerous theories of happiness and countless definitions of it,
researchers (e.g., Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2004) have begun to build on past work (Fordyce,
1977, 1983) in their attempts to answer the question many of our clients ask: “Can I learn
how to be happier?” David Myers (1993), an expert on the subject and the author of The
Pursuit of Happiness, provides general strategies for increasing the happiness in daily life. We
provide additional Life Enhancement Strategies for boosting happiness in specific domains of
your life.
When looking at the suggestions below, we would ask the reader to consider that not all
suggestions necessarily work for all cultural groups. Use a discerning eye while reading, and
this may help you determine what seems plausible and culturally valid in your own life. One
way in which some increase their well-being is to value their own time and to make sure that
they rank this time as a high priority.
Williams, Dunn, Smeets, Bekkers, and Norton (2017) found that “individuals who spend
money on time-saving services report greater life satisfaction”. These services might include
things such as employing a housecleaner or assistance with cooking or shopping. Although
the researchers recognize that buying anything might require a certain amount of income, in
the participants sampled (all of whom were able to buy these services), income was not a
moderating factor (i.e., if time saving could be afforded, it was beneficial regardless of
income).
The authors posit that the increase in life satisfaction might be related to the decrease in
stress felt because certain tasks were no longer an issue to be completed (Williams et al.,
2017). In our very busy culture, this may be one way to offset stress if able to purchase this
type of time saving.
David Myers’s Suggestions for a Happier Life
1. Realize that enduring happiness doesn't come from success. People adapt to changing
circumstances-even to wealth or a disability. Thus wealth is like health: its utter absence
breeds misery, but having it (or any circumstance we long for) doesn't guarantee happiness.

16
2. Take control of your time. Happy people feel in control of their lives, often aided by
mastering their use of time. It helps to set goals and break them into daily aims. Although we
often overestimate how much we will accomplish in any given day (leaving us frustrated), we
generally underestimate how much we can accomplish in a year, given just a little progress
every day.
3. Act happy. We can sometimes act ourselves into a frame of mind. Manipulated into a
smiling expression, people feel better, when they scowl, the whole world seems to scowl
back. So, put on a happy face. Talk as if you feel positive self-esteem, are optimistic, and are
outgoing. Going through the motions can trigger the emotions.
4. Seek work and leisure that engage your skills. Happy people often are in a zone called
"flow"-absorbed in a task that challenges them without overwhelming them. The most
expensive forms of leisure (sitting on a yacht) often provide less flow experience than
gardening, socializing, or craft work.
5. Join the "movement" movement. An avalanche of research reveals that aerobic exercise
not only promotes health and energy, it also is an antidote for mild depression and anxiety.
Sound minds reside in sound bodies. Off your duffs, couch potatoes,

6. Give your body the sleep it wants. Happy people live active, vigorous lives yet reserve time
for renewing sleep and solitude. Many people suffer from a sleep debt, with resulting fatigue,
diminished alertness, and gloomy moods.
7. Give priority to close relationships. Intimate friendships with those who care deeply about
you can help you weather difficult times. Confiding is good for soul and body. Resolve to
nurture your closest relationships, to not take those closest to you for granted, to display to
them the sort of kindness that you display to others, to affirm them, to play together and
share together. To rejuvenate your affections, resolve in such ways to act lovingly.

8. Focus beyond the self. Reach out to those in need. Happiness increases helpfulness (those
who feel good do good). But doing good also makes one feel good.
9. Keep a gratitude journal. Those who pause each day to reflect on some positive aspect of
their lives (their health, friends, family, freedom, education, senses, natural surroundings, and
so on) experience heightened well-being.
10. Nurture your spiritual self. For many people, faith provides a support community. a reason
to focus beyond self, and a sense of purpose and hope. Study after study finds that actively
religious people are happier and that they cope better with crises.

Unit 5 Emotional Intelligence

Daniel Goleman, once a science writer for numerous periodicals and newspapers, popularized
the concept of emotional intelligence in the 1990s. His 1995 book, Emotional Intelligence:
Why It Can Matter More Than IQ, introduced the general public to the emotional concepts
that had been discussed by psychologists and knowledgeable laypeople for decades.

17
Professionals of all types built on this “next big thing” and shared their views on emotional
intelligence in the popular press or in what has been referred to as the “organizational
development industry” (which primarily involves training programs designed to help
employees reach their professional potential by realizing their personal potential). To date,
numerous amalgamations of psychological constructs have been conceptualized as reflective
of emotional intelligence (see Bar-On, 1997; Schutte et al., 1998).
For example, Bar-On (1997, 2013, 2017) defines emotional intelligence as an array of
noncognitive capabilities, competencies, and skills that help us deal with the demands of the
environment, but the related inventory, the EQ-I (Bar-On, 1997; now in its second iteration
EQ-I 2.0; Bar-On, 2013), primarily measures personality and mood variables such as self-
regard, empathy, tolerance, and happiness. This atheoretical version of emotional
intelligence may be distinct from other forms of intelligence, yet it appears to overlap existing
operationalizations of meaningful psychological variables.
Therefore, measuring this type of emotional intelligence may not provide a researcher or
practitioner with the new information that might help predict positive life outcomes. We
believe that the proliferation of emotional intelligence models and the general appeal and
popularity of this positive construct have led to a muddying of the waters. As a result,
emotional intelligence now may be one of the most misunderstood and misrepresented
constructs in psychology. For that reason, we return to the roots of emotional intelligence
research and demonstrate how we learn to manage emotion-laden material for our benefit
and the benefit of others.
In 1960, Mowrer addressed the prevailing thoughts about emotions undermining intelligence
by suggesting that emotion was, in fact, “a high order of intelligence”. Peter Salovey of Yale
University and John Mayer of the University of New Hampshire shared Mowrer’s sentiment
and theorized that adapting to life circumstances required cognitive abilities and emotional
skills that guide our behavior.
In their original 1990 papers, Salovey and Mayer constructed a theoretical framework for an
emotional intelligence. The framework comprised three core components: appraisal and
expression, regulation, and utilization. These fledging ideas about a set of emotional abilities
that might provide people with a reservoir of intellectual resources were well received by the
general public and psychology scholars.
The Salovey and Mayer four-branch ability model of emotional intelligence has been
predicated on the belief that skills needed to reason about emotions and to use emotional
material to assist reasoning can be learned. Branch 1 of the model involves skills needed to
perceive and express feelings. More specifically, perception of emotions requires picking up
on subtle emotional cues that might be expressed in a person’s face or voice.
For example, when chatting with a friend about an emotionally charged political topic, a
person skilled in perceiving emotions can determine what aspects of the discussion are safe
or unsafe territory based on the friend’s nonverbal behavior. These skills in perceiving can be
considered a threshold competency that needs to be acquired so that the other three
emotional intelligence competencies can be developed.

18
Branch 2 of this ability model concerns using emotions and emotional understanding to
facilitate thinking. Simply stated, people who are emotionally intelligent harness emotions
and work with them to improve problem solving and to boost creativity. Physiological
feedback from emotional experience is used to prioritize the demands on our cognitive
systems and to direct attention to what is most important.
In this regard, imagine that a woman has to make an important decision about a relationship.
Should she invest more energy in a friendship that has been on the rocks, or should she cut
her losses and end the friendship in a civil manner? How she feels physically and emotionally
when she thinks about continuing or ending the friendship can provide some clues about how
to proceed. This emotional information thus turns attention to alternatives about how to
handle the friendship. Also, the more the emotions are used in efforts to make good decisions,
the greater the increase in emotional intelligence.
Branch 3 of emotional intelligence highlights the skills needed to foster an understanding of
complex emotions, relationships among emotions, and relationships between emotions and
behavioral consequences. Someone displaying a heightened level of emotional
understanding would know that hope is an antidote to fear and that sadness and apathy are
more appropriate responses to lost love than hating is.
People with these skills understand that emotions such as jealousy and envy are destructive
in their own right (due to their physiological and psychological repercussions) and that they
fuel maladaptive interpersonal behavior that probably results in a proliferation of negative
emotions. Appreciating the dynamic relationships among emotions and behaviors gives an
emotionally intelligent person the sense that they can better “read” a person or a situation
and act appropriately, given environmental demands.
For example, imagine the emotional struggle of a man who is placed in the awkward situation
of being asked by a close friend to betray the confidence of a classmate or work colleague. He
might feel disappointment or disgust that the friend asked him to behave in an inappropriate
manner. If he were tempted to break the trust, he might experience a wave of shame.
Understanding these complex emotions then might help him choose the right course of action
at that time.
The more we practice skills that are associated with Branches 1 through 3, the more
emotional content there is to manage.
Managing emotions, Branch 4, involves numerous mood regulation skills. These skills are
difficult to master because regulation is a balancing act. With too much regulation, a person
may become emotionally repressed. With too little, one’s emotional life becomes
overwhelming. People who become very good at regulating their moods also are able to share
these skills with others. Often the best parents, teachers, coaches, leaders, bosses, or role
models can manage their emotions and at the same time instil confidence in others to be
open to feelings and manage them appropriately.
Salovey and Mayer’s Four-Branch Ability Model of Emotional Intelligence
Branch 1: Perceiving Emotions

19
Ability to identify emotion in a person’s physical and psychological states.

Ability to identify emotions in other people.

Ability to express emotions accurately and to express needs related to them.

Ability to discriminate between authentic and inauthentic emotions.

Branch 2: Using Emotions to Facilitate Thought

Ability to redirect and prioritize thinking on the basis of associated feelings.

Ability to generate emotions to facilitate judgment and memory.

Ability to capitalize on mood changes to appreciate multiple points of view.

Ability to use emotional states to facilitate problem solving and creativity

Branch 3: Understanding Emotions

Ability to understand relationships among various emotions.

Ability to perceive the causes and consequences of emotions.

Ability to understand complex feelings, emotional blends, and contradictory states.

Ability to understand transitions among emotions.

Branch 4: Managing Emotions

Ability to be open to feelings, both pleasant and unpleasant.

Ability to monitor and reflect on emotions.

Ability to engage, prolong, or detach from an emotional state.

Ability to manage emotions in oneself and others

Each of the four dimensions of the ability model is assessed with two sets of tasks in a measure
called the Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (the most recent version is the
MSCEIT 2.0; Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso, 2002). The tasks concerned with perceiving emotions
ask respondents to identify the emotions expressed in photographs of faces and the feelings
suggested by artistic designs and landscapes. For the measurement of using emotions to
facilitate thought, respondents are asked to describe feelings using nonfeeling words and to
indicate the feelings that might facilitate or interfere with the successful performance of
various tasks.
The understanding–emotions dimension is assessed with questions concerning the manner
in which emotions evolve and how some feelings are produced by blends of emotions. To tap
the ability of managing emotions, the MSCEIT 273 2.0 presents a series of scenarios eliciting
the most adaptive ways to regulate one’s own feelings, as well as feelings that arise in social
situations and in other people.
Emotional intelligence may be linked to other positive constructs and experiences as well.
Some research has pointed to the connections between emotional intelligence and a variety

20
of other cognitive abilities. Resilience, well-being, and mindfulness are other positive traits
that have been linked with emotional intelligence.
In addition, emotional intelligence is often studied in regard to leadership skills (Maamari &
Majdalani, 2017), and many leadership training organizations tout development of emotional
intelligence affecting one’s leadership style.
Emotional intelligence may show some differences in different genders (Pardeller et al., 2017)
but not in all circumstances (Direktor, Şimşek, & Serin, 2017). Certain types of emotional
intelligence might also mediate the relationship between feelings of anger and resulting
aggressive responses.

Unit 6: Socioemotional Selectivity

The extent to which we are able to make the most of our emotional experiences is determined
in part by personal and environmental demands such as our health status, social
surroundings, and cultural norms. It now is becoming clear that humans’ unique ability to
monitor time across their entire span of life also may determine how much energy is
dedicated to emotional goals.
Indeed, in Stanford psychologist Laura Carstensen’s (1998; Carstensen & Charles, 1998)
socioemotional selectivity theory, she posits that our later years (the “golden years”) may be
valuable as we focus less on negative emotions, engage more deeply with the emotional
content of our days, and savor the “good stuff” in life (e.g., establishing and enhancing
relationships). Carstensen reasons that we are able to appreciate these benefits in our
advanced years because we come to realize that we have a short amount of time left.

In her laboratory, Carstensen has demonstrated that young people and their older
counterparts manage emotion-laden material quite differently. In tests of attention to novel
stimuli, for example, the younger participants attended to negative images more quickly,
whereas the older participants oriented faster to images laden with positive emotions
(smiling face, happy baby, puppy) (Charles, Mather, & Carstensen, 2003).
Regarding recall of emotional events, it appears that young people (college age and a bit
older) remembered the positive and negative material to the same degree, but the older
people had a positivity bias in which they recalled the positive material more quickly than the
negative material (Charles et al., 2003; Reed & Carstensen, 2012). The “positivity effect”
shown in these studies suggests that the process of interacting with emotions is different for
young adults and older adults.
This said, conflicting research results have been found with regard to this effect since its
original introduction to the field. Reed and Carstensen (2012) address these conflicting
research findings by looking closely at the conditions in the different studies conducted. To
this point, they state, “Positivity appears when cognitive resources are available, when
experimental task or stimuli do not activate automatic processing, and when information
processing is unconstrained by external factors such as task instructions”.

21
In addition, when pressure is on or risk of failure is high, the positivity effect seems to
disappear. Thus, some of the conflicting results may be artifacts of research studies and their
characteristics, more than as a result of actual findings (Reed & Carstensen, 2012).
Irrespective of our tendencies to attend to and remember certain types of events, life
provides all of us with blessings and burdens.
Related to this point, Carstensen and her colleagues have found that there are age cohort
effects for how we handle positive and negative daily life experiences. After monitoring the
moods of 184 people (age 18 and up) for a week, Carstensen, Pasupathi, Mayr, and
Nesselrode (2000) discovered that their older research participants not only did not “sweat
the small stuff” (which is how they viewed negative events) but also savored the positive
events (experienced the good residuals of positive events for longer periods than their
younger counterparts did).
Older adults may also be able to continue to perform at high levels on tasks involving
emotions well beyond their abilities to do this on cognitive tasks (Samanez-Larkin, Robertson,
Mikels, Carstensen, & Golib, 2014), showing differential processing of these tasks. Given these
findings, it appears that positive experiences and positive emotions become our priority as
we age and consider our mortality. In addition, contrary to young people’s fascination with
future-oriented goals pertaining to acquiring information and expanding horizons, older
people seem to orient to here-and-now goals that foster emotional meaning.
This selectivity toward positive stimuli might be able to be used in promoting other positive
behaviors in older adults. Notthoff and Carstensen (2014, 2017) have showed that using
positive messaging (e.g., “Walking can have important cardiovascular health benefits,” p. 331)
to motivate older adults to get more exercise via walking is more successful than using
negative messaging (“Not walking enough can lead to increased risk for cardiovascular
disease,” p. 331).
This study was conducted in a racially diverse sample and similar results were not found to be
significant in younger adults. This type of messaging might have implications for encouraging
older adults to engage in other helpful behaviors. In addition, paying attention to strengths
(as opposed to weaknesses) in older adults might help to allow them to remain a part of the
workforce.
Thinking about ways to develop work teams that include different ages or generations and to
establish older workers as mentors for younger workers might assist in helping older workers
to feel useful and positive about their worklife for longer. The tendency to remember more
positive than negative information may generalize across other cultures. Studies demonstrate
that Chinese older adults have the same pattern of memory of positive and negative pictures
(Chung & Lin, 2012), although they may not have the same pattern with regard to visual
attention to positive images (Fung et al., 2008).

In the study by Chung and Lin, Chinese older adults remembered fewer negative pictures in
comparison to positive pictures, and they remembered fewer negative pictures in comparison
to their U.S. counterparts. Researchers hypothesize that this may be partially due to the more
negative view of aging held by older adults in the United States as compared to views of aging

22
in China. With regard to attention, Fung and colleagues (2008) found that it was more
common for older Chinese (but not younger) to look away from positive images, showing no
attentional preference toward positivity.

These interesting findings must be explored in greater detail to truly understand the process
at hand. As with most situations, context appears to play some role in the equation. As
mentioned earlier, some of the results found may be a result of a perception by older adults
that time is waning for them in general. Ersner-Hershfield, Mikels, Sullivan, and Carstensen
(2008) compared experiences of poignancy (mixed emotions related to an ending or to losing
something meaningful) in younger and older adults.
Both younger and older adults in the experimental condition in this study were taken through
a series of guided imagery scenarios of being in a personally meaningful location, ending with
a final scenario that asked them to imagine that they were at this meaningful location for the
very last time. Results showed that age was not a significant factor in the experience of
poignancy, suggesting that “a meaningful limited-time situation such as an ending can
produce poignancy regardless of age”.
The researchers posited that the higher incidence of these feelings in older adults that have
been reported previously may be more related to the feeling that time is limited (in life) as
opposed to something organic to the aging process. This provides us with important
information about processing complex emotions and directs us toward continuing to search
for deep emotional experiences in younger groups, while at the same time looking toward
the strengths of older adults as models for successful processing of deep emotional
experiences.
Recall of positive experience, savouring the good times, and setting and investing in emotion-
focused goals systematically influence social preferences, emotion regulation, and cognitive
processing. Overall, therefore, looking at the aging process within various cultural groups may
be able to provide us with valuable information about how best to strive for a deeper
emotional life.
Unit 7: Emotional Storytelling

Every now and again, we experience life events that shake us to our core. Traumatic events
that cause emotional upheaval may outstrip the resources of good emotion-focused copers,
the emotionally intelligent, and the young and old alike. It is quite likely (with a 95%
probability) that, when we experience an overwhelming emotional event, we will share the
experience with a friend or family member within the same day of its occurrence, typically in
the first few hours (Rime, 1995). It is almost as if we were compelled to tell the story of our
emotional suffering. Is it possible that we have learned that not talking about our intense
emotions has dire consequences? This question and many related research hypotheses have
served as the impetus for the work of University of Texas psychologist James Pennebaker.

In 1989, Dr. Pennebaker broke ground on this research area by making the following request
of undergraduate research participants in an experimental group of a study. The control
group participants were asked to write for 15 minutes a day for 4 days but about a non-

23
emotional topic (e.g., a description of the room they were seated in). All participants were
asked to write continuously, without regard to spelling, grammar, and sentence structure.
The immediate effects of the two interventions were such that the experimental group was
more distressed. Then, over time (beginning 2 weeks after the study), the members of the
emotional storytelling group experienced numerous health benefits, including fewer
physician visits over the next year, compared with the members of the control group. Other
researchers have found that certain features within the narratives constructed for these
purposes can predict health outcomes (Ramírez-Esparza & Pennebaker, 2006).
These researchers have found that when people use more positive-emotion words (such as
happy or laugh) as part of expressive writing, their health improves more. In addition,
participants who used cognitive words specifically associated with insight or causality made
greater inroads toward better health as well. Thus, how and what we write may affect the
benefits of these techniques. Emotionally expressive writing may have benefits in many
populations. In research looking at early survivors of breast cancer, findings showed that
participants who were assigned to experimental groups with expressive writing regarding
their cancer experience had improved quality of life (Craft, Davis, & Paulson, 2013), and these
findings are replicated especially in populations of women who are high in optimism (Sohl,
Dietrich, Wallston, & Ridner, 2017).
In addition, this type of emotional processing may have benefit in dealing with prejudice.
Kwon (2013) asserts that use of emotional processing in this way may assist gay and lesbian
individuals dealing with discrimination to develop more resilience as a sort of buffer to the
effects of prejudice. Some cultural differences may exist in the benefit of writing about certain
types of experiences as well.
In a study aimed at using expressive writing techniques as an attempt to decrease alcohol use,
researchers found that when Asian participants wrote expressively about their alcohol use
and future intentions to drink, they experienced more shame about these behaviors than
their White counterparts. These results were even found in light drinkers within the Asian
sample, although this shame did not lead to more drinking in this group. Shame was not a
common reaction to White participants who wrote about their alcohol use in this study, and
in many cases, this intervention was found to be beneficial to this group.
The experience of shame in this study was found to be linked to increased drinking intentions
in heavier drinking Asian participants, however, although not in White participants even when
shame was experienced (Rodriguez et al., 2016). This makes the point, yet again, that cultural
context must be taken into account with interventions of all types.
Finally, writing about emotions and emotional experiences may be particularly beneficial to
individuals who prefer to use an emotion approach style of coping in dealing with problems
in their lives (Austenfeld & Stanton, 2008). In a study of undergraduate students, Austenfeld
and Stanton (2008) found that individuals who preferred an emotionally expressive style of
coping made fewer visits to a health care provider when assigned to a group that used
emotion-based writing as compared to more goal-oriented writing.

24
This was not true for those who did not prefer this style, however; these individuals had fewer
medical visits when participating in a group that instructed members to write about their
“best possible selves” (Austenfeld & Stanton, 2008, p. 35). In addition, those who prefer
emotion-approach coping with stress and trauma showed more benefit from emotional
writing following a stress test versus those who did not (Seeley, Yanez, Stanton, & Hoyt, 2017).
These results direct us to remember to attend to the vast array of individual differences that
can affect the effectiveness of various strategies (Stickney, 2010). Again, it may be that
psychological outcomes are partially determined by individuals’ emotional preferences
related to coping. This research procedure involving the mere act of written disclosure of
emotional upheaval 285 —what we generally call emotional storytelling—is now referred to
as the Pennebaker paradigm (systematic written disclosure across brief sessions).

This technique has been used to address the emotions associated with job loss (discussed in
Chapter 15), diagnosis of illness, and relationship breakup (reviewed in Pennebaker, 1997). It
has also been used with a number of different populations, including helping those who want
to forgive a transgressor (Barclay & Saldanha, 2016), youth involved in the juvenile justice
system (Greenbaum & Javdani, 2017), and people with depression and other mental health
issues (Lee, Kim, et al., 2016; Reinhold, Bürkner, & Holling, 2018).
The positive long-term effects of emotional storytelling are fairly robust, yet it does appear
that people with hostility (which typically suggests personal difficulty managing emotions)
have a greater positive immune response than people with low hostility (Christensen & Smith,
1998), and participants high in the trait of alexithymia (difficulty identifying and making sense
of emotions) experienced more salutary effects than those low in the trait (Paez, Velasco, &
Gonzales, 1999).
The theoretical explanations for the benefits of emotional storytelling in response to
traumatic events continue to be refined. It does appear that disinhibition (letting go of
emotion-related stress), cognitive processing, and social dynamics (when disclosure occurs
outside the laboratory) are at work (Niederhoffer & Pennebaker, 2002) when someone
experiencing emotional upheaval shares their story. Others have stated, “Emotional writing
… reveals the natural abilities people have to construct stories” (Ramírez-Esparza &
Pennebaker, 2006, p. 212).
Plainly stated, “Putting upsetting experiences into words allows people to stop inhibiting their
thoughts and feelings, to begin to organize their thoughts and perhaps find meaning in their
traumas, and to reintegrate their social networks” (Niederhoffer & Pennebaker, 2002, p. 581).
This is supported by recent neurological studies that seem to suggest that “affect labelling
(putting feelings into words) is a form of incidental emotional regulation” (Memarian, Torre,
Haltom, Stanton, & Lieberman, 2017, p. 1437). The most commonly involved areas of the
brain were the right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and the amygdala. Some also have found
benefit from using storytelling to teach children how to develop their own emotional
frameworks and perhaps influence better attachment to parents (Frude & Killick, 2011).
When parents allow their own emotional response to characters in a story to be seen, in
addition to discussing potential emotions of the characters themselves, children may be

25
better able to cope with varying emotions in their own lives through this modelling. We
believe these explanations for the potency of emotional storytelling can be summed up as
strategically working with emotions within a social context

26