The Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology (3rd edn)
C. R. Snyder (ed.) et al.
[Link]
Published: 2016 Online ISBN: 9780190635206 Print ISBN: 9780199396511
CHAPTER
1 Strengthening Positive Psychology
Matthew W. Gallagher, Shane J. Lopez
Downloaded from [Link] by Università degli Studi di Padova user on 25 April 2023
[Link] Pages 2–7
Published: 04 April 2019
Abstract
The term “positive psychology” was rst used in 1954 by Abraham Maslow, who complained that
psychology as then practiced said “little about [man’s] potentialities, his virtues, his achievable
aspirations, or his full psychological height.” In the decades, since, this has changed. Pick up a
magazine or a scholarly psychology journal and, chances are, you will read about the good work of a
positive psychologist. Through the use of sound methods, positive psychologists answer hard
questions about the best in people. This book serves as repository of answers to those tough questions.
In this chapter, we argue that the work of positive psychology scholars is good for psychology, as a
discipline, and for society. We also discuss what needs to be done to strengthen the science and
practice of positive psychology. The promise of this new brand of positive psychology was and remains
clear. By using the same techniques and tools that help us explain weakness and prevent or treat
illness, we could enhance our understanding of strengths and promote well-being.
Keywords: positive psychology, social science, strengthswell-being, methodology
Subject: Social Psychology, Psychology
Series: Oxford Library of Psychology
Collection: Oxford Handbooks Online
“Positive psychology,” the term, was rst used in 1954 by Abraham Maslow in a book chapter where he
noted that the “science of psychology has been far more successful on the negative than on the positive
side; it has revealed to us much about man’s shortcomings, his illness, his sins, but little about his
potentialities, his virtues, his achievable aspirations, or his full psychological height. It is as if psychology
had voluntarily restricted itself to only half its rightful jurisdiction, and that the darker, meaner half”
(Maslow, 1954, p. 354). More than 40 years later, Martin Seligman reintroduced the term and proclaimed
that psychology was “half-baked” and that more attention needed to be paid to the good in people and in
the world. Quickly, research meetings sprang up in the United States in locales such as Philadelphia,
Washington, D.C., Lincoln, and Lawrence. The rst edition of the Handbook of Positive Psychology was
published in 2002 and helped summarize and spark the rapidly expanding eld of positive psychology. The
International Positive Psychology Association was founded in 2007, and the Fifth World Congress on
Positive Psychology took place in Montreal in 2017. The promise of this new brand of positive psychology
was and remains clear. By using the same techniques and tools that help us explain weakness and prevent or
treat illness, we could enhance our understanding of strengths and promote well-being.
Some scholars of human behavior saw great potential in answering hard questions about the positive in
people. Many of these scholars have contributed to this volume, and it is this group of scholars and their
collective works that make the best case for positive psychology. Nevertheless, handing someone the
Handbook of Positive Psychology is not always the best way to inform them of the added value of the work
addressing strengths, positive emotions, and healthy institutions. Here, we try to make a more succinct case
for positive psychology’s value to the broader discipline of psychology and to society. We also discuss the
p. 4 need to continue to enhance the science, theory, and application of positive psychology over the next
decade in order to strengthen the eld of positive psychology.
Making the Case for Positive Psychology
On occasion, we are asked to make a case for positive psychology. For example, many of the professors who
have created positive psychology courses for their departments were challenged with the question, “Why do
we need a positive psychology course?” Other questions we have faced include, “Is there enough research to
ll a handbook/textbook?” “Is this a scienti c eld or just pop psychology?” “Isn’t this too esoteric for the
Downloaded from [Link] by Università degli Studi di Padova user on 25 April 2023
general public?” and “Isn’t this intellectual eld just a playground or luxury for people who are already
doing well?” We will answer each of these questions, as we did in actual discussions with deans, colleagues,
publishers and editors, and friends in our attempt to demonstrate that positive psychology has a place in
psychology and in the e orts of people to lead better lives.
Rounding Out Psychology
Maslow and Seligman’s call for more serious attention to the positive side of life has been echoed by many,
including visionaries in psychiatry such as Karl Menninger, and business gurus, notably Peter Drucker.
Taking these calls one at a time and in historical sequence, Maslow (1954) argued for an augmentation of
what was known about psychology to tell a complete story about human nature and to help people realize
their full potential…not just to aid them in their work toward the absence of ills. Menninger (Menninger,
Mayman, & Pruyser, 1963) reinvented psychiatry by demonstrating that mental illness was treatable,
mental health was achievable, and both states could be studied. With a message for managers who wanted
to boost their bottom line, Drucker (1993) simply stated that executives should build on strengths, not
weaknesses. In 1998, Seligman picked up the mantle of those who came before him—Maslow, Menninger,
Jahoda, Drucker, and many others who were actively studying topics that would fall under the umbrella of
positive psychology, such as Beatrice Wright, Albert Bandura, Rick Snyder, Carol Ry , Chris Peterson, and
Don Clifton, and paired scienti c zeal with good timing to make positive psychology come alive and round
out psychology.
We occasionally cite these historical events when trying to explain why we need positive psychology courses
on campuses, but it often is more e ective to note that wherever there is fear, there is hope. And, since
abnormal psychology courses, which are required for most psychology majors, are about fear, related
negative emotions, and illness, a positive psychology course serves to round out a student’s knowledge base
with the study of hope, positive emotions, and health. Positive psychology does not make the case that
topics such as anxiety or depression are not important or worthy of study, but rather that studying
strengths and well-being can potentially inform and complement the tremendous knowledge that has
already been gained in those areas. We can also detail how some of the best thinkers and researchers in
psychiatry, sociology, economics, and business are contributing to this body of knowledge, so it exposes our
students to research from other disciplines. That helps with the sell. What continues to sometimes
undermine the case that positive psychology rounds out psychology is the hyperfocus on what some critics
refer to as “happyology.” Indeed, the lion’s share of public storytelling about positive psychology work
focuses on happiness and the shortcuts to it. While this coverage has stoked public interest in positive
psychology and made positive psychology courses and research more popular, this soft-hitting media
possibly can undermine the credibility of positive psychology and has made launching courses and getting
grants more di cult.
Unifying Psychology
Psychology is carved up into specialties and divisions and lled with factions. Occasionally, one issue is
intriguing enough to attract attention across the discipline, but the norm is that such an issue is a divisive
one. Positive psychology research, especially the operationalization of meaningful, yet fuzzy constructs
such as hope, courage, and wisdom, has historically uni ed psychologists. Each of these constructs and many
others were often de ned and researched by collectives, with contributions from developmental
psychology, social psychology, personality psychology, and clinical and counseling psychology. Researchers
rallied around questions, shared new methods and approaches perfected in their specialty and in their own
laboratories, and put old agendas aside for the sake of engaging in serious inquiry about topics that matter
to all people. Positive psychology has provided talented scholars with overlapping interests reasons to come
together to ask and answer hard questions; all told, even when accounting for psychologists who have made
Downloaded from [Link] by Università degli Studi di Padova user on 25 April 2023
cases against positive psychology, it has had a unifying e ect on the eld.
p. 5 Giving Psychology Away
In uential psychologists such as George Miller, George Albee, Raymond Fowler, and others have
encouraged us to “give psychology away” over the decades. For the most part, we have been fairly
successful at giving psychology away in the schools; high school courses have become commonplace, and
psychology majors outnumber most others on college campuses. We have also made a dent in educating the
general public about mental illness and its prevention and treatment. “Giving positive psychology away”
seems to be an easy task. People not su ering from a mental disorder, the majority of the population on a
given day, are trying to make sense of the world and use available information to make a good life. Positive
psychology science and practice is accessible, and this “new” information meets the daily needs of
“normal” people.
Mass media grounded in principles of strengths development helps with the mission of giving positive
psychology away. For example, Bandura spreads self-e cacy through carefully crafted soap operas (see
[Link]) that air on the radio and/or television around the world. The Gallup organization consulted
with positive psychology researchers to help identify factors that promote student success, and it now
annually measures the hope, engagement, and well-being of hundreds of thousands of students across the
United States. Viewers of “Paz the Penguin” of DiscoveryKids learn how to be hopeful, resilient learners.
More than a million people are touched by one of these purveyors of positive psychology every day. This and
other work has helped to broaden the impact of positive psychology beyond research laboratories and
universities in order to help individuals worldwide, but much remains to be done to maximize the impact of
positive psychology ndings on individuals worldwide.
Attracting More Talent to Psychology
Psychology, like any other science, explains the natural world through observation and experiment. Our
ndings are the products of those observations and experiments that are conducted by talented men and
women across the world. The vibrancy of our science is dependent upon the commitment of these talented
people to a lifelong pursuit of demystifying psychological phenomena. Positive psychology appears to
attract those talented people. Summer institutes, dissertation prizes, the Templeton Prize, and the Clifton
Strengths Prize have encouraged the development of new scholars and have rewarded those who have made
signi cant early career and lifelong contributions. None of these incentives explains the knocks on the
o ce door, or emails from bright, hard-working college students, or retreads from the world of work who
want to immerse themselves in the study of the positive. Knowing more about the good in people has a
gravitational pull of some sort that is hard for some to resist. With the large numbers of people attracted to
working on positive psychology research and programming, we are sure to connect with highly talented
individuals who can make signi cant contributions.
Strengthening Positive Psychology
The case for positive psychology is easy to make, but it is also easy to undermine, given the nature of the
media attention received and the varying quality of the research and practice that fall under the positive
psychology umbrella. Here we contend that the best way to continue to grow the eld of positive psychology
is through the use of rigorous scienti c methods, and we attempt to guide interested researchers toward
sound, sophisticated methods that could tell a more complex story about positive human development.
Concerns regarding the reproducibility of ndings in psychology has received great attention in psychology
in recent years (e.g., Open Science Collaboration, 2015), and the issue of reproducibility is just as crucial in
positive psychology as it is in other specialty areas of psychology. We also recommend continuing to develop
and re ne theoretical models of positive psychology by testing theories and constructs in unison in order to
determine, for example, the overlap or incremental value of optimism and hope when predicting academic
Downloaded from [Link] by Università degli Studi di Padova user on 25 April 2023
outcomes or changes in well-being over time. Finally, we encourage scientists and practitioners to work
together to determine how best to apply the ndings of positive psychology to promote mental health,
strengths, and other positive outcomes.
Strengthening the Science of Positive Psychology
As the chapters in this third edition make clear, the continued expansion of positive psychology research
has led to an improved understanding of the nature of positive mental health, the bene ts of traits such as
hope and gratitude, and the methods by which the ndings of positive psychology can be used to improve
the lives of individuals and communities. Given that much of our science has real-world applications that
p. 6 a ect the lives of children and adults, we must continue to conduct rigorous science. The eld of
psychology has been challenged in recent years to use more robust methods of experimental design and
analysis in order to increase the reproducibility of our ndings (e.g., Asendorpf et al., 2013). As it is a
relatively new area of psychology, the importance of using robust methods of experimental design and
analysis may be particularly important in positive psychology to ensure that conclusions regarding the
catalysts, correlates, and consequences of strengths and well-being are appropriately based on empirical
ndings. Focusing on e ect sizes and con dence intervals rather than statistical signi cance, using latent
variable modeling techniques to more precisely model the measurement of complex positive psychology
constructs, and increasing the use of meta-analysis to synthesize knowledge about the impact of positive
psychology constructs and interventions are just a few examples of some of the research practices that may
help to advance the eld of positive psychology.
It will also be important for the eld to continue to move beyond cross-sectional research so that we can
better understand interventions, and more clearly identify not just the associations between positive
psychology constructs, but the dynamic change processes within individuals that may occur over time. One
of the underlying questions behind a portion of positive psychology research is whether it is possible to
improve individual levels of well-being. This issue has signi cant relevance for individuals, public policy,
and the healthcare system. Cross-sectional research can provide a wealth of information about how positive
traits and various indices of mental health are associated with one another, but cross-sectional studies can
never provide true tests of the causal models that are often put forth in our theories. Although it can be
di cult and expensive to conduct longitudinal studies that can accurately demystify change, the methods
and data analysis necessary to model change are becoming increasingly more accessible. The positive
psychology research methods volume edited by Ong and Van Dulmen (2006) provides concrete examples of
how longitudinal data analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling or growth-curve modeling can be
applied speci cally to positive psychology research in order to provide a more sophisticated understanding
of the latent trajectories of well-being. Of course, researchers should not use these advanced statistical
analyses when they are not necessary or appropriate, but for positive psychology to continue to develop as a
science, we believe that researchers will increasingly need to design studies that permit the appropriate
modeling of individual trajectories and change. The research covered in the chapters in this edition of the
handbook highlight the great progress that has been made in increasing our understanding of when, why,
and how changes in positive psychology constructs may occur.
Strengthening the Theories of Positive Psychology
As is clear from the new chapters in this handbook and the signi cant revisions to existing chapters, the
past decade has seen remarkable growth and development of new and re ned theories and measures of
positive psychology constructs. The breadth of research re ects the excitement about the topics of positive
psychology, but there are also reasons to be cautious about this proliferation of constructs. In many
instances, there has been too little attention given to examining the incremental validity of these new
constructs, or whether alternative models may provide more parsimonious or accurate models and
measures of strengths or well-being. It is important to demonstrate that multiple positive traits (e.g., hope
and optimism) are associated with positive outcomes, but it is just as important, if not more so, to
demonstrate the unique e ects of these traits on positive outcomes and to demonstrate the contexts in
which one trait might be more valuable than another. By examining our theories and constructs in unison,
Downloaded from [Link] by Università degli Studi di Padova user on 25 April 2023
we can develop a more nuanced science of positive psychology that could articulate when, how, and why
various constructs relate to one another. As the science of positive psychology continues to develop, this
may result in the pruning or modi cation of constructs or measures that are found to be redundant or to
have little incremental value in the prediction or promotion of positive outcomes. Although this process can
be challenging, we believe that continuous iteration and improvement of how we de ne, measure, and
target the constructs of positive psychology is crucial for promoting a healthy science.
Strengthening the Practice of Positive Psychology
We believe that as positive psychology continues to grow and develop, it will be critical that the scientists
and practitioners of positive psychology remain closely linked. Within the eld of clinical psychology, there
continues to be a disconnection between the theoretical orientations and the treatment methods endorsed
p. 7 by clinical researchers and practitioners. We believe this disconnection is unfortunate and hinders the
work of both scientists and practitioners. As positive psychology movement in its current form enters its
third decade, the empirical basis for interventions based on ndings of positive psychology will continue to
improve. It will be important to increase the e orts that are made to bring positive psychology
interventions to real-world settings outside of research labs, to examine how the e cacy of these
interventions holds up when examined with larger populations, to clarify the mechanisms of change that
promote positive outcomes in these interventions, and to determine the extent to which the impact of these
interventions is moderated by cultural factors or other individual or group characteristics. By doing so, we
can strengthen both the science and the practice of positive psychology and maximize the impact of positive
psychology worldwide.
Beyond Making a Case for Positive Psychology
The fact that we were compelled to make the case for positive psychology in the lead chapter of this
handbook suggests that skepticism persists regarding the scienti c status of positive psychology. This
incarnation of positive psychology is only entering its third decade, so the empirical foundations of some
areas of positive psychology are not so well developed as other topics in psychology, but we believe that the
following chapters demonstrate the health of positive psychology as a eld. This third edition of the
Handbook helps move us beyond the need for making a case for inclusion of positive psychology in
mainstream psychology departments and toward a focus on strengthening the already vibrant eld of
positive psychology so that we can maximize our ability as a eld to meet the basic needs of children and
adults and society at large.
Future Questions
1. What are some future of applications of positive psychology that might meet societal needs?
2. What are the primary critiques of positive psychology, and what evidence supports/refutes those
critiques?
3. How could more talented graduate students and scholars be attracted to studying strengths, positive
emotions, and strong institutions?
References
Asendorpf, J. B., Conner, M., De Fruyt, F., De Houwer, J., Denissen, J. J., Fiedler, K.,…Perugini, M. (2013). Recommendations for
increasing replicability in psychology. European Journal of Personality, 27(2), 108–119. doi:10.1002/per.1919 10.1002/per.1919
Google Scholar WorldCat Crossref
Drucker, P. F. (1993). The e ective executive. New York: Harper Collins.
Google Scholar Google Preview WorldCat COPAC
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University.
Google Scholar Google Preview WorldCat COPAC
Downloaded from [Link] by Università degli Studi di Padova user on 25 April 2023
Menninger, K., Mayman, M., & Puysers, P. W. (1963). The vital balance. New York: Viking Press.
Google Scholar Google Preview WorldCat COPAC
Ong, A. D., & Van Dulmen, M. H. M. (2006). Oxford handbook of methods in positive psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar Google Preview WorldCat COPAC
Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251).
doi:10.1126/science.aac4716 10.1126/science.aac4716
WorldCat Crossref