See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319287771

Happiness

Chapter · January 2017

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_522-1

CITATION READS

1 11,617

1 author:

Lukasz Dominik Kaczmarek

Adam Mickiewicz University
85 PUBLICATIONS   565 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Psychophysiological model of challenge and threat in e-sports View project

Sport Mental Training Questionnnaire View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Lukasz Dominik Kaczmarek on 05 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

H

Happiness field of psychology have attempted to translate

these philosophical concepts into empirical
Lukasz D. Kaczmarek measureable constructs (e.g., Waterman et al.
Institute of Psychology, Adam Mickiewicz 2010). For the sake of scientific accuracy, it is
University in Poznań, Poznan, Poland recommended to refer to a specific theory when
the term happiness is used in the literature,
because conceptualizations of happiness differ
Synonyms substantially. For instance, for some authors hap-
piness is what people experience (Diener 2000;
Flourishing; Satisfaction with life; Well-being Kahneman 1999), whereas for others happiness is
what people do and achieve (Waterman
et al. 2010).
Definition

Happiness in psychology has two references.

Happiness as a Psychological Construct
First, happiness is an umbrella term for several
theories of well-being. These theories cover
Is Happiness a Scientific Term?
intrinsically rewarding and valued experience,
Most authors use happiness as a valid psycholog-
positive beliefs about self and the world, or posi-
ical term within the well-being literature (e.g.,
tive psychological functioning. Second, happi-
Czapiński and Peeters 1991; Diener 2000; Kah-
ness has been considered a basic emotion by
neman 1999), while other consider happiness too
most theorists within the psychology of emotions.
unwieldy for a psychological term (Seligman et al.
This chapter has been focused on happiness as
2005). However, the occurrence of the term hap-
well-being.
piness has been increasing in the psychological
literature, especially following emerge of positive
psychology (Seligman et al. 2005). Happiness is a
Introduction
pluralistic term, because it is defined in different
ways depending on the context in which it is used
Psychological theories of happiness build upon
and the type of professional group that introduces
philosophical concepts such as hedonia,
it into their terminology (e.g., psychologists, edu-
eudaimonia, and meaning in life as well as philo-
cators, or sociologists).
sophical traditions of utilitarianism or moral phi-
losophy (Tatarkiewicz 1976). Scholars within the
# Springer International Publishing AG 2017
V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_522-1
2 Happiness

Categorization of Happiness Theories utility) is a valid measure of well-being

Happiness theories can be sorted into hedonic (Kahneman 1999). The psychological well-being
with an emphasis on immediate subjective expe- theory argues that a happy individual is character-
rience (e.g., Kahneman 1999), eudaimonic with ized by several positive psychological character-
an emphasis on the pursuit of personal excellence istics such as autonomy, environmental mastery,
(Waterman et al. 2010), or mixed (see Table 1). or personal growth (Ryff 2013). The eudaimonic
Some theories provide extensive lists of substan- well-being theory argues that a happy individual
tial components of happiness that are relatively is, above all, intensely engaged in self-
independent from each other (Ryff 2013), exploration, self-expression, and the development
whereas other propose specific working mecha- of their best potential with positive emotions as an
nisms in which the listed components of happi- additional consequence or a by-product of these
ness interact (Kim-Prieto et al. 2005; Czapiński pursuits (Waterman et al. 2010). Social-
and Peeters 1991). Another distinction is between psychological prosperity theory lists elements of
theories that emphasize subjective (with the sub- positive functioning across diverse domains that
ject as the final judge of whether they are happy or are constitutive to a very happy life (flourishing)
not) (e.g., Diener 2000) or objective (with the such as having rewarding relationships, contrib-
subject misled by cognitive biases in their judg- uting to happiness of others, or being engaged in
ments) (Kahneman 1999) perspective on the mea- daily activities (Diener et al. 2010). Happiness
surement of happiness. Given this variety of theories proposed by Seligman (Seligman et al.
perspectives, happiness theories are similar to 2005) (authentic happiness theory that evolved
each other in terms of a family resemblance, i.e., into the well-being theory) have distinguished
they are connected by a series of overlapping components (“routes to happiness”) that consti-
constructs (each theory shares at least one com- tute the full life: pleasure and positive emotions
ponent with some other theory) rather than one (the pleasant life), engagement or flow (the good
common feature (see Table 1). life), and meaning (meaningful life). In his further
works, Seligman has included components of
Ingredients of Happiness achievements (conceptualized as the pursuit of
There are several theories of happiness in the them rather than their actual accomplishment)
literature that attempt to identify basic psycholog- and social relationships. Happiness is described
ical elements that happiness consists of. The most with a three-layer structure in the onion theory
notable theories include: subjective well-being with the positive attractor (the will to live) as the
(Diener 2000), objective happiness (Kahneman core, the mid-layer of general subjective well-
1999), psychological well-being (Ryff 2013), being, and the outer layer of current effective
eudaimonic well-being (Waterman et al. 2010), experience and satisfaction with specific life
authentic happiness/the well-being (Seligman domains that reflects objective life events and
et al. 2005), social-psychological prosperity/ circumstances (Czapiński and Peeters 1991).
flourishing (Diener et al. 2010), or the onion the-
ory of happiness (Czapiński and Peeters 1991).
The subjective well-being theory argues that a Individual Differences in Happiness
happy individual experiences an abundance of
positive feelings and few negative feelings – a Large scale cross-cultural studies indicated that
balance that serves as the basis for the evaluation most individuals consider themselves rather
of life as very satisfactory (Diener et al. 2010; happy (Diener 2000). There are however mean-
Kim-Prieto et al. 2005). The objective happiness ingful differences in happiness that result from
theory argues that broad cognitive evaluations of several factors. Research has established that indi-
well-being (“Am I a happy person?”) are usually vidual differences of various components of hap-
biased; thus, only the quality of immediate expe- piness result mostly from: (a) genetic influences
rience (in terms of good vs bad as the indicator of that sustain a level of well-being characteristic for
Happiness, Table 1 Basic components in happiness theories and association of happiness theories with philosophical traditions
Happiness theory
Happiness

Subjective Objective Psychological Eudaimonic well- Social-psychological Authentic happiness/ well- Onion
well-being happiness well-being being (Waterman prosperity (Diener being theory (PERMA) theory
(Diener 2000) (Kahneman (Ryff 2013) et al. 2010) et al. 2010) (Seligman et al. 2005) (Czapiński
1999) and Peeters
1991)
Component:
Autonomy ✓
Engagement/ ✓ ✓ ✓
involvement in
activities/effort
Environmental ✓ ✓ ✓
mastery/
competence/
achievements
Meaning in life ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Optimism ✓
Personal growth/ ✓ ✓
development of best
potentials
Positive experience ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
(pleasant, good,
enjoyable)
Positive ✓ ✓ ✓
relationships
Respect ✓
Satisfaction with life ✓ ✓ ✓
Self-acceptance ✓ ✓
Self-discovery ✓
Will to live ✓
Perspective:
Hedonic ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Eudaimonic ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
3
4 Happiness

a specific person (i.e., the happiness set-point), why some individuals are happier than others as
(b) intentional activity (e.g., how an individual well as to develop interventions to increase hap-
regulates their positive emotions), and, to a lesser piness. Individual differences in happiness are
extent, (c) life events (e.g., marriage) and circum- explained mostly by biological, personality, and
stances (e.g., income) (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005). social influences.
Life events can cause positive and negative tem-
poral (childbirth or widowhood, respectively) or
lasting changes in well-being (marriage or disabil- Cross-References
ity) (Anusic et al. 2014).
Personality is the main determinant of well- ▶ Character
being due to its constant interaction with several ▶ Diener, Ed
aspects of human functioning such as life events ▶ Eudaimonic Motivation
and circumstances, emotional experience, and ▶ Hedonic Motivation
cognitive processing (Kim-Prieto et al. 2005). ▶ Lyubomirsky, Sonia
Several personality traits have been related to ▶ Personal Growth
happiness, e.g., extroverts experience more life ▶ Pleasure
satisfaction, whereas individuals high on neuroti- ▶ Positive Affect
cism experience less life satisfaction (Costa and ▶ Positive Psychology
McCrae 1980). Happiness-related personality ▶ Ryff, Carol D., Satisfaction with Life Scale
traits evolve over time, e.g., individuals become ▶ Seligman, Martin E. P.
more extroverted and more emotionally stable
(Roberts et al. 2006). Noteworthy, the influence
of personality on happiness can be modified via References
intentional behavioral efforts. For instance, when
less extroverted individuals intentionally try to Anusic, I., Yap, S. C., & Lucas, R. E. (2014). Does per-
sonality moderate reaction and adaptation to major life
initiate behaviors that are typical for extroverts,
events? Analysis of life satisfaction and affect in an
they temporarily improve their well-being Australian national sample. Journal of Research in
(McNiel and Fleeson 2006). Personality, 51, 69–77.
Various aspects of happiness (i.e., life satisfac- Bolier, L., Haverman, M., Westerhof, G. J., Riper, H., Smit,
F., & Bohlmeijer, E. (2013). Positive psychology inter-
tion or positive emotions) can be successfully
ventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled
enhanced intentionally via happiness interven- studies. BMC Public Health, 13, 119.
tions or positive psychological interventions Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influences of extra-
(Bolier et al. 2013; Seligman et al. 2005). These version and neuroticism on subjective well-being.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38,
interventions are inspired by cognitive therapy
668–678.
methods and increase happiness through exercises Czapiński, J., & Peeters, G. (1991). The onion theory of
that enhance positive emotions (e.g., gratitude), happiness: Basic concepts and cross-cultural test. In
cognitions (e.g., optimism), or behaviors (e.g., N. Bleichrodt & P. J. D. Drenth (Eds.), Contemporary
issues in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 196–206).
kind acts).
Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of
happiness and a proposal for a national index. Ameri-
Conclusion can Psychologist, 55, 34–43.
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W.,
Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being
Happiness is a psychological term with an measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and posi-
increasing popularity that groups theories tive and negative feelings. Social Indicators Research,
concerned with the essence of human well- 97, 143–156.
Kahneman, D. (1999). Objective Happiness. In: D. Kah-
being. There are several theories of happiness
neman, E. Diener & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Well-being:
that cover a wide range of experience and func- The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York:
tioning. These theories have been used to explain Russell Sage Foundation.
Happiness 5

Kim-Prieto, C., Diener, E., Tamir, M., Scollon, C., & Ryff, C. D. (2013). Psychological well-being revisited:
Diener, M. (2005). Integrating the diverse definitions Advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia.
of happiness: A time-sequential framework of subjec- Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 83, 10–28.
tive well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 6, Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson,
261–300. C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). validation of interventions. American Psychologist,
Pursuing happiness: The architecture of sustainable 60, 410–421.
change. Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 111–131. Tatarkiewicz, W. (1976). Analysis of happiness. The
McNiel, J. M., & Fleeson, W. (2006). The causal effects of Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
extraversion on positive affect and neuroticism on neg- Waterman, A. S., Schwartz, S. J., Zamboanga, B. L.,
ative affect: Manipulating state extraversion and state Ravert, R. D., Williams, M. K., Bede Agocha, V., . . .,
neuroticism in an experimental approach. Journal of Brent Donnellan, M. (2010). The questionnaire for
Research in Personality, 40, 529–550. Eudaimonic well-being: Psychometric properties,
Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). demographic comparisons, and evidence of validity.
Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits The Journal of Positive Psychology, 5, 41–61.
across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal
studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1–25.

View publication stats