How Much Is Enough in a Perfect World? Cultural Variation in Ideal Levels of Happiness, Pleasure, Freedom, Health, Self-Esteem, Longevity, and Intelligence

Abstract

The maximization principle-that people aspire to the highest possible level of something good if all practical constraints are removed-is a common yet untested assumption about human nature. We predict that in holistic cultures-where contradiction, change, and context are emphasized-ideal states of being for the self will be more moderate than in other cultures. In two studies ( Ns = 2,392 and 6,239), we asked this question: If participants could choose their ideal level of happiness, pleasure, freedom, health, self-esteem, longevity, and intelligence, what level would they choose? Consistent with predictions, results showed that maximization was less pronounced in holistic cultures; members of holistic cultures aspired to less happiness, pleasure, freedom, health, self-esteem, longevity, and IQ than did members of other cultures. In contrast, no differences emerged on ideals for society. The studies show that the maximization principle is not a universal aspect of human nature and that there are predictable cultural differences in people's notions of perfection.

Putting the “We” Into Well‐being: Using Collectivism‐Themed Measures of Well‐Being Attenuates Well‐being's Association With Individualism

“…Most recommendations are based, however, on measuring the societal well‐being of individuals using constructs developed in individualistic cultures (i.e., individual life satisfaction). The assumption that this type of well‐being is universally valued and desired may not be correct (Diener, Napa‐Scollon, Oishi, Dzokoto, & Suh, ; Hornsey et al., ; Joshanloo & Weijers, ; Krys et al, ). Our findings suggest that we may need to elaborate and more thoroughly study societal well‐being that is less culture‐bound.…”

Family well-being is valued more than personal well-being: A four-country study

“…The majority of previous studies implicitly assume that all people prefer to be well, but fewer studies (Hornsey et al 2018;Koh 2014) explicitly acknowledge that people may value wellbeing to various extents. Even if different well-beings contribute to each other, people (in particular, from various cultural backgrounds) do differently value various types of well-being.…”

“…Such positive evaluations of life satisfaction are common among individuals shaped by Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic societies (WEIRD; Henrich et al 2010), and are implicitly assumed to apply to the whole human race. In contrast, some psychological research hints that well-being may be defined, experienced, and valued differently across individuals and cultures (Delle Fave et al 2016;Hornsey et al 2018;Lu and Gilmour 2004;Uchida and Oishi 2016). For example, in contrast to researchers' typical focus on life satisfaction, a more open-ended approach by Delle Fave and collaborators (2016) revealed that harmony and balance were mentioned more often than satisfaction among lay definitions of happiness.…”

“…As the body of studies on well-being grows, we found this question fundamental. Although well-being seems to be desired by the majority of people, studies on valuation of personal life satisfaction suggest that the valuation of this specific type of well-being is not equally high across countries (Diener et al 2000;Hornsey et al 2018). Individualistic countries seem to value personal life satisfaction more than collectivistic countries (Koh 2014).…”

“…Theorizing and studies on valuation of well-being are novel (for exceptions see Diener et al 2000;Hornsey et al 2018;Koh 2014). Thus, we decided to avoid formulating precise theory-driven predictions and took a more exploratory approach.…”