The paradox of pursuing happiness

Zerwas, Felicia K.; Ford, Brett Q.

doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.03.006

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When reflecting on their good feelings, however, people may have insufficient attentional resources both to experience their affect and to evaluate it at the same time. As a result, anything that causes one to perseverate in making self-evaluations of positive feelings—e.g., inordinately valuing happiness ( Mauss et al, 2011 ; Zerwas and Ford, 2021 )—may make it harder for one to be aware of the affective experience itself. The more people wonder how happy they are or compare their feelings to what they wanted or expected to feel, the less happy they will be.…”

Section: Promising Directions For Future Theory and Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current Progress and Future Directions for Theory and Research on Savoring

Bryant

2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As research on savoring has increased dramatically since publication of the book Savoring: A New Model of Positive Experience (Bryant and Veroff, 2007), savoring has gradually become a core concept in positive psychology. I begin by reviewing the evolution of this concept, the development of instruments for assessing savoring ability and savoring strategies, and the wide range of applications of savoring in the psychosocial and health sciences. I then consider important directions for future theory and research. To advance our understanding of how naturalistic savoring unfolds over time, future work should integrate the perceptual judgments involved in not only the later stages of attending to and regulating positive experience (where past research has concentrated), but also the initial stages of searching for and noticing positive stimuli. Whereas most research has investigated reactive savoring, which occurs spontaneously in response to positive events or feelings, future work is also needed on proactive savoring, which begins with the deliberate act of seeking out or creating positive stimuli. To advance the measurement of savoring-related constructs, I recommend future work move beyond retrospective self-report methods toward the assessment of savoring as it occurs in real-time. The development of new methods of measuring meta-awareness and the regulation of attentional focus are crucial to advancing our understanding of savoring processes. I review recent research on the neurobiological correlates of savoring and suggest future directions in which to expand such work. I highlight the need for research aimed at unraveling the developmental processes through which savoring skills and deficits evolve and the role that savoring impairments play in the etiology and maintenance of psychopathology. Research is also needed to learn more about what enhances savoring, and to disentangle how people regulate the intensity versus duration of positive emotions. Finally, I encourage future researchers to integrate the study of anticipation, savoring the moment, and reminiscence within individuals across time.

show abstract

Section: Promising Directions For Future Theory and Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current Progress and Future Directions for Theory and Research on Savoring

Bryant

2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One possible reason for the diverging effects of these two personality traits (valuing happiness to an extreme, prioritizing positivity) is how accepting people are of their negative emotional states 9 (Humphrey et al, 2021); another is the extent of active engagement in pleasant behaviors. The idea that intentional activity may be a critical ingredient in the effective pursuit of happiness resonates with theoretical models in the literature (e.g., Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2021;Zerwas & Ford, 2021). Plausibly, when people prioritize positivity they engage in behaviors shown to raise mood, such as socializing (Catalino & Fredrickson, 2011), exercising (Reed & Ones, 2006), committing kind acts for others (Nelson et al, 2016), and behaviors that more generally fulfill basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, relatedness, Ryan & Deci, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…This result, however, may be applicable only to one component of the valuing happiness to an extreme measure(Luhmann et al, 2016;Zerwas & Ford, 2021).9 This divergence, however, was found only when partialing out the effects of valuing happiness to an extreme from prioritizing positivity(Humphrey et al, 2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Daily variation in prioritizing positivity and well-being.

Catalino¹,

Tov²

2022

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prioritizing positivity is the tendency to use pleasant states (e.g., contentment, joy) as a key criterion to structure daily life. Research shows that people who tend to possess this trait are happier (between-person effect), but a separate question remains: On days people prioritize positivity, relative to their own baseline, do they feel happier (within-person effect)? In a sample of college students (n = 301) who completed a 2-week diary study resulting in 3,894 reports, we evaluated this hypothesis using hedonic and eudaimonic indicators of well-being. We also tested whether between-person differences in prioritizing positivity (measured as a trait and mean daily state) predicted daily well-being-people's actual, lived experience of well-being, as opposed to their global reports. Results showed that daily variation in prioritizing positivity predicted higher daily well-being (more positive emotions, satisfaction, and meaning; fewer negative emotions). Exploratory analyses revealed these within-person effects were stronger for people who scored higher on mean daily prioritizing positivity. Last, between-person differences in prioritizing positivity (trait, mean daily state) predicted most aspects of daily well-being, and these effects held when adjusting for other traits (extraversion, attitude toward joy). The results shed light on how people can effectively pursue happiness in their daily lives and show that the benefits of prioritizing positivity are not limited to people's "top-down" evaluations of their well-being, but also extend to their actual, lived experience.

show abstract

“…In fact, it may be helpful to encourage partners to reconsider the wisdom making the pursuit of happiness the focus of their relationship strengthening efforts. In support of this, Zerwas and Ford (2021) recently noted evidence that there is a “paradox of pursing happiness” in that the more people value and focus on happiness, the less happy they tend to be. Similarly, Ford et al (2015) found that directly pursuing happiness can paradoxically impair well‐being.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Satisfaction or connectivity?: Implications from the strong relationality model of flourishing couple relationships

Galovan

Carroll

Schramm

et al. 2021

J Marital Family Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central feature of couple relationships research is the use of self-report measures of relationship satisfaction. Despite the widespread use of such measures in couples' research, scholars have raised critical questions about satisfaction-focused assessment, including concerns about taking an ontologically individualistic focus. Moving beyond ontological individualism, drawing from the Strong Relationality Model of Relationship Flourishing and data from 615 couples in the United States and Canada (N = 1230 individuals), we explored similarities and differences between assessments of relationship satisfaction and a measure based on strong relationality (relational-connectivity). We evaluated associations with other scales assessing relationship factors including indicators of well-being, relationship processes, virtues, and responsible actions. Using confirmatory latent profile analysis, we classified individuals as Flourishing (55.4%), Languishing (31.8%), Connected, Less-Satisfied (7.8%), or Satisfied, Less-Connected (5.0%). Our results suggest that attending to richer perspectives of relationship quality

show abstract

The paradox of pursuing happiness

Cited by 18 publications

References 50 publications

Current Progress and Future Directions for Theory and Research on Savoring

Current Progress and Future Directions for Theory and Research on Savoring

Daily variation in prioritizing positivity and well-being.

Satisfaction or connectivity?: Implications from the strong relationality model of flourishing couple relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About