Science of Happiness
Contents
Lecture 1...................................................................................................................................................................2
Expanding the social science of happiness..........................................................................................................4
Reevaluating the strengths and weaknesses of self-report measures of subjective well-being............................5
Is the study of happiness a worthy scientific pursuit?..........................................................................................7
Well-being concepts and components..................................................................................................................9
Lecture 2.................................................................................................................................................................11
Very happy people..............................................................................................................................................15
Eudaimonia in the Contemporary Science of Subjective Well-Being: Psychological Well-Being, Self-
Determination, and Meaning in Life..................................................................................................................16
Lecture 3.................................................................................................................................................................18
Lecture 4.................................................................................................................................................................21
Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: a review..........................................26
Pro-environmental behaviors and well-being in everyday life..........................................................................27
Lecture 5.................................................................................................................................................................29
Assessing the impact of the size and scope of government on human well-being..............................................31
Subjective well-being and public policy.............................................................................................................32
Can and should happiness be a policy goal?.....................................................................................................33
Lecture 6.................................................................................................................................................................34
Scientific Answers to the Timeless Philosophical Question of Happiness........................................................35
Normative ethics (pages 30-41).........................................................................................................................36
From the Paleolithic to the present: Three revolutions in the global history of happiness...............................37
Lecture 7.................................................................................................................................................................38
Healthy social bonds: A necessary condition for well-being.............................................................................40
Mistakenly seeking solitude................................................................................................................................42
Lecture 8.................................................................................................................................................................44
Income and subjective well-being: Review, synthesis, and future research.......................................................47
The happiness–income paradox revisited..........................................................................................................48
1
,Lecture 1
Bad is stronger than good (we see a lot of bad news, but not so much good news). Negativity
bias:
- Negative events have a bigger (longer lasting and more intense) impact than positive
events: People are more distressed by the loss of $50 than they are made happy by
finding $50. Negative information receives more attention and is processed more
thoroughly than positive information
Evolutionary explanation: preventing bad things is more important than maximizing good
things. A person who ignores danger might not live longer. BUT: we want to be happy (self-
help books etc) and the government wants us to be happy.
- Happier people live longer, are healthier, more productive, contribute more to society,
have better relationships (less divorce FE)
Does happiness deserve scientific interest?
- Chemist Ashutosh Jogalekar: Happiness research is a great example of why
psychology isn’t a science. How exactly should ‘happiness’ be defined? The meaning
of that word differs from person to person and especially between cultures.
How does one measure happiness? Psychologists can’t use a ruler or a microscope, so
they invent an arbitrary scale
- Then we decided this can be seen as a science (even though philosophical reflections
on happiness exist since ancient times)
- Science of happiness: Focus on the subjective experience of happiness, its antecedents
and consequences. This is a multidisciplinary effort.
Definitions of happiness
- There are different definitions. Simply: a state of well-being and contentment.
Extensively: Good mental states, including all of the various evaluations, positive and
negative, that people make of their lives and the affective reactions of people to their
experience.
- Research shows that people identify happiness mostly with inner harmony (rather than
satisfaction or positive affect)
- Is happiness an elusive concept? Jingle-Jangle assumptions
o Jingle: the very same term refers to different underlying conceptions:
happiness refers to life satisfaction, positive affect, well-being
o Jangle: Different terms are used to describe the very same underlying
conceptions: happiness, life satisfaction, meaning in life, well-being ≈
‘happiness’
- Tripartite model: 3 facets that make up hedonic/subjective well-being
o Life Satisfaction (‘cognitive evaluation) – a reflective assessment on a
person’s life or some specific aspect of it: general satisfaction with life or
domain-specific satisfaction with marriage, work, friendship, leisure, the
weather
2
, o Positive Affect – a person’s feelings or emotional states, measured with
reference to a particular point in time (momentary): e.g., excited, interested,
enthusiastic
o Negative Affect – a person’s feelings or emotional states, measured with
reference to a particular point in time (momentary): e.g., nervous, afraid,
irritable
- General but untested idea: affect drives life satisfaction (rather than the other way
around)
- Eudaimonic well-being. Eudaimonia: a sense of meaning and purpose in life, or good
psychological functioning. Eudaimonic: actualization of one’s potential by dultilling
one’s daimon (true self) = flourishing
o Also referred to as authentic happiness
- There is consensus and a lot of controversy.
o Consensus - two main approaches. 1) hedonic/subjective well-being: a pleasant
life (satisfaction, presence of momentary positive affect, absence of negative
affect), 2) eudaimonic: purpose and meaning in life
o Controversy: what is the best indicator for happiness: hedonic or eudaimonic
measures? Policy making focusses on hedonic/subjective well-being.
Measurement of happiness
- How can we know someone is happy? Generally, we ask people to self-report how
happy they are. Alternative measures
o Duchenne smiling with crinkling around the eyes as a true indicator of positive
affect: Genuine smiles in college yearbook pictures predicted marital
satisfaction decades later
o Real-time recording of feelings of happiness (‘objective happiness’ in the
moment) – Lecture 2
o Note that disciplines different from psychology determine happiness not by
examining subjective experiences but by mapping conditions that are supposed
to contribute to happiness (e.g., education or economic equality
- Duchenne smile is caused by activation of the orbicularis oculi muscle (raising the
cheeks) that is not under voluntary control (unlike the muscle that bends the mouth
upwards into a smile Fake smiles feature the upturned mouth but there's something
missing in the eyes.
o New evidence that it may be hard to distinguish between role-playing genuine
positive emotion (e.g., pleasure at a good exam grade) vs role-playing fake
positive emotion (e.g., smiling in response to a gift that's not really liked
- Self-report
o Despite disadvantages of self-report (social desirability, problems associated
with introspection)
o People are able to report on their feelings in metrics (different from what
chemist Jogalekar assumes)
3
, o After all, happiness is about subjective well-being - so why not ask people
themselves? Even a single item on satisfaction with life (Cantril’s ladder)
produces reliable scores comparable with multiple item scales
o Albeit somewhat lower mean scores than measures with multiple items;
multiple items reduce random error from ambiguity in single items
- Most used are: positive and negative affect scale, satisfaction with life scale,
psychological well-being scale (eudaimonia), subjective happiness scale (positive
psychology)
- Different scales have different outcomes. What scale is best-used depends on the
purpose of your project.
Happiness (in a formula) = S + C + V
S is the genetic set point, C is the individual’s circumstances, V is the voluntary factors
that are under the individual’s control.
Expanding the social science of happiness
Historically, happiness was mainly studied by philosophers and religious thinkers. Only
recently have social scientists begun measuring happiness directly, using subjective well-
being (SWB) surveys where people report their own life satisfaction and emotions.
These tools are valid and reliable and have allowed researchers to identify what social and
personal factors make people happy. Helliwell and Aknin argue that it’s time to build
a broader “social science of happiness”, one that is:
1. Social in content — recognizing how relationships and prosocial behaviour shape
well-being.
2. Social in method — promoting collaboration across disciplines (psychology,
economics, sociology, policy, etc.).
They also note that while “subjective well-being” is a precise term, “happiness” is more
accessible and captures both emotional and evaluative aspects of life.
Humans are social creatures who gain happiness through connection. Data shows that:
The happiest people have strong, satisfying relationships.
Simply having someone you can count on in times of need is the single best global
predictor of life satisfaction even more than income.
Social capital (= trust and cooperation in communities) helps people cope with crises
such as illness, unemployment, and natural disasters.
In the workplace, employees who view their manager as a partner are as happy during the
week as on weekends; those who see a “boss” feel less happy.
Prosocial behaviour: means voluntary actions intended to benefit others.
Although traditional economic models assume people act selfishly, evidence shows humans
are naturally altruistic from early childhood:
4
Contents
Lecture 1...................................................................................................................................................................2
Expanding the social science of happiness..........................................................................................................4
Reevaluating the strengths and weaknesses of self-report measures of subjective well-being............................5
Is the study of happiness a worthy scientific pursuit?..........................................................................................7
Well-being concepts and components..................................................................................................................9
Lecture 2.................................................................................................................................................................11
Very happy people..............................................................................................................................................15
Eudaimonia in the Contemporary Science of Subjective Well-Being: Psychological Well-Being, Self-
Determination, and Meaning in Life..................................................................................................................16
Lecture 3.................................................................................................................................................................18
Lecture 4.................................................................................................................................................................21
Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: a review..........................................26
Pro-environmental behaviors and well-being in everyday life..........................................................................27
Lecture 5.................................................................................................................................................................29
Assessing the impact of the size and scope of government on human well-being..............................................31
Subjective well-being and public policy.............................................................................................................32
Can and should happiness be a policy goal?.....................................................................................................33
Lecture 6.................................................................................................................................................................34
Scientific Answers to the Timeless Philosophical Question of Happiness........................................................35
Normative ethics (pages 30-41).........................................................................................................................36
From the Paleolithic to the present: Three revolutions in the global history of happiness...............................37
Lecture 7.................................................................................................................................................................38
Healthy social bonds: A necessary condition for well-being.............................................................................40
Mistakenly seeking solitude................................................................................................................................42
Lecture 8.................................................................................................................................................................44
Income and subjective well-being: Review, synthesis, and future research.......................................................47
The happiness–income paradox revisited..........................................................................................................48
1
,Lecture 1
Bad is stronger than good (we see a lot of bad news, but not so much good news). Negativity
bias:
- Negative events have a bigger (longer lasting and more intense) impact than positive
events: People are more distressed by the loss of $50 than they are made happy by
finding $50. Negative information receives more attention and is processed more
thoroughly than positive information
Evolutionary explanation: preventing bad things is more important than maximizing good
things. A person who ignores danger might not live longer. BUT: we want to be happy (self-
help books etc) and the government wants us to be happy.
- Happier people live longer, are healthier, more productive, contribute more to society,
have better relationships (less divorce FE)
Does happiness deserve scientific interest?
- Chemist Ashutosh Jogalekar: Happiness research is a great example of why
psychology isn’t a science. How exactly should ‘happiness’ be defined? The meaning
of that word differs from person to person and especially between cultures.
How does one measure happiness? Psychologists can’t use a ruler or a microscope, so
they invent an arbitrary scale
- Then we decided this can be seen as a science (even though philosophical reflections
on happiness exist since ancient times)
- Science of happiness: Focus on the subjective experience of happiness, its antecedents
and consequences. This is a multidisciplinary effort.
Definitions of happiness
- There are different definitions. Simply: a state of well-being and contentment.
Extensively: Good mental states, including all of the various evaluations, positive and
negative, that people make of their lives and the affective reactions of people to their
experience.
- Research shows that people identify happiness mostly with inner harmony (rather than
satisfaction or positive affect)
- Is happiness an elusive concept? Jingle-Jangle assumptions
o Jingle: the very same term refers to different underlying conceptions:
happiness refers to life satisfaction, positive affect, well-being
o Jangle: Different terms are used to describe the very same underlying
conceptions: happiness, life satisfaction, meaning in life, well-being ≈
‘happiness’
- Tripartite model: 3 facets that make up hedonic/subjective well-being
o Life Satisfaction (‘cognitive evaluation) – a reflective assessment on a
person’s life or some specific aspect of it: general satisfaction with life or
domain-specific satisfaction with marriage, work, friendship, leisure, the
weather
2
, o Positive Affect – a person’s feelings or emotional states, measured with
reference to a particular point in time (momentary): e.g., excited, interested,
enthusiastic
o Negative Affect – a person’s feelings or emotional states, measured with
reference to a particular point in time (momentary): e.g., nervous, afraid,
irritable
- General but untested idea: affect drives life satisfaction (rather than the other way
around)
- Eudaimonic well-being. Eudaimonia: a sense of meaning and purpose in life, or good
psychological functioning. Eudaimonic: actualization of one’s potential by dultilling
one’s daimon (true self) = flourishing
o Also referred to as authentic happiness
- There is consensus and a lot of controversy.
o Consensus - two main approaches. 1) hedonic/subjective well-being: a pleasant
life (satisfaction, presence of momentary positive affect, absence of negative
affect), 2) eudaimonic: purpose and meaning in life
o Controversy: what is the best indicator for happiness: hedonic or eudaimonic
measures? Policy making focusses on hedonic/subjective well-being.
Measurement of happiness
- How can we know someone is happy? Generally, we ask people to self-report how
happy they are. Alternative measures
o Duchenne smiling with crinkling around the eyes as a true indicator of positive
affect: Genuine smiles in college yearbook pictures predicted marital
satisfaction decades later
o Real-time recording of feelings of happiness (‘objective happiness’ in the
moment) – Lecture 2
o Note that disciplines different from psychology determine happiness not by
examining subjective experiences but by mapping conditions that are supposed
to contribute to happiness (e.g., education or economic equality
- Duchenne smile is caused by activation of the orbicularis oculi muscle (raising the
cheeks) that is not under voluntary control (unlike the muscle that bends the mouth
upwards into a smile Fake smiles feature the upturned mouth but there's something
missing in the eyes.
o New evidence that it may be hard to distinguish between role-playing genuine
positive emotion (e.g., pleasure at a good exam grade) vs role-playing fake
positive emotion (e.g., smiling in response to a gift that's not really liked
- Self-report
o Despite disadvantages of self-report (social desirability, problems associated
with introspection)
o People are able to report on their feelings in metrics (different from what
chemist Jogalekar assumes)
3
, o After all, happiness is about subjective well-being - so why not ask people
themselves? Even a single item on satisfaction with life (Cantril’s ladder)
produces reliable scores comparable with multiple item scales
o Albeit somewhat lower mean scores than measures with multiple items;
multiple items reduce random error from ambiguity in single items
- Most used are: positive and negative affect scale, satisfaction with life scale,
psychological well-being scale (eudaimonia), subjective happiness scale (positive
psychology)
- Different scales have different outcomes. What scale is best-used depends on the
purpose of your project.
Happiness (in a formula) = S + C + V
S is the genetic set point, C is the individual’s circumstances, V is the voluntary factors
that are under the individual’s control.
Expanding the social science of happiness
Historically, happiness was mainly studied by philosophers and religious thinkers. Only
recently have social scientists begun measuring happiness directly, using subjective well-
being (SWB) surveys where people report their own life satisfaction and emotions.
These tools are valid and reliable and have allowed researchers to identify what social and
personal factors make people happy. Helliwell and Aknin argue that it’s time to build
a broader “social science of happiness”, one that is:
1. Social in content — recognizing how relationships and prosocial behaviour shape
well-being.
2. Social in method — promoting collaboration across disciplines (psychology,
economics, sociology, policy, etc.).
They also note that while “subjective well-being” is a precise term, “happiness” is more
accessible and captures both emotional and evaluative aspects of life.
Humans are social creatures who gain happiness through connection. Data shows that:
The happiest people have strong, satisfying relationships.
Simply having someone you can count on in times of need is the single best global
predictor of life satisfaction even more than income.
Social capital (= trust and cooperation in communities) helps people cope with crises
such as illness, unemployment, and natural disasters.
In the workplace, employees who view their manager as a partner are as happy during the
week as on weekends; those who see a “boss” feel less happy.
Prosocial behaviour: means voluntary actions intended to benefit others.
Although traditional economic models assume people act selfishly, evidence shows humans
are naturally altruistic from early childhood:
4
