Section 1 Where Are We Now?

Chapter
The Science of Wellbeing and

2 Positive Psychology
Lindsay G. Oades and Lara Mossman

The seemingly innocuous question “What is wellbeing?” easily leads to passionate debates
and much conceptual confusion. This chapter first provides some signposts for a definition
of wellbeing. Sound definition of the construct is essential to the measurement of wellbeing
and the growth of the science of wellbeing. The emergence of the science of positive psychol-
ogy and its application through positive psychology interventions (i.e. strategies to increase
wellbeing) have created new opportunities to develop wellbeing in individuals, organiza-
tions and communities. After positive psychology is defined, key theories of wellbeing and
positive psychology are summarized. An overview of key research evidence from positive
psychology interventions is then provided. This overview is intended not as an exhaustive
review, but rather as a sample to enable readers to explore the fertile interface of the science
of wellbeing and positive psychology with the literature and experience of recovery.

What Is Wellbeing?
Responses to the question What is wellbeing? vary greatly depending on whether it is a lay
person, health practitioner, person with lived experience of illness, economist, philosopher,
psychologist or sociologist answering the question. Lay persons or persons unfamiliar with
defining concepts or constructs commonly give examples of situations or experiences that lead
to wellbeing, such as having good friends or a good job. A philosophical definition is com-
monly brief and coherent, but may lack the precision that a scientist is seeking. One philosoph-
ical example is the following definition: how well someone’s life is going for them (Crisp, 2014).
Philosophers have been arguing over and defining wellbeing for many centuries. Econ-
omists have been doing so for over one hundred years. Psychologists and wellbeing scien-
tists are relatively new to this arena. Although recognizing the contributions to this area
from philosophers (e.g. the distinction between hedonic and eudaemonic wellbeing) and
economists (e.g. the distinction between evaluative and experienced wellbeing), this chapter
focuses primarily on empirical attempts to define, measure and increase wellbeing, with
particular focus on positive psychology and its related interventions.
In attempting to define wellbeing it is useful to consider several questions from the outset:
1. What is the level of analysis? for example: individual, group, organization, society
2. What domain is being discussed? for example: physical, mental, social
3. Is it to be defined subjectively or objectively?
4. Does it necessarily require the presence of positive attributes? in other words, is it more
than the absence of negative attributes such as symptoms of illness?
Wellbeing, Recovery and Mental Health, ed. Mike Slade, Lindsay Oades and Aaron Jarden.
Published by Cambridge University Press. © Mike Slade, Lindsay Oades and Aaron Jarden 2017

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 8 Section 1: Where Are We Now?

5. Is wellbeing multifaceted (multidimensional)?

6. How is it different from health?
Clarity regarding these six questions makes it is easier to locate one’s position within the
contested space of wellbeing constructs. Table 2.1 summarizes some key examples of con-
temporary wellbeing constructs in wellbeing science and positive psychology. Such con-
structs underpin the emerging health and wellbeing outcome measurement in health and
human services. In reading Table 2.1, it is useful to examine the difference between hedonic
and eudaemonic assumptions in terms of defining wellbeing. Shorthand definitions often
combine these two approaches in phrases such as “feeling good and functioning well” (see
Huppert and So, 2013).

Table 2.1 Scientific Constructs of Wellbeing

Wellbeing
construct Definition Reference
Hedonic “focuses on happiness and defines well- Ryan and Deci (2001b, p. 141)
wellbeing being in terms of pleasure attainment and
pain avoidance” “the predominant view
among hedonic psychologists is that well-
being consists of subjective happiness and
concerns the experience of pleasure versus
displeasure broadly construed to include all
judgments about the good/bad elements
of life. Happiness is thus not reducible to
physical hedonism, for it can be derived from
attainment of goals or valued outcomes in
varied realms”
Eudaemonic “The eudaimonic perspective of wellbeing – Gale et al. (2013, p. 687)
wellbeing based on Aristotle’s view that true happiness
comes from doing what is worth doing –
focuses on meaning and self-realization, and
defines wellbeing largely in terms of ways of
thought and behavior that provide fulfillment”
Wellbeing “refers to optimal psychological experience Deci and Ryan (2008, p. 1)
and functioning” “Ryff and Keyes (1995) Ryan and Deci (2001b, p. 146)
… spoke of psychological well-being
(PWB) as distinct from SWB and presented
a multidimensional approach to the
measurement of PWB that taps six distinct
aspects of human actualization: autonomy,
personal growth, self-acceptance, life purpose,
mastery, and positive relatedness. These six
constructs define PWB both theoretically and
operationally and they specify what promotes
emotional and physical health”

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 Chapter 2: The Science of Wellbeing and Positive Psychology 9

Table 2.1 (cont.)

Wellbeing
construct Definition Reference
Psychological “Each dimension of PWB articulates different Keyes et al. (2002, p. 1008)
wellbeing challenges individuals encounter as they
strive to function positively (Ryff, 1989a; Ryff
and Keyes, 1995). That is, people attempt
to feel good about themselves even
while aware of their own limitations (self-
acceptance). They also seek to develop and
maintain warm and trusting interpersonal
relationships (positive relations with others)
and to shape their environment so as to meet
personal needs and desires (environmental
mastery). In sustaining individuality within
a larger social context, people also seek a
sense [of ] self-determination and personal
authority (autonomy). A vital endeavor is to
find meaning in one’s efforts and challenges
(purpose in life). Lastly, making the most of
one’s talents and capacities (personal growth)
is central to PWB.”
Subjective “As an operational definition, SWB is most Deci and Ryan (2008, p. 1)
wellbeing often interpreted to mean experiencing
a high level of positive affect, a low level
of negative affect, and a high degree of
satisfaction with one’s life …The concept of
SWB, assessed in this way, has frequently been
used interchangeably with ‘happiness.’ Thus,
maximizing one’s well-being has been viewed
as maximizing one’s feelings of happiness.”
Wellbeing “In 2 large samples, results supported the Gallagher et al. (2009, p. 1025)
proposed latent structures of hedonic,
eudaimonic and social well-being and indicated
that the various components of well-being
could be represented most parsimoniously with
3 oblique second-order constructs of hedonic,
eudaimonic, and social well-being.”
Social “Keyes (1998) conceived of a five-component Gallagher et al. (2009, p. 1027)
wellbeing model of social well-being: social integration,
social contribution, social coherence, social
actualization, and social acceptance. These five
elements, taken together, indicate whether
and to what degree individuals are overcoming
social challenges and are functioning well
in their social world (alongside neighbors,
coworkers, and fellow world citizens).”
(cont.)

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 10 Section 1: Where Are We Now?

Table 2.1 (cont.)

Wellbeing
construct Definition Reference
Mental health “a syndrome of symptoms of positive feelings Keyes (2002, p. 207)
and positive functioning in life”
Flourishing “high levels of wellbeing” Hone et al. (2014, p. 62)
“To be flourishing in life, individuals must Keyes (2002, p. 210)
exhibit a high level (high = upper tertile) on
one of the two measures of emotional well-
being and high levels on six of the 11 scales of
positive functioning”
Life satisfaction “Life satisfaction, according to Campbell et al. Keyes et al. (2002,
(1976), reflects individuals’ perceived distance pp. 1007–1008)
from their aspirations … satisfaction is a
judgmental, long-term assessment of one’s life”
Happiness “according to Bradburn (1969), results from a Keyes et al. (2002, p. 1008)
balance between positive affect and negative
affect … happiness is a reflection of pleasant
and unpleasant affects in one’s immediate
experience”
Optimal “high subjective wellbeing and psychological Keyes et al. (2002, p. 1007)
wellbeing wellbeing”
Happiness “In the first version of his theory, Seligman Forgeard et al. (2011, p. 96)
(2002) claimed that ‘happiness’ was composed
of three subjective facets: positive emotion,
engagement, and meaning. Happiness was
therefore achievable by pursuing one or
more of these facets. As a result, individuals
low in one aspect could still be ‘happy’ if they
nurtured other components.”
Wellbeing “wellbeing consists of the nurturing of one Forgeard et al. (2011, p. 96)
or more of the five following elements:
Positive emotion, Engagement, Relationships,
Meaning, and Accomplishment (abbreviated
as the acronym PERMA). These five elements
are the best approximation of what humans
pursue for their own sake”
Positive “we identified the positive pole of each Huppert and So (2013,
wellbeing symptom dimension. This resulted in ten p. 849)
features representing positive aspects of
mental functioning: competence, emotional
stability, engagement, meaning, optimism,
positive emotion, positive relationship,
resilience, self-esteem, and vitality … it
includes both hedonic and eudaimonic
components; that is, both positive feeling and
positive functioning.”

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 Chapter 2: The Science of Wellbeing and Positive Psychology 11

What Is Positive Psychology?

While the origin of the term ‘positive psychology’ can be traced back to Abraham Maslow’s
1954 book, Motivation and Personality (Maslow, 1970; Snyder et al., 2011), it was many years
before positive psychology as an academic field was born: a vision that included steering
psychology back toward what makes life worth living, toward courage, generosity, creativity,
joy, gratitude (Csikszentmihalyi and Nakamura, 2011). The founders of positive psychology
recognized that traditional psychology had become predominantly weakness-oriented: an
approach that had succeeded in alleviating many forms of human suffering but had failed
at capturing the whole human picture (Snyder et al., 2011). The timing was ripe to address
this imbalance issue. In the months that followed, Martin Seligman became the President
of the American Psychological Association (APA), enabling him to pioneer the new field of
positive psychology. He identified two “neglected missions” of psychology (Seligman, 1998,
p. 2). The first was building human strength and making people more productive. The sec-
ond was the nurturing of genius, the generation of high human potential (Compton and
Hoffman, 2013; Seligman, 1998). Seligman saw this new field as combining scientific and
applied approaches. He called for a mass of research on human strength and virtue. So 1998,
therefore, marked the beginning of a seismic shift in psychology (Rusk and Waters, 2013b)
and the birth of the field of positive psychology.
In their seminal paper, Positive Psychology: An Introduction, Seligman and Csikszentmi-
halyi (2000) outlined the purpose of the new field: the research and development of the
factors that enable flourishing at individual, community and societal levels. The field’s scope
included three levels of research: the subjective level, the individual level and the group
level. Research at the subjective level included valued subjective experiences and was broken
down into past, present and future constructs: the past involving wellbeing, contentment
and satisfaction; the present involving flow and happiness; and the future involving hope
and optimism. The individual level called for research into individual traits that are positive,
such as character strengths (including those that guide our interactions with others), talent
and the capacity for vocation. Last, the group level comprised research into “civic virtues and
the institutions that move individuals towards better citizenship: responsibility, nurturance,
altruism, civility, moderation, tolerance and work ethic” (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi,
2000, p. 5). Positive psychology thus emerged as the scientific study of positive human func-
tioning and flourishing intrapersonally (e.g. biologically, emotionally, cognitively), inter-
personally (e.g. relationally) and collectively (e.g. institutionally, culturally and globally)
(Crompton and Hoffman, 2013; Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).
In the 15 or so years since the inception of positive psychology, a number of themes
have surfaced, such as altruism, accomplishment, appreciation of beauty and excellence,
authenticity, best possible selves, character strengths, coaching, compassion, courage, cop-
ing, creativity, curiosity, emotional intelligence, empathy, flow, forgiveness, goal setting,
gratitude, grit, happiness, hope, humour, kindness, leadership, love, meaning, meditation,
mindfulness, motivation, optimism, performance, perseverance, positive emotions, positive
relationships, post-traumatic growth, psychological capital, purpose, resilience, savoring,
self-efficacy, self-regulation, spirituality, the good life, virtues, wisdom and zest. Many of the
themes studied have their origins outside of the field of positive psychology. However, Rusk
and Waters (2013b) looked at the breadth of the field and found that approximately a third of
the positive-psychology-related terms they studied were new to the field since 1999. There-
fore, it seems that positive psychology is largely exploring existing constructs, but through a

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 12 Section 1: Where Are We Now?

fresh lens. In addition to the breadth, they also found that the size, reach and impact of the
field had grown substantially since its founding. This growth has generated new sub–fields
focused on the application of the science, such as positive education (Norrish 2015; Nor-
rish et al., 2013) or positive organizational behavior and positive organizational scholarship
(Wright and Quick, 2009).
As the science disseminates, there are some issues that arise by virtue of the immaturity of
the field. While the breadth of research undertaken is substantial (Rusk and Waters, 2013b),
there is tension between the depth of research and the desire for real-world application. A
number of single studies have shown promising findings, but more research that replicates
them across a range of populations and contexts is required: whom do interventions work
for and under what conditions (i.e. effectiveness rather than efficacy: see Hone et al., 2015)?
More longitudinal studies are required, too. As the field matures, longitudinal studies will
be conducted. In the meantime, positive psychology researchers are reminded to adhere to
rigorous scientific standards (Snyder et al., 2011) such as those of meta-analysis and ran-
domized control trials (Vella-Brodrick, 2013). Paradoxically, while positive psychology
offers itself as the antidote to the negativity bias of psychology as usual, it must not fall prey
to focusing solely on the good in the world. Good science looks at the whole picture (Snyder
et al., 2011). As the field works toward this, those working with the application of positive
psychology must ensure that they are conscientious consumers of the science, and as such
new journals focusing specifically on these issues are emerging (e.g. the International Jour-
nal of Applied Positive Psychology, which will launch in 2016). It is with this in mind that we
move to the key theories and evidence.

What Are Some Key Theories within Wellbeing and Positive

Psychology Research?
There is a well-established suite of theories relating to wellbeing and key areas of positive
psychology. Table 2.2 provides a sample of some of the key theories, which include emo-
tions, attentional states, cognition, motivation, goal striving and relationships.

What Is the Evidence Base?

The evidence base underpinning the field of positive psychology is small but rapidly growing
(Rusk and Waters, 2013) and can be broken down into cross-sectional studies and causal
studies. Cross-sectional studies look at associations between variables (e.g. are happier peo-
ple healthier?), and causal studies look at what impacts wellbeing over time (i.e. does mar-
riage increase wellbeing?). Both types of studies can lead to inferences about what leads to
or predicts wellbeing, with causal studies providing strong evidence.
As an example of a cross-sectional study, Waugh and Fredrickson (2006) found that in a
group of students increased assimilation and understanding of their roommates was associ-
ated with higher levels of positive emotion. The caution with these types of cross-sectional
studies is that it is not clear or conclusive if A leads to B, of if B leads to A, or if some other
variable mediates the relationship – for example, if higher positive emotion leads to greater
understanding of roommates, or if greater understanding of roommates leads to higher pos-
itive emotion. As some further examples of this type of research, Fredrickson and Levenson
(1998) found that positive emotions can help people cope with physiological responses to
negative emotions, and in a large meta-analysis, Lyubomirsky et al. (2005) found that people

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 Chapter 2: The Science of Wellbeing and Positive Psychology 13

Table 2.2 Key Theories of Wellbeing and Positive Psychology

Theory Key proposition Key researcher

Broaden-and-build Positive emotions broaden awareness and over time Fredrickson
theory enable the building of resources.
Flow theory Flow is focused motivation involving single-minded Csikszentmihalyi
immersion in an appropriately challenging goal-
based activity.
Hope theory Hope is perceived ability to produce pathways to Snyder
achieve desired goals and motivation to use those
pathways.
Psychological Psychological wellbeing involves not only the Ryff & Keyes
wellbeing absence of illness, but the presence of something
positive: growth, positive relationships, autonomy,
purpose and environmental mastery.
Self-determination There are different types of motivation for activities, Deci & Ryan
theory ranging from those that feel intrinsic to those that
feel extrinsic. Conditions will meet our psychological
needs differently through our sense of autonomy,
competence and relatedness. In turn this impacts
our quality of motivation.
Strengths theories Individuals have personal strengths that can be Peterson/
measured reliably across cultures. Seligman Linley
Wellbeing (PERMA) Wellbeing can be achieved through five key Seligman
theory pathways: positive emotions, engagement, positive
relationships, meaning and accomplishment.

with higher levels of positive emotion were more successful across many life domains such
as work, relationships and health.
As an example of a causal study, Lyubomirsky et al. (2005) examined the results of experi-
mental studies and found that increasing people’s positive emotions had the effect of making
them better at conflict resolution and more social. They also found in their meta-analysis, which
included longitudinal studies, that happiness does lead to better relationship and work out-
comes. As examples of evidence they cited findings that increases in happiness lead to greater
creativity, productivity and quality of work, and income (Estrada et al., 1994) and to stronger
social support and an increased likelihood of marriage (Harker and Keltner, 2001), that sub-
jective wellbeing impacts mental and physical health (Pressman and Cohen, 2005) and leads
to healthier immune function (Davidson et al., 2003), and that happier people even live longer.
Furthermore, what both this cross-sectional and causal research suggest is that positive
emotions can and do have impacts beyond individuals to their close connections.

What Is the Evidence for Positive Psychology Interventions?

Sin and Lyubomirsky (2009) define positive psychology interventions (PPIs) as “treatment
methods or intentional activities aimed at cultivating positive feelings, positive behav-
iours, or positive cognitions.” Their meta-analysis found that PPIs are effective at increasing
wellbeing and decreasing depression, but the effect sizes were moderate and should be

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

Table 2.3 Efficacy of Positive Psychology Interventions (PPIs)

Intervention Efficacy Participants Measures

Best possible selves (BPS; You at your best led to gains in happiness Adults (range = 35–54 years) Center for Epidemiological Studies –
including you at your best) and decreased depression immediately recruited via the Internet Depression Scale
postintervention (Seligman et al., (CES-D) symptom survey; 20-item
2005). Steen Happiness Index (SHI)
(involves writing about oneself BPS has been shown to lead to greater University students Positive and Negative Affect
at one’s best in all domains of increases in positive affect and self- Schedule (PANAS); Self-Concordant
one’s life) concordant motivation as compared Motivation (SCM); exercise
with counting blessings and control performance, for example, how
groups. It has also led to immediate frequently exercise was practiced
decreases in negative affect (Sheldon
and Lyubomirsky, 2006).
The BPS condition was found to be more Swedish university students Dispositional optimism, the Life
effective at increasing optimism than (mean age = 29.6 years, range Orientation Test (LOT); extraversion
the control condition (Peters et al., 21–50) and neuroticism measured by
2010). two subscales of the Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire Revised
Short Scale (EPQ-RSS); short form
of the Positive and Negative Affect
Schedule (PANAS)
Forgiveness Forgiveness interventions have been Older adults (mean = 71.18 years; Spanish versions of the State and
used with a broad range of clinical range 60–93 years) Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI);
clients, with foundational research Beck Depression Inventory (BDI);
occurring before positive psychology. Autobiographical Memory Test
Combined with gratitude and (AMT); Mini-cognitive Exam (Mini-
life memories in an intervention, Examen Cognoscitivo [MEC]; Life
forgiveness has been found to help Satisfaction Scale (LSS); Subjective
increase subjective well-being and Happiness Scale
quality of life (Ramírez et al., 2014).
Gratitude Gratitude visits have been shown to lead Adults (range = 35–54 years) Center for Epidemiological Studies –
to gains in happiness and decreased recruited via the Internet Depression Scale
depression in adults immediately (CES-D) symptom survey; 20-item
postintervention and up to 1 month Steen Happiness Index (SHI)
postintervention (Seligman et al.,
2005).
(including gratitude visit; Youth low in positive affect have reported Students (mean age = 12.74 years, Gratitude Adjective Checklist (GAC);
gratitude letters; noticing good high levels of gratitude (compared to range = 8 –19 years) Positive and Negative Affect Scale –
things; recording good things; the control group) and positive affect Children (PANAS-C)
counting blessings) immediately after the gratitude letter/
journal intervention, and positive affect
at 2 months’ follow-up (Froh et al., 2009).
Counting blessings participants in the Undergraduate students plus A weekly form included ratings
gratitude condition have reported adults with either congenital of mood, physical symptoms,
improved wellbeing as measured by or adult-onset neuromuscular reactions to social support
optimistic appraisal of life, increased disease (mean age = 49 years, received, estimated amount of time
exercise, decreased reporting of range = 22–77 years) spent exercising, and two global
physical symptoms and increased life appraisal questions
positive affect (Emmons and
McCullough, 2003).
Counting blessings has also been shown University students Positive and Negative Affect
to lead to immediate decreases Schedule (PANAS); Self-Concordant
in negative affect (Sheldon and Motivation (SCM); exercise
Lyubomirsky, 2006). performance, for example, how
frequently exercise was practiced
In a double-blind randomized controlled Full-time Chinese professional Chinese version of the 10-item
trial Cheng et al. (2015) found lower healthcare practitioners version of the Center for
depressive symptoms and a reduction Epidemiologic Studies-Depression
in perceived stress for a gratitude Scale (CES-D); Chinese version of
condition. the 10-item Perceived Stress Scale
(cont.)
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

Table 2.3 (cont.)

Intervention Efficacy Participants Measures

Kerr et al. (2015) reliably cultivated the Adults (mean age = 43 years, Participants rated intensity of
emotional experience of gratitude in a range 19–67) seeking individual gratitude or kindness felt; a version
two-week intervention with a clinical psychological treatment. of the Positive and Negative Affect
sample on a waiting list for outpatient Schedule; the Purpose in Life test
psychological treatment. (PIL); Outcome Questionnaire-45.2
(OQ-45); the Depression Anxiety
and Stress Scale (DASS-21).
Participants also rated how
connected they felt with others.
Three good things led to gains in Adults (range = 35–54 years) Center for Epidemiological Studies –
happiness and decreased depression recruited via the Internet Depression Scale
immediately postintervention as (CES-D) symptom survey; 20-item
well as increases for up to 6 months Steen Happiness Index (SHI)
postintervention in comparison with
the placebo control group (Seligman
et al., 2005). Some researchers may
consider three good things as savoring
rather than gratitude.
Sergeant and Mongrain (2011) found that Volunteer adults (mean age = 34 Centre for Epidemiological Studies
a gratitude condition where participants years, range = 18–72 years) – Depression Scale, Depressive
identify five good things over the course Experiences Questionnaire,
of a day led to increased reported Gratitude Questionnaire-6,
happiness over time in comparison to measure of physical symptoms,
the control group. Self-critics reported Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, Steen
the most favorable outcomes if Happiness Index
they were assigned to the gratitude
condition. Needy individuals did not
benefit from the intervention and even
decreased with regards to self-esteem
(Sergeant and Mongrain, 2011).
Hope Hope interventions have led to Adults recruited from the The State Hope Scale; Center
improvements from pre to community through for Epidemiologie Studies –
postintervention for agency hope (but advertisements in the local Depression Scale (CES-D); State-
not pathways hope), anxiety, self- newspaper (mean age = 49 Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)
esteem and purpose in life (Cheavens years old, range = 32–64) Form Y; Index of Self-Esteem (ISE);
et al., 2006). Purpose In Life Test (PIL)
Mindfulness Huppert and Johnson (2010) found a Adolescent boys (range 14–15 Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness
(defined as “the awareness positive relationship between the years). Scale – Revised (CAMS-R); Ego-
that emerges through paying amount of time adolescent boys Resiliency Scale (ERS); Warwick–
attention on purpose, in spent practicing mindfulness and Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale
the present moment, and improvements in both psychological (WEMWBS); Big Five personality
nonjudgmentally to the wellbeing and mindfulness. dimensions were measured using
unfolding of experience the Ten-Item Personality Inventory
moment by moment“ (Kabat- (TIPI). At follow-up, participants in
Zinn, 2003, p. 2) the mindfulness condition were
also asked a series of questions
such as the number of times they
had practiced mindfulness outside
of class, how helpful they found
it and whether they thought
they would continue to practice
mindfulness.
Jha et al. (2010) found improvements in Adult participants included The Positive and Negative Affect
positive affect for participants with three groups: military control Schedule (PANAS). Working
higher levels of mindfulness training. (MC) group; civilian control memory capacity (WMC) was also
Due to limitations of sampling, this was (CC) group; mindfulness and tested through an automated test.
not a randomized study design. mindfulness training group
(MT)
(cont.)
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

Table 2.3 (cont.)

Intervention Efficacy Participants Measures

Music (listening to three or four Participants reported greater increases in Volunteer adults (mean age = 34 Centre for Epidemiological Studies
uplifting songs of participant’s happiness over time than the control years, range = 18–72 years) – Depression Scale, Depressive
choosing each day) group (Sergeant and Mongrain, 2011). Experiences Questionnaire,
Gratitude Questionnaire-6,
measure of physical symptoms,
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, Steen
Happiness Index
Positive psychotherapy (PPT) Seligman et al. (2006) tested the efficacy Study One: mild to moderate Study One: Beck Depression
(includes a combination of of PPT in two studies. In the first depressive symptoms. Study Inventory–II (BDI); Satisfaction with
gratitude visit, three good study, PPT was delivered to groups Two: major depressive disorder Life Scale (SWLS); Study Two: Zung
things in life, you at your best, of university students with mild to (MDD; unipolar depression). Self-Rating Scale (ZSRS); Hamilton
using signature strengths in a moderate depression. This significantly Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD);
new way, identifying signature decreased levels of depression through Outcome Questionnaire (OQ);
strengths) 1-year follow-up as compared with the DSM–IV’s Global Assessment of
control group. In the second study, PPT Functioning (GAF). Happiness and
delivered to outpatients with unipolar wellbeing were assessed using
depression produced higher remission and by the Satisfaction with Life
rates than did treatment as usual or Scale (SWLS) and the Positive
treatment as usual plus medication. The Psychotherapy Inventory (PPTI),
findings of these studies suggest that a 21-item PPT outcome measure
exercises that explicitly increase positive created and validated by the study
emotion, engagement and meaning researchers.
may be useful in treating depression.
Savoring (savoring can be past- Preference for undertaking PPI is Participants were visitors to a The Authentic Happiness Inventory
focused (reminiscing about positively related to adherence to university research Internet (AHI); the Center for Epidemiologic
positive experiences), present- the activity. The savoring exercise portal. 329 were assigned to Studies Depression Scale (CES-D)
focused (savoring the moment) produced statistically significant savoring (average age = 53.5).
or future-focused (anticipating increases in happiness and decreases
positive experiences yet to in depression. Those who preferred
come) (Smith et al., 2014) active constructive responding also
preferred savoring (Schueller, 2010).
Self-compassionate writing Negative mood induced. Randomly Undergraduate (mostly first-year) The Self-Compassion Scale (SCS);
allocated to write about a negative psychology students (mean Ruminative Thought Style Scale
event in either a self-compassionate age = 20.9, range = 17– 59): (RTS); Positive and Negative Affect
or an emotionally expressive way. 3.7% reported a past diagnosis, Schedule (PANAS); 100mm Visual
Self-compassionate writing has and 3.7% reported a current Analogue Scale (VAS)
been shown to significantly predict diagnosis of depression.
improved mood compared with the
control group (Odou and Brinker,
2014a).
Participants writing self-compassionately Undergraduate students (mean The Self-Compassion Scale (SCS);
experienced increased positive affect = 21.3, range = 17–57 years): Ruminative Thought Style Scale
and reduced negative affect; high 14% of participants had a past (RTS); The Positive and Negative
ruminators experienced greater diagnosis of depression while Affect Schedule (PANAS); 100mm
reduction of sadness than low 2% reported having a current Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).
ruminators (Odou and Brinker, 2014b). diagnosis.
 20 Section 1: Where Are We Now?

treated with a level of caution. They found four factors that heighten the efficacy of PPIs:
high levels of depression; increased age; individual interventions (rather than group inter-
ventions); and longer interventions. There is some debate as to whether participants should
be matched to interventions based on a person–activity fit or not. For example, participant
preference for undertaking a PPI has been positively related to commitment to adhere to
the activity (Schueller, 2010), and matching participants to an intervention that was based
on an orientation to happiness that differed from their dominant orientation was effective at
enhancing wellbeing (Giannopoulos and Vella-Brodrick, 2011).
However, Schueller (2011) found no significant difference between participants assigned
to activities based on preference and those randomly assigned to activities. PPIs have been
used in studies specifically targeting clinical participants, such as positive psychotherapy
(PPT; Seligman et al., 2006; see Chapter 11) and in nonclinical studies. However, regardless
of the population, many study designs include pre- and post-test measures of depression
and/or negative affect as well as measures of positive functioning.
Typically, studies include a broader range of measures, such as stress (Cheng et al., 2015);
state and trait anxiety (Cheavens et al., 2006); ruminative thinking (Odou and Brinker,
2014a); self-esteem (Sergeant and Mongrain, 2011); Big Five personality (Huppert and John-
son, 2010); working memory capacity (Jha et al., 2010); physical symptoms (Emmons and
McCullough, 2003; Sergeant and Mongrain, 2011); and self-compassion (Odou and Brinker,
2014a, 2014b).
Table 2.3 includes examples of the efficacy of PPIs. It should be noted that many con-
structs explored in PPIs have their origins outside positive psychology, such as gratitude,
forgiveness and mindfulness. While positive psychology cannot lay claim to these concepts,
its role does include an understanding of their function in building human strength and
generating high human potential.

Conclusion
In this chapter we introduced key definitions relating to wellbeing and highlighted ways to
approach this contested domain. After a summary of some key theories within the science
of wellbeing and positive psychology, a brief overview of recent empirical evidence for pos-
itive psychology interventions (PPIs) was provided. Key debates continue about evidence
from clinical compared with nonclinical populations, adding emphasis to the usefulness of
cross- [?] fertilization between wellbeing research and research in mental health recovery.

References
Cheavens, J. S., Feldman, D. B., Gum, A., Scott, T. M., & Snyder, C. R. (2006). Hope therapy in a
community sample: A pilot investigation. Social Indicators Research, 77, 61–86.
Cheng, S-T., Tsu, P. K., & Lam, J. H. M. (2015). Improving mental health in health care practitioners:
Randomized controlled trial of a gratitude intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 83(1), 177–186.
Crisp, R. (2014). Well-being. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter
2014 ed.). Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/well-being/.
Crompton, W. C., & Hoffman, E. (2013). Positive psychology: The science of happiness and flourishing.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Nakamura, J. (2011). Positive psychology: Where did it come from, where
is it going? In Sheldon, K. M., Kashdan, T. B., & Steger, M. F. (ch. 1). Designing positive psychology:
Taking stock and moving forward. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 Chapter 2: The Science of Wellbeing and Positive Psychology 21

Davidson, R. J., Kabat-Zinn, J., Schumacker, J., Rosenkranz, M., Muller, D., Sontorelli, S. F., et
al. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation.
Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 564–570.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia and well-being: An introduction.
doi:10.1007/s10902–006–9018–1.
Diener, E., & Chan, M. Y. (2011). Happy people live longer: Subjective well-being contributes to
health and longevity. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 3(1), 1–43, doi:10.1111/j.1758–
0854.2010.01045.x.
Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens: An experimental
investigation of gratitude and SWB in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84,
377–389.
Estrada, C., Isen, A. M., & Young, M. J. (1994). Positive affect influences creative problem solving and
reported source of practice satisfaction in physicians. Motivation and Emotion, 18, 285–299.
Forgeard, M. J. C., Jayawickreme, E., Kern, M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Doing the right
thing: Measuring wellbeing for public policy. International Journal of Wellbeing, 1(1), 79–106,
doi:10.5502/ijw.v1i1.15.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Levenson, R. W. (1998). Positive emotions speed recovery from the
cardiovascular sequelae of negative emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 12, 191–220.
Froh, J. J., Kashdan, T. B., Ozimkowsk, K. M., & Miller, N. (2009). Who benefits the most from a
gratitude intervention in children and adolescents? Examining positive affect as a moderator.
Journal of Positive Psychology, 4, 408–422.
Gale, C. R., Booth, T., Mõttus, R., Kuh, D., & Deary, I. J. (2009) Neuroticism and extraversion in
youth predict mental wellbeing and life satisfaction 40 years later: The hierarchical structure of
well-being. Journal of Personality 77(4), 1025–1050, doi:10.1111/j.1467–6494.2009.00573.x.
Giannopoulos, V. L., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2011). Effects of positive interventions and orientations
to happiness on subjective well-being. Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 95–105.
Harker, L., & Keltner, D. (2001). Expressions of positive emotions in women’s college yearbook
pictures and their relationship to personality and life outcomes across adulthood. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 112–124.
Hone, L., Jarden, A., & Schofield, G. (2015). An evaluation of positive psychology intervention
effectiveness trials using the re-aim framework: A practice-friendly review. Journal of Positive
Psychology, 10(4), 303–322.
Hone, L. C., Jarden, A., Schofield, G. M., & Duncan, S. (2014). Measuring flourishing: The impact
of operational definitions on the prevalence of high levels of wellbeing. International Journal of
Wellbeing, 4(1), 62–90, doi:10.5502/ijw.v4i1.4.
Huppert, F. A., & Johnson, D. M. (2010). A controlled trial of mindfulness training in schools:
The importance of practice for an impact on well-being. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5,
264–274.
Huppert, F. A., & So, T. T. C. (2013). Flourishing across Europe: Application of a new conceptual
framework for defining well-being. Social Indicators Resource, 110(3), 837–861.
International Positive Psychology Association (2015, October 6). About IPPA. Available at http://
www.ippanetwork.org/about/.
Jha, A. P., Stanley, E. A., Kiyonaga, A., Wong, L., & Gelfand, L. (2010). Examining the protective
effects of mindfulness training on working capacity and affective experience. Emotion, 10, 54–64.
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical
Psychology: Science and Practice, 10, 144–156.
Kerr, S. L., O’Donovan, A., & Pepping, C. A. (2015). Can gratitude and kindness interventions
enhance well-being in a clinical sample? Journal of Happiness Studies, 16, 17–36.
Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal
of Health and Social Research, 43, 207–222.
Keyes, C. L. M., Shmotkin, D., & Ryff, C. D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: The empirical
encounter of two traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 1007–1022,
doi:10.1037//0022–3514.82.6.1007.

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 22 Section 1: Where Are We Now?

Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does
happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 803–855, doi:10.1037/0033–
2909.131.6.803.
Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Norrish, J. M. (2015). Positive education: The Geelong Grammar School journey. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Norrish, J. M., Williams, P., O’Connor, M., & Robinson, J. (2013). An applied framework for positive
education. International Journal of Wellbeing, 3(2), 147–161, doi:10.5502/ijw.v3i2.2.
Odou, N., & Brinker, J. (2014a). Exploring the relationship between rumination, self-compassion,
and mood. Self and Identity, 13(4), 449–459, doi:10.1080/15298868.2013.840332.
Odou, N., & Brinker, J. (2014b). Self-compassion, a better alternative to rumination than distraction
as a response to negative mood. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1–11, doi:10.1080/17439760.2014.9
67800.
Otake, K., Shimai, S., Tanaka-Matsumi, J., Otsui, K., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Happy people
become happier through kindness: A counting kindness intervention. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 7, 361–375.
Peters, M. L., Flink. I. K., Boersma, K., & Linton, S. J. (2010). Manipulating optimism: Can mental
imagining a best possible self be used to increase positive future expectancies? Journal of Positive
Psychology, 5, 204–211.
Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005). Does positive affect influence health? Psychological Bulletin, 131,
925–971.
Ramírez, E., Ortega, A. R., Chamorro, A., & Colmenero, J. M. (2014). A program of positive
intervention in the elderly: Memories, gratitude and forgiveness. Aging & Mental Health, 18(4),
463–470, doi:10.1080/13607863.2013.856858.
Rusk, R. D., & Waters, L. E. (2013). Tracing the size, reach, impact, and breadth of positive
psychology.Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(3), 207–221, doi:10.1080/17439760.2013.777766.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78,
doi:10.1037110003–066X.55.1.68.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001a). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 9, 1–11, doi:10.1007/s10902–006–9018–1.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001b). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on
hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological
wellbeing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 57(6), 1069–1081.
Ryff, C. D. (1995). Psychological well-being in adult life. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
4(4), 99–104.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 69(4), 719–727.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Building human strength: Psychology’s forgotten mission. APA Monitor,
29(1), 2.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness. New York, NY: Free Press.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American
Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
Seligman, M. E. P., Rashid, T., & Parks, A. C. (2006). Positive psychotherapy. American Psychologist,
61, 774–788.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress:
Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60(5), 410–421, doi:10.1037/0003–
066X.60.5.410.
Sergeant, S., & Mongrain, M. (2011). Are positive psychology exercises helpful for people with
depressive personality styles? Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 260–272.
Sheldon, K. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effect
of expressing gratitude and visualising best possible selves. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 73–82.

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press

 Chapter 2: The Science of Wellbeing and Positive Psychology 23

Shueller, S. M. (2010). Preferences for positive psychology exercises. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5,
192–203.
Shueller, S. M. (2011). To each his own well-being boosting intervention: Using preference to guide
selection. Journal of Positive Psychology, 6, 300–313.
Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms
with positive psychology interventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical
Psychology: In Session, 65(5), 467–487, doi:10.1002/jclp.20593.
Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4), 249–275.
Snyder, C. R., Lopez, S. J., & Pedrotti, J. T. (2011). Positive psychology: The scientific and practical
explorations of human strengths (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Steger, M. F., Shigehiro, O., & Kashdan, T. B. (2009). Meaning in life across the life span: Levels and
correlates of meaning in life from emerging adulthood to older adulthood. Journal of Positive
Psychology, 4, 43–52.
Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., Platt, S., Joseph, S., Weich, S., et al. (2007). The Warwick–
Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (WEMWBS): Development and UK validation. Health and
Quality of Life Outcomes, 5 (63). doi:10.1186/1477-7525-5-63.
Tugade, M. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). Resilient individuals use positive emotions to bounce
back from negative emotional experiences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2),
320–333.
Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2013). Positive psychology interventions: Research evidence, practical utility,
and future steps. In Keyes, C. L.M. (ch. 15). Mental Well-Being: International Contributions to the
Study of Positive Mental Health. Dordrecht, the Netherlands, Springer.
Waters, L. (2011). A review of school-based positive psychology interventions. Australian Educational
and Developmental Psychologist, 28(2), 75–90, doi:10.1375/aedp.28.2.75.
Waugh, C. E., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Nice to know you: Positive emotions, self-other overlap,
and complex understanding in the formation of a new relationship. Journal of Positive Psychology,
1, 93–106.
Williams, S., & Shiaw, W. T. (1999). Mood and organizational citizenship behavior: The effects of
positive affect on employee organizational citizenship behavior intentions. Journal of Psychology,
133, 656–668.
Wright, T. A., & Quick, J. C. (2009). The emerging positive agenda in organizations: Greater than a
trickle, but not yet a deluge. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 147–159.

https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339275.003 Published online by Cambridge University Press