Thanks to Hearistic for the link.

The idea is that you turn up at the Park, get introduced to someone you don’t know, and are given a ‘Menu of Conversation’ – like a restaurant menu, only instead of dishes, you’re presented with 25 topics of conversation to choose from. But these aren’t your usual dinner party ice-breakers; they’re designed to get you to think about yourself, your life, your relationships, your hopes and aspirations and what makes you you. In other words, the kind of topics that you’d rarely discuss with friends or work colleagues, let alone complete strangers.

Examples of questions on the Menu of Conversation include:

• What have you rebelled against in the past and what are you rebelling against now?

• What most delights each of your five senses and which sensations do you avoid?

• How have your opinions and behaviour changed on the way the two sexes treat each other?

The idea is that posing the questions to a stranger gives you the chance to step into their shoes and really understand what it’s like to be them. And at the same time, when you answer the questions, you get to find out a lot more about yourself and who you really are.

This is such a fantastic way of building connections between people – fun, engaging, light-hearted and profound at the same time. Since relationships are one of the three basic psychological needs (the others being control and competence – Ryan & Deci, 2000), it’s right at the heart of positive psychology. It’s been suggested that the so-called Muse Conversation approach, as well as the self-portrait approach, might help to prevent stress and depression, so not surprisingly, they’re the subject of ongoing clinical trials.

Zeldin has also run “Muse Conversation dinners” for organisations : you can find out more by emailing info[at]oxfordmuse[dot]com or calling 01865 791421.

Image courtesy of katiedee47

Putting aside the argument about Cognitive Behavioural Therapy and depression (which is one definitely worth having), I’m not yet convinced that government intervention to make us all happier is either necessary or effective. I’m all for educating people to make their own decisions but perhaps the government should concentrate its efforts on creating better schools and hospitals first…

But no doubt it would become bogged down in happiness measurements, targets and standards anyway before any real difference was made!

In this month’s Positive Psychology News Daily article we explore the links between Positive Psychology, making music and singing in unison.

Not only are they both good for your physical health, scientists like Professor Stephen Clift of the Sidney de Haan Centre for Arts and Health are now investigating the benefits for psychological well-being, including increased happiness,self-esteem and self-efficacy, and reduced depression.

Read the rest of the article here.

Image: Tallalex85

You can see why Anthony Seldon, head of Wellington College (one of the most elite schools in the UK) is so keen that kids get something more than the National Curriculum, since it will hardly prepare them for the adult world in the 21st Century after all. But teaching them Positive Psychology doesn’t fill Richard Schoch with confidence, largely because he says you can’t measure meaning and engagement, which are the holy grail of happiness. He thinks there is a place for well-being in the classroom, but doesn’t really have any suggestions about how to teach it, other than getting kids to read ancient texts.

Hmmmmm.

I’m not sure that’s the answer either!

The really interesting question is why we feel that children need to be taught about happiness in the first place. Some people (including Seldon) have argued that kids are more prone to depression, anxiety and other mental illnesses than in the past. So teaching them various life skills will help them survive these issues. If that’s the case, shouldn’t we be asking ourselves what is causing them to be more prone to depression, anxiety and other mental illnesses in the first place, and try to do something to fix that?

According to Schoch, Positive Psychology is a bit like Marmite, i.e. you either love it or you hate it. The challenge for Positive Psychologists is how to persuade its critics that it’s a useful subject which can make a positive difference to how people choose to live their lives. I’m not sure it’s succeeding in that aim at the moment. What do you think?

You can read the original debate between Seldon and sociologist Frank Furedi here.

You might be interested to know that there’s been a great deal of research into the benefits of gratitude; grateful people, for example, report higher levels of life satisfaction, vitality, optimism and positive emotions, as well as lower levels of depression and stress*. I’ve talked about gratitude in several postings before, covered new ways of expressing gratitude, and looked specifically at Peterson’s 10 minute exercise to increase your well-being by identifying the things you’re thankful for.

This 30 minute BBC Radio 4 programme today explores the subject both for those people expressing their thanks, and for the people being thanked. It’s well worth listening to for some real-life insight into the research.

* McCullough, Emmons & Tsang (2002)

Next time you go supermarket shopping, take a few minutes to have a long hard look at the shelves in each food aisle – how many types of coffee, breakfast cereal and butter are there? Research by psychologist Barry Schwartz suggests that more choice isn’t necessarily beneficial, especially if you’re a maximiser.

Basically a maximiser is someone who, having decided to buy e.g. a digital camera researches all the models extensively on the internet to compare features and prices, talks to the assistants at the local camera shop, reads Which?, asks friends for their recommendations and buys copies of every photography magazine that they can find, before creating a spreadsheet listing their Top 10 favourite models and weighting all the required functions, the price and guarantee terms before they decide which to buy.

I kid you not, I have known someone do this.

The problem is that this person wasn’t actually happy with the camera they ended up buying; they worried that it wasn’t as good as the alternatives that they didn’t choose. They wondered whether they should have waited before buying anything when a newer, more up-to-date model came on the market a month later… This is what Schwartz refers to as “maximising”, i.e. trying to make the best choice out of the tens or hundreds of available options, when in reality not only is this extremely difficult to achieve, but one is left feeling regretful about ‘the one(s) that got away’.

Satisficers, on the other hand, are those people who accept a ‘good enough’ choice. If they were buying a digital camera, they might decide on the price range and the must-have features, then buy the first camera that fitted this bill. So maybe they might not get the very best model, but their decision is made more quickly and relatively painlessly.

Is the research on how people react to choice relevant to business? Over 10 years ago when Procter & Gamble reduced the number of varieties of Head and Shoulders shampoo it offered, its sales increased. It has been suggested that this sales growth reflected consumers’ positive reaction to optimised choice. Similarly, in the discussion on the pros and cons of choice on this BBC Radio 4 programme today* it was mentioned that Asda threatened to delist some well-known brands, because consumers don’t want duplication. Tyranny of choice was mentioned by one of Asda’s executive directors. So it would seem that the theory of choice and over-choice is being taken seriously by businesses.

You may not be surprised to hear that whilst maximising behaviour carries some benefits, it is also associated with regret, perfectionism, depression and lower well-being. We’ll be discussing the pros and cons of maximising and satisficing, as well as some techniques for overcoming the ‘tyranny of choice’ in later posts.

* If you’re interested in listening to the section on the paradox of choice in this R4 programme, it’s almost 26 minutes in.

So when Charlie sent me a link to a BBC Radio Four programme (How to Knit a Poem) this week, which was about the therapeutic effect of knitting, I wondered whether knitting might also be a way of imitating REM.

In this 15 minutes programme, the poet, Gwyneth Lewis, interviews Jeni Hewlett (referred to incorrectly as Jeni Green in the interview), a research assistant in the School of Psychology at Cardiff University , who is undertaking a research study to demonstrate scientifically whether or not knitting can help people get out of a cycle of negative thinking that accompanies depression.

Betsan Corkhill, who runs Stitchlinks, believes that cross-stitching and crochet have a similar effect. It seems it’s all to do with the repetitive nature of the activity; the beneficial effect it has on physical and mental health might be due to eye-scanning, or the release of the chemical serotonin in the brain.

So now I’m thinking of taking up knitting in 2007; I doubt it will transform me into a serene earth-mother, but I could do with a few more scarves…

PS I’m amazed at how many knitters are also bloggers …see for example:

http://www.bhkc.co.uk/data/knitting_therapy.htm

http://fibrespates.blogs.com/blog

http://acechick.typepad.com/uknitters