The latest quarterly edition of the open-access International Journal of Well-being has just been published.  No. 3 includes

• some new research by Nathaniel Lambert, A. Marlea Gwinn, Tyler Stillman and Frank Fincham on how sharing positive experiences can boost your vitality and help you overcome tiredness,
• An interview with Barbara Fredrickson (famous for the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions), and
• A review of the film Happy, directed by Roko Belic

This edition is quite a lot shorter than the previous two – does this reflect a lack of material, or positive psychologists’ preference to be published in ‘traditional’ positive psychology journals? Whichever it is, let’s hope it isn’t a trend that will continue.

Hefferon & Boniwell's Book

Unusually for me, my posting for Positive Psychology News this month is a book review, Kate Hefferon and Ilona Boniwell’s Positive Psychology: Theory, Research and Applications. Don’t be put off by the fact that it’s a textbook, in short it’s a highly enjoyable, educational, and engaging read, well worth the £18-£20 it’s currently selling for online. It includes all the usual subjects such as positive emotions, subjective well-being and resilience, lots of new research, and topics you won’t find mentioned in other positive psychology textbooks, like the positive body, sex and positive death. I thoroughly recommend it whether you’re a student, lecturer, practitioner or positive psychology enthusiast. It’s so good it’s now at the top of our list of recommended reads on our Positive Psychology Masterclass!

For the full review, click here.

Word cloud from the national well-being debate

A few months ago (see here and here) I wrote about the British government’s intention to measure national well-being. This project came about because of the obvious failing of GDP (gross domestic product) to capture all the nuances of social and economic progress (and more recently, the lack of it).

I promised to update you on this project’s progress, and at the end of July 2011, a series of reports was issued by the Office for National Statistics. In August’s posting for Positive Psychology News, I review  the ONS interim findings and question whether we are really any better informed about the nation’s well-being than we were 8 months ago.

Read the full article here.

The Difference Engine

One of the very first pieces I wrote for Positive Psychology News Daily back in 2007 focused on the application of strengths – whether strengths as defined in positive psychology are always positive and how we know which strength to apply in any given situation. This was inspired by a great article by Barry Schwartz and Kenneth Sharpe (see below) about ‘practical wisdom’, the nous we all need to help us navigate life’s trickier waters. What I like about Schwartz and Sharpe is that they remind us that context is king. Positive psychologists tend to define strengths as inherently positive characteristics, but that doesn’t mean they can be applied willy-nilly, hence the need for some practical wisdom to guide our choice of behaviour.

This month’s article for Positive Psychology News looks at a 2011 paper by James McNulty and Frank Fincham (details below) in which the authors argue that positive psychology needs to be more contextual. They have a point – most psychology research is carried out on convenience samples of psychology students in a  college environment, which is hardly representative of people in the real world. They chose 4 well-documented positive psychology topics (forgiveness, positive attributions, optimism and kindness), presenting research which counters the usual positive psychology claims that more of them is better for well-being. However, I found their conclusions more interesting, in particular:

• The need to study the implications of various psychological concepts in the context of both happy and unhappy people. Perhaps some may benefit people in optimal circumstances, but may harm people in suboptimal circumstances. For example, some may not be suitable for people in therapy.

• The need to examine the implications of psychological characteristics over a long period of time. Most of the positive psychology studies look at consequences over the short term, the assumption being that if the immediate outcome is positive, the long term result will be too.

Of course, we should not forget that positive psychology is a very young discipline (about 13 years old). Hopefully it will continue too grow and mature, and perhaps over time it may even acquire the scientific kudos that Seligman is so keen on.

To read the full article and readers’ comments, click here.

* McNulty, J.K. & Fincham, F.D. (2011). Beyond positive psychology? Toward a contextual view of psychological processes and well-being. American Psychologist. doi: 10.1037/a0024572.

The Houses of Parliament and Big Ben

Back in February 2011 I looked at the British government’s plans to measure the nation’s well-being. Now the National Statistician, Jil Matheson, has published her Reflections on the National Debate on Measuring National Well-being.

Was it worth waiting for?  Have we learnt anything new about well-being?  Was it worth the £2m it cost to conduct this ‘debate?’

Based on the fact that they only captured the views of  some 35,000 people (about 0.06% of the population), probably not. Have we learnt anything new about well-being? Having read Ms Matheson’s Reflections, again probably not. As I pointed out before, they’d secured enough  experts on the advisory panel to tell them everything they needed to know about well-being without spending £2m and 10 months consulting the general public. If the exercise was intended to engage the public and make Cameron et al on the coalition government look like they’re more in touch with the general public, then judging by the numbers who took part, it probably hasn’t succeeded on those grounds either.

And of course, there is always the danger that politicians will actually bow to public opinion about what makes them happy, when they don’t actually know (the  ‘you don’t know what you don’t know’ argument).

According to this report, a draft set of national well-being indicators will be published in Oct 2011.  We wait with bated breath.

UPDATE: 18/08/11

In the light of the recent riots in England, you might be interested to read what people said mattered most to them:

• “children who contributed to the debate through events in schools said eating breakfast in the morning, playing on computer games, playing with dolls and push-chairs, celebrating Christmas and birthdays were some of the things that matter most
• some young adults included make-up, good clothes, alcohol, music and fast food on their list
• some older people were concerned about the loss of a sense of community

All the age groups highlighted the importance of family, friends, health, financial security, equality and fairness in determining well-being” (p9).

I wonder what the Government will make of that.

Image: The British Parliament & Big Ben: ** Maurice **