[Paleopsych] Psychology Today: Happy Hour
Premise Checker
checker at panix.com
Mon Feb 7 20:36:13 UTC 2005
Happy Hour
http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/index.php?term=pto-20050119-000002.xml&print=1
[First the summary from The Chronicle of Higher Education.]
MAGAZINES & JOURNALS
A glance at the February issue of "Psychology Today":
Training our minds to be happy
Living in the present may be the key to happiness, says Carlin
Flora, a staff writer at the magazine. "Our sense of well-being
is intimately tied into our perception of time," she says.
Age also makes a difference, she says, citing research by a
professor of psychology at Stanford University. The professor,
Laura Carstensen, has found that younger people focus more on
the negative, while older people release bad feelings faster and
maintain good ones longer.
"Carstensen thinks this shift toward the positive occurs because
as we age, we become aware, consciously or not, that time is
running out," Ms. Flora writes. "The awareness of life's
fragility turns our attention to the present moment, so we worry
less."
Ms. Carstensen is also investigating how Buddhist meditation,
which involves an intense focus on the present, may affect the
brain.
Ms. Flora also cites research on that topic by Richard Davidson,
a professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin at
Madison. Mr. Davidson's research, she says, shows that Buddhist
monks who spent more than 10,000 hours meditating had
significantly more activity in a part of the brain that is
associated with positive emotions than they did in a similar
part of the brain associated with negative emotions.
"The finding suggests," Ms. Flora says, "that if we train
ourselves to become more mindful and slow down our sense of
passing time, we can learn to monitor our moods and thoughts
before they spiral downward. We can, in other words, make
ourselves happier."
The article, "Happy Hour," is online at
http://cms.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-20050119-000002.html
_________________________________________________________________
Happy Hour
By: [4]Carlin Flora
Summary: We search for happiness in eager anticipation and joyful
memories, but we're better off paying attention to each moment as it
passes.
Jason Carpenter was one of those Red Sox fans--determined, passionate
and absolutely convinced that a World Series win would be a
life-changing event. The baseball team famously botched an easy win
during the 1986 championships, and Carpenter, 13 at the time, broke
down in sobs. Yet he never gave up on his dream: that the Red Sox
would one day prove they deserved his unwavering devotion. "I imagined
crying with happiness," he says. Last fall, Carpenter, now 31 and
living in New York City, saw his dream come true when his team beat
the Yankees--their blood rivals--in the league championships, after
the biggest comeback in baseball history. Carpenter was over the moon.
"I went nuts with 200 of my closest 'strangers,' all displaced Boston
fans, partying in the streets deep in the heart of enemy territory
until 4 a.m."
With the next morning, though, came the darker side of triumph.
Carpenter's elation had worn off. "I was wondering what to do with
myself. I was depressed." Years of longing for a win had boiled down
to a fleeting moment of bliss. What Carpenter had believed his whole
life would make him happy actually happened--and then he
faced...nothingness.
The things we expect will bring us lasting joy rarely do. Whether it's
losing 25 pounds, getting a major promotion or watching a troupe of
perennial losers finally win the big one, long-anticipated events give
us a swell of glee...and then we settle back into being just about as
happy as we've always been. Most of us have a happiness "set point,"
fixed by temperament and early life experience, which is very
difficult to shift. Whether you win the lottery or wind up in a
wheelchair, within a year or two you generally end up just about as
happy (or unhappy) as you started out.
Yet the quest for happiness isn't futile. Psychologists now believe
that many of us can turn the well-being thermostat up or down a few
notches by changing how we think about anticipation, memory and the
present moment. Our sense of well-being is intimately tied into our
perception of time. The problem is that we usually get it wrong.
Memory tricks us--we don't remember our experiences properly, and that
leaves us unable to accurately imagine the way we'll feel in the
future. At the same time, expectations mislead us: We never learn to
predict what will make us happy, or how to anticipate the impact of
major life experiences.
Focusing on the moment may help us understand how to be happy.
Besides, we have a built-in tendency to grow more cheerful as we get
older: Aging helps us ignore the negative and shift our attention
toward the positive. Finding happiness isn't hopeless--it seems to be
just a question of time.
Youth is a downer, it turns out. Young people naturally pay more
attention to the negative. Older people are faster than younger people
to orient to smiling faces rather than scowling ones in
advertisements, finds Linda Carstensen, a professor of psychology at
Stanford who studies how age influences time perception and goals.
Similarly, young people are quicker to pick up on negative stimuli.
This youthful attention to the bad may be a necessary part of growing
up--a cognitive mechanism that helps with survival. Since the young
are focused on new (and therefore possibly dangerous) experiences and
acquaintances, they may be more likely to put themselves in harm's
way. "Young people need to take risks, and as such, they need to pay
attention to the potentially negative, to recognize the lion or bear
that is going to jump out at them," Carstensen explains. As we grow
older, though, we are increasingly drawn to the familiar, like close
friends and relatives. If given a chance to meet either their favorite
author or a close friend for lunch, younger people chose the former,
while older people preferred the latter.
Carstensen's findings shatter the stereotype of seniors as a crabby
bunch. When she spent one week frequently monitoring the moods of 184
adults, aged 18 to 94, she saw that older people experienced highly
positive emotional experiences for longer periods of time than younger
people, and their highly negative emotional experiences subsided more
quickly. In other research, she showed that their memories were in
general more positive. The sunny habit of revising history may explain
why seniors tend not to wallow in bad moods: Pleasant memories are
always invading their thoughts, and these fond recollections may "wash
away" anger or sadness. "There is no empirical evidence that older
people are grouchy," she says, although personality studies have
revealed that they do tend to care less about what other people think
of them.
Carstensen thinks this shift toward the positive occurs because as we
age, we become aware, consciously or not, that time is running out.
The awareness of life's fragility turns our attention to the present
moment, so we worry less. The potential missteps and possible
catastrophes that cloud a young person's vision of the future fade
away. "If you think about the things you worry about ---getting a job,
finding a mate or an apartment--they are almost always concerns about
the future," she says. The gap between ambition and achievement, a
major source of stress and unhappiness for young people, also narrows
with age. As we get older, we either achieve our goals or replace them
with more reachable aims.
Older people's positivity bias can even boost their memories. The
elderly generally do poorly on tests of short-term memory. But when
Joseph Mikels, a post-doctoral fellow in psychology at Stanford and
researcher in Carstensen's lab, showed them joyful scenes of babies
and puppies, older adults demonstrated better visual memory than their
younger counterparts. He theorizes that they are able to overcome
their cognitive handicaps because they are highly motivated to
remember images that match up with their personal goals of fostering
warm relationships.
These cheerful habits of mind can also be adopted by young people,
especially when a chapter of life is coming to a close. Think of
getting ready to move to a new city. Annoyances or grudges toward
local friends recede; memories of good times flood your mind. Your
awareness that your time with them is finite pushes the things you'll
miss about them to the foreground, and the present moment comes more
clearly into focus. Mikels says that conjuring this state of mind,
simply by appreciating life's brevity, could help young people find
the contentment that comes more naturally to their elders.
Carstensen and her team are now studying Buddhist meditators, to see
how their practice alters their perception of time. Her theory is that
meditation may cultivate a mind-set similar to an old person's, since
it shuts out thoughts of the past and the future in favor of the
present. "The religion is centered around the fact that we could die
at any moment," she says.
Related research by psychologist Richard Davidson at the University of
Wisconsin has in fact shown that meditation may change how the brain
works. He measured brain activity in people who had finished eight
weeks of meditation training and found significantly more activity in
the left prefrontal cortex, a region associated with positive feelings
and pursuit of goals. More recently, Davidson traveled to India to
measure the brain activity of Buddhist monks who had each spent at
least 10,000 hours in meditation. The activity in their left
prefrontal cortex far exceeded that in their right prefrontal cortex,
which is the brain's home for negative emotions and anxiety. Most of
us don't have 10,000 free hours to devote to brain resculpturing. But
the finding suggests that if we train ourselves to become more mindful
and slow down our sense of passing time, we can learn to monitor our
moods and thoughts before they spiral downward. We can, in other
words, make ourselves happier.
In the quest for happiness, most of us try to guess what the future
might bring, then project our current selves--with all of our hopes,
quirks and predilections--into that unknown. We use a fuzzy image of
the future to make all kinds of decisions, whether it's what to make
for dinner or whom to marry. Those predictions are essential to
happiness--and they are almost always wrong, finds Daniel Gilbert,
professor of psychology at Harvard. As a result, our efforts to
improve our lives often fall flat.
Working with Tim Wilson, professor of psychology at the University of
Virginia, Gilbert has shown that we are remarkably bad at "affective
forecasting," or predicting how we'll feel in the future. The good
things are never as good as we imagine they'll be; the bad things are
never as bad. We think of ourselves as both more fragile and more
easily satisfied than we really are. We overestimate the impact of a
good turn of event: We think that a fresh career or a new relationship
will permanently change us, when all it does is provide a short-term
mood boost. On the other hand, we are also much more resilient than we
give ourselves credit for. Most of us do recover emotionally from
life's traumas, whether it's the death of a close friend or a bitter
divorce.
"Memory is a flawed partner to anticipation," explains Gilbert. "If I
ask you to remember a terrorist attack, you will instantly think of
Sept. 11, not because it's a prototypical act of terrorism but because
it's so unrepresentative." But if your memory provides you with the
example of Sept. 11 as a representative for all terrorist attacks,
you're very likely to mispredict how you'll feel in response to future
attacks. You expect that you will feel the way you did after Sept. 11,
yet because the vast majority of terrorist attacks are very small and
involve the loss of relatively few lives, you would probably be a lot
less upset and recover more quickly. The bright side to forecasting
errors like this is that they expose our built-in psychological immune
system, as Gilbert calls it, which ensures we will survive future
horrors we can't predict.
There are many other reasons why we have such trouble imagining how
we'll feel in the future: We don't account for our own internal
spin-room, the rationalization techniques we use to explain away bad
situations. ("She wasn't right for me anyway.") We also tend to
anticipate the most dramatic symbol of a future event. If it's a
promotion, for example, we fantasize about the moment the boss breaks
the news. What we forget is that life goes on after the congratulatory
handshake--there will still be a job to do, a commute to endure and a
family to raise.
Even simple choices between concrete alternatives are plagued by
forecasting errors, shows Christopher Hsee, an economist from the
University of Chicago. As a result, we have a hard time picking the
job, the house or the car that will make us happiest. That's because
there is a big difference between the criteria we use to choose
something and the criteria we use to evaluate it later. If, for
example, you're hemming and hawing over whether to buy a
top-of-the-line camera that is bulky and heavy or a second-best model
that's easier to carry, the comparative difference in picture quality
may steer you toward the unwieldy model. Once you get the fancy camera
home, though, you no longer have the lesser-quality photo to compare
it with. All you notice is that it's a hassle to lug around--and as a
result you barely use it. A better strategy is to try to get a
holistic impression of each experience or product you're
contemplating, Hsee says. Just consider the first camera and imagine
how it would be to use it, without immediately comparing it with the
second.
Gilbert has another solution to the prediction problem: asking other
people for advice. "Grandmothers, rabbis and philosophers have been
telling us for years that we shouldn't want shiny new things, but it's
impossible not to," he says. "The important lesson is to learn how to
predict more accurately what will give us lasting pleasure versus
short-term pleasure, because there are things from the mundane to the
transcendental that really do bring pleasure and happiness." His
remedy is surrogation, or quite simply, asking people who have already
done what you're considering doing how they liked it. "Most of the
futures you're contemplating are someone else's memory," he says.
While it helps to have a lot in common with a "surrogate," even a
randomly chosen person can probably give you a better estimate of how
much you would enjoy an experience than would your own impulses.
Yet few people are willing to use this technique. To his dismay,
Gilbert's research shows that people would rather close their eyes and
imagine a vacation spot, or a new job, than ask someone what that
holiday or that career was like for them. This is because although we
are remarkably similar in our emotional reactions to events, we like
to think of ourselves as unique, Gilbert says. We can correct our
forecasting errors, but at a high cost to our self-image--we would
rather be original than happy.
Psychologist Daniel Kahneman grew up near the Bois de Bologne in
Paris, and from time to time, his parents would take him on a trip to
the woods. Young Danny, engrossed in some other activity, would scream
bloody murder at the prospect of being interrupted. Yet once he got to
the woods, he'd get so involved in his play that when it was time to
go home, he'd cry again. For Kahneman, those fits of tears are proof
that he was a happy child. "When you don't want to stop what you're
doing, that's a happy condition," he says. "There is something sad
about people who live their lives wanting to be elsewhere."
Kahneman won the Nobel Prize in economics in 2002 for his insights in
irrationality and decision-making, but has since turned his attention
to well-being. That has led him to study the value of time, "the
ultimate finite resource." He's examining the difference between
immediate and remembered experience and has zeroed in on the fact that
our actual experience and our memories of life operate on separate
tracks, and affect our happiness in completely distinct ways. Most
psychologists who study happiness have focused on how we think of our
lives in retrospect, but Kahneman believes that there's a lot to be
learned from looking at "online" happiness--or how we feel in the
moment.
Because our memories are all we keep of our experiences, we have a
built-in bias that favors memory over immediate experience. Our
experiencing self, the part of us that registers events as they happen
without anticipation or reflection, doesn't have much of a voice in
influencing how happy we are with our lives, he says. Instead, memory
dominates. Imagine you've thrown a marvelous party. You've spent hours
reveling, but just as the night is winding down, two drunk guests get
into a vicious argument. Even though your pleasure during the
preceding hours was real, you will remember the event as a total
disaster.
That spoiled night is a clear example of the "evaluating self" at
work, explains Kahneman. To create a narrative out of life's thousands
of disconnected moments, our evaluating self focuses on the most
intense moments and the final moments of an experience. That's the way
we're built, but our tendency to rely mostly on memory to judge our
well-being can lead us to make counterproductive decisions that
undermine our own happiness.
For instance, many parents believe they'd be happier if they spent
more time with their children. But because spending more time together
might not raise the intensity or change the concluding moments of the
experience, it won't be reflected in rosier memories. "If you double
the time that you spend with your children, it may have very little
effect on what you will remember about that time," Kahneman says. If
memory is all that matters, spending additional time with your
children accomplishes nothing. Another example: You had a great time
on summer vacation in Italy last year, so you consider going back. But
since returning to the same place wouldn't give you many new memories
to savor, your evaluating self might decide against it--even though
your experiencing self would clearly enjoy the trip.
"The point is that we shouldn't measure our lives on the quality of
our memories alone," says Kahneman. He doesn't simply mean we should
be more spontaneous--in fact, he points out that since time is our
most valuable resource, we should pay careful attention to how we
spend it. We need to vigilantly protect our time from the biases of
our evaluating self by not relying on memory alone. Otherwise, we risk
wasting it in ways that contradict our values and don't bring us
happiness.
Well-being is also a product of "focal time," or how we direct our
attention. This is the key idea behind the different roles that
pleasures and comforts have in creating happiness, a distinction
originally posited by the late Stanford economist Tibor Scitovsky.
Comforts are objects or experiences we tend to take for granted: a
computer that doesn't crash, boots that don't leak or even a spouse
who is supportive and warm. Pleasures, on the other hand, are stimuli
that you focus your attention on: a good meal, a silky shirt, a
boisterous evening with friends. The difference isn't intrinsic to the
thing itself but rather lies in our attitude toward it: whether it
captures our attention or recedes into the background.
Our evaluating self misleads us by giving more weight to comforts,
those things that make life easier, but that we become accustomed to.
Our experiencing self, meanwhile, prefers pleasures--absorbing events
or interactions that hold us captive. If you ask someone with a Lexus
if she likes it, she'll probably say yes, since its high quality
really does bring happiness. But that's only while she's thinking
about it--and she probably doesn't think about it very often. "Suppose
you are driving in your car with your spouse and you are quarreling,"
Kahneman posits. "Are you better off if you're driving an Escort or a
Lexus?" You're much too busy arguing to pay attention to the Lexus'
smooth ride, so at that moment the quality of the car hardly matters.
At the same time, something trivial that grabs your focus and
interest, like getting flowers, will bring you happiness. If you got
flowers every day, though, it would become routine, and neither garner
your attention nor bring you much pleasure. Kahneman's point: Nothing
is as important as it is when you're thinking about it.
As he's explored the role of attention and moment-by-moment
experiences in happiness, Kahneman has identified factors that have a
powerful effect in determining immediate mood. When asked how they
feel "in the moment," he's found that people report being happier when
they are with friends than when they're with a spouse or child. It
sounds counterintuitive, but it makes sense: When we're with friends,
we're intensely engaged, whereas we don't pay as much focused
attention to family--they recede into the background, since we see
them all the time. Similarly, getting enough sleep is crucial,
probably because it is difficult to be engaged with the things you
enjoy when you are tired. And people under time pressure at work don't
report much happiness, as they are unable to pay attention to anything
other than their impending deadlines.
Kahneman acknowledges the power of the well-being "setpoint," but he
still thinks that we can influence our own happiness in small ways--by
attending to the moment, and by choosing activities that engage rather
than numb our minds. If we heed what does give us immediate pleasure,
and if we are skeptical of our error-riddled memories and predictions,
we can learn to spend our money, time and attention in ways that make
us happier. If it's simply our nature to root for a cursed team or to
chase a dream that, when realized, will never be as sweet as it is in
our mind's eye, then we can try to appreciate the joy that comes in
the striving. PT
Publication: Psychology Today Magazine
Publication Date: Jan/Feb 2005
Last Revised: 19 Jan 2005
More information about the paleopsych
mailing list