Can Our Happiness Set-Point Be Changed?

“If you are not happy here and now you never will be.”

Taisen Deshimaru

Are There Different Ways to Be Happy?

“Happiness” really is a messy concept.

In fact, not only do psychologist define and measure aspects of well-being differently, there is some new evidence that having the right kind of happiness might actually be more important for long-term health ((Fredrickson, B. et al. (2014). A functional perspective on human well-being. PNAS, doi=10.1073)).

Subjective Well-Being vs. Psychological Well-Being

It seems the term “happiness” is generally recognized by most people as an indicator of well-being and indeed it is. However, psychologists and researchers prefer to split the concept of well-being into two major types: 1) Subjective (hedonic) well-being and 2) Psychological (eudaimonic) well-being. Subjective well-being generally refers to either the ratio of positive to negative emotions (commonly what is described as “happiness“) and life satisfaction (a longer-term sense of overall engagement and fulfillment). Both of these reflect the “emotional component” and “cognitive component” of well-being, respectively.

Psychological well-being is often associated with the concept of flourishing and contains the elements of meaningfulness/purpose in life and ongoing pursuit of self-development.

Of these two broad types, it appears that people with high levels of hedonic well-being don’t feel any worse than those with high levels of eudaimonic well-being.

But, research by Barbara Frederickson and her colleagues (2014) have found some convincing evidence at the gene expression level that people experiencing higher life purpose had significantly low levels of inflammatory gene expression and strong expression of antiviral and antibody genes compared to those who just reported being emotionally “happy” on a daily basis. In their study, the researchers drew blood samples from 80 healthy adults who were assessed for subjective well-being and psychological well-being. The research team used the CTRA gene-expression profile to map the potentially distinct biological effects of these two types of “happiness.”

This study is one of the first to suggest that “happiness” is not always beneficial for health and it’s important to distinguish exactly what is being measured when this concept is being discussed.

Is Happier Always Better?

A relatively new study has tried to answer this question by analyzing data from 118,519 respondents of the World Values Study, an intense data collection project with college students entering 25 mostly elite Universities, and four longitudinal data sets exploring the link between self-reported happiness and various outcomes such as educational degrees obtained, income levels, relationship satisfaction and duration ((Oishi, S. et al., (2007). The optimum level of well-being: Can people be too happy? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2 (4) 346-360)). These studies revealed a consistent pattern of results:

• The optimal level of happiness in the domains of interpersonal relationships is the highest possible level of happiness
• In contrast, the optimal level of happiness for achievement of outcomes (e.g., salary, income, education) is a moderate (but still high) level of happiness

The authors in this study stress that it is not bad to be very happy nor is it desirable to be unhappy.

They are suggesting that for those individuals whose primary values in work and life focus on achievement, only moderate levels of happiness may be possible. For those whose values prioritize close relationships, it is the highest level of happiness possible given one’s genetic set point, situation and daily activities that are desirable. The benefit of happy moods are also likely influenced by one’s personality and work/life values and likely to differ across cultures.

Our own research with our stress and resilience tool called StressScan has revealed some interesting results when we analyze the items composing our own Well-Being/Happiness scale with a sample of 1,350 working professionals in diverse industries:

Percent Answering “Often” or “Always”

• 70.7% — Genuinely enjoying the things you are involved in
• 66.3% — Feeling that your future looks hopeful and promising
• 68.5% — Pleased with life overall

In general, most Americans report positive life satisfaction but also tend to report a high level of work and life stress ((Nowack, K. (2006). Optimising Employee Resilience: Coaching to Help Individuals Modify Lifestyle. Stress News, International Journal of Stress Management, Volume 18, 9-12)).

Can Our Happiness Set-Point Be Changed?

To what extent is our happiness genetically set by our life situation, events, thoughts and behaviors? Can our happiness “set-point” be modified by specific actions and exercises?

Our own research suggestd a “profile” of employees who were very likely to describe themselves as least happy with work and life. These individuals reported low levels of work and life satisfaction (psychological well-being), poor eating habits (eating/nutrition) and were very self-critical (negative appraisal). We wondered if happiness and life meaning could actually be modified given that research suggests that one’s overall happiness level seems to be at least partially genetically predetermined (50%), partly based on specific events/situations (10%) and can be strongly influenced by what we do each day (40%).

Until recently, scientific research supported the idea that what we do each day didn’t have much impact on our unchangeable and biological “set point” for happiness. This older view suggested that happiness was pre-determined genetically and perhaps influenced by our upbringing but always returning to a “set point” and varying only slightly. It also explained why those who are diagnosed with a chronic illness return to about the same level of happiness they enjoyed before they became ill.

To understand life satisfaction completely though, it is helpful to review some of the components that go into most people’s experience of happiness. One of the most important influences on happiness is social support (availability, utility and satisfaction with one’s support network). People who score high on life satisfaction tend to report higher levels of supportive family, friends, and co-workers compared to those who are lonely or alone and are more likely to be dissatisfied. Loss of a close support member may cause much distress and require a period of adjustment creating lower life satisfaction and happiness.

A second factor is being involved in meaningful and engaging work, hobbies or activities. When a person has passion for what they are doing (paid or unpaid) and feels it is meaningful to them, they tend to report higher levels of life satisfaction. So identifying your strengths and passions and attempting to do more of what you truly enjoy is a way to increase your core happiness.

The 10 Keys to Maximizing our Core Happiness

There is no one key to life satisfaction but rather a recipe that includes a number of specific ingredients including some of the following activities that you can practice and employ each day:

1. Sleep: Get adequate rest/sleep as lack of it has been shown to influence fatigue and moods
2. Exercise: Make time for physical activity as those who frequently exercise report lower depression and higher psychological well-being
3. Forgiveness: Forgive others who have hurt you in the past
4. Emotional Expression: The goal is to feel good as opposed to just “feeling good” all the time.
5. Writing:Expressing one’s emotions, particularly through writing, can have strong immune protective effects
6. Social Support: Engage with others and avoid those who are “toxic” in your life
7. Daily Affirmations: Reflecting on your blessings each day seems to be associated with increased well-being and happiness
8. Identifying Our Strengths: Identifying and using Signature Strengths
9. Deploying Our Passions: Identifying and leveraging what you do well and how to maximize the application of your unique “strengths” will allow you to be more engaged and satisfied
10. Avoiding Negative Self-Talk: Monitor your own self-talk and work to dispute those things you say that are irrational, absolute, self-critical and/or overly perfectionist

You can also live the words of Jack Buck who said, “Things turn out best for those who make the best of how things turn out“….Be well…

Ken Nowack

Kenneth Nowack, Ph.D. is a licensed psychologist (PSY13758) and President & Chief Research Officer/Co-Founder of Envisia Learning, is a member of the Consortium for Research on Emotional Intelligence in Organizations. Ken also serves as the Associate Editor of Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. His recent book Clueless: Coaching People Who Just Don’t Get It is available for free for a limited time by signing up for free blog updates (Learn more at our website)