PSYC 266 Exam 1: Q&As

What is one concern of the Judgement Model of Subjective Well-Being on self-report measures?

One concern is that when people are reflecting on their perceived well-being, an individual's current affective mood might influence how they report their total evaluation of well-being. This concern was tested in 1983 by Schwarz and Clore by influencing participants' moods positively or negatively and then asking them to report their overall satisfaction with life. They found people who were influenced to be in a positive mood reported greater overall life satisfaction than those influenced to be in a negative mood (Lucas, p. 3).

In James Pawleski's guest lecture, he discussed ways in which exposure to arts and culture can improve overall well-being. (1) List two of the five ways he mentioned that engagement with the arts can elicit this effect along with a brief description and (2) briefly outline a study design in which you assess if engagement with the arts affects overall well-being of an individual. Be sure to include the type of research design used, the independent and dependent variables (if applicable), operational definitions (as necessary), sample size, and how you will measure your outcome.

(1) In his lecture, Pawleski mentioned the following ways that engagement with the arts can lead to increased overall well-being: (2/5 necessary) Immersion: attention fully captured by immediacy of the experience; disconnect from worries of everyday life; feel carried away Expression: able to externalize thoughts/feelings, often becoming more aware of them in the process Acquisition: experiences that result in enduring insights, skills, or habits Socialization: able to understand more clearly who you are, what roles you play in community + culture Reflection: empowered to intentionally reinforce adaptive habits, values, world views and transform maladaptive ones (2) Using an experimental design. The independent variable used in this study will be exposure to the arts, and the dependent variable will be personal sense of well-being. Well-being is operationalized by numerical scores from the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire, and results from this assessment will be used to measure outcomes. The sample will be 50 randomly selected elementary school students. They will begin the experiment by taking the Oxford Questionnaire. Then, 25 students will be randomly assigned in the experimental group (Arts Exposure) where they will have 30 minutes of arts-related after school activities for a year (music, writing, painting, etc.) and the control group (No Arts Exposure) will have 30 minutes of free play in the classroom. At the end of the year period, they will re-take the Oxford Questionnaire, and changes in responses in relation to their group assignment will be measured.

In both his guest lecture and in the article "The Role of the Arts and Humanities in Human Flourishing," James Pawelski discusses mechanisms that enhance human flourishing. What are the proposed mechanisms, what do they mean in the context of Arts and Humanities and what is one example James gives of each?

1. Immersion—the act of one's attention being captured immediately upon viewing an example of Arts and Humanities. In this immersive state one can experience sensory and emotional enhancement. By becoming absorbed into the entity, well-being can be enhanced directly. Ex. Immersion in text can result in deep enjoyment that can lead to self-transformation and change our judgements of the world 2. Embeddedness—the soci-cognitive processes that underlie our ability to build skills and habits. This is how one builds a sense of mastery. With mastery, one will have greater positive flourishing outcomes.Ex. Authors who experience greater mastery are more likely to write complex plots and character perspectives than authors who do not. 3. Socialization—the extent to which an individual expands upon their cultural and communal identity. Arts and Humanities enriches the lives of those exposed to its work and allows individuals to create new identities and social roles. This can enhance resiliency and flourishing. Ex. When an individual retires, their work identity is lost and often people need to create a different identity for themselves to compensate. 4. Reflectiveness—Intentional processes involved in developing or reducing habits and values. Being exposed to Arts and Humanities allows one to turn their attention inward in order to evaluate his/her own world views. It also fosters critical thinking and perspective taking. Ex. Reflectiveness can result in an evolution of the self and give an individual enhanced meaning/purpose.

What are the two types of criteria included in the normative definition of the positive? Explain each of their components. What is their relationship to fractal flourishing?

1. Inclusion criterion a. Simple preference In order for something to be positive, someone needs to prefer it over its absence (Pawelski, 2020) 2. Continuum Criteria a. Relative preference Depends on frame of reference Example: One thousand dollars is more positive than one hundred dollars b. Sustainability across time Short term AND long term positive Example of opposite: What was fun (positive) on Saturday night, when extended to the frame of Sunday, is no longer positive c. Sustainability across persons Good for not only individual(s), but also relationships, community, etc. Example of opposite: Good for individuals but bad for community d. Sustainability across effects No negative effects Example of opposite: car is good for you but bad for environment e. Sustainability across structures Example: Not only positive at Penn, but also at many other universities, institutions, etc. (Pawelski, 2020) Fractal Flourishing = flourishing at all levels of analysis Achieved when something is positive as defined by both inclusion and continuum criteria.

What are three limitations to the study designs of examining the ways that individuals use happiness strategies in their everyday lives?

1. People rarely use only one type of happiness strategy, therefore it is difficult to determine which strategy they use is the most effective / is effective 2. It is also difficult to examine the effect of happiness activities when people have been practicing a certain activity for a long time - this is called hedonic adaptation. Hedonic adaptation refers to the tendency for people to return to baseline happiness after being used to a certain activities or event in their lives (Parks et al). Therefore, because happiness strategies may decrease in effectiveness over time, such study designs lack reliability, resulting in less productive and valuable results. 3. This kind of study (study 2 in Parks et al.) does not show cause and effects or correlation regarding whether the activities actually increase participant's happiness (lecture 3). The only result found was a description of activities that happiness-seekers tend to use in an attempt to become happier.

When using the descriptive research design, a psychologist may collect data via observation, self-reports or conducting a case study. Describe each method of data collection and list one strength and one weakness of that method.

A case study is a compilation of data about an individual or a very small group of individuals. These studies are typically longitudinal, meaning that the researcher(s) follow the subjects and collect data from them for an extended period of time. A benefit of this method is that the focus on such a small subject pool allows the researcher to collect a much larger amount of data about that subject or phenomenon than if they'd used any other method. However, the small sample size is simultaneously this method's weakness. It makes it impossible to generalize any of the findings and apply them to the general public (Lumen Learning). Observation, or "naturalistic" observation, is when the researcher simply observes the subject in their natural environment (e.g. home, school, work, etc.). A main benefit of this method of data collection is that if done in a manner in which the observer is inconspicuous, the observations can be considered natural human behavior, thus justifiably generalizable. The reason it's essential that the observer is inconspicuous is directly related to this method's biggest weakness -- people who know they are being watched are much less likely to behave the way they would naturally, which makes the observational findings less valid. Another danger to the data is observer bias: people often see what they're looking for, meaning a researcher is always observing the world through the lens of their research project. They might subconsciously tweak what they observe so that it becomes the data they need. This is why it's important for there to be multiple observers, so they can compare their observations of the same event and collect the most accurate data possible (Lumen Learning). Self-reporting is when a subjects give a researcher information about themselves. The benefit of this is that they are able to provide detailed personal information, but a weakness is that the human memory is faulty and that people are not always honest. A popular form of self-reporting is giving a survey.Surveys are sets of questions distributed by a researcher to collect data. The main benefit of surveys is that they're quick and easy. This makes it easier to draw in participants, often resulting in enormous sample sizes. The large volume of responses, or data collected, makes the generalization of findings to the wider population possible. The downside is that the simplicity of this method does not present the opportunity for follow-up questions, allowing for a very shallow level of insight. Social norms and personal pride have been known to skew results even when the survey is anonymous -- people might report a higher frequency of participating in socially praised activities like recycling, going to church, exercising, etc. while reporting a lower frequency of engagement in activities typically frowned on by society like masturbating, eating junk food, drinking, etc. (Lumen Learning).

What is the difference between an experimental research design and a correlational research design and what is an example of both?

A correlational research design establishes a relationship between two variables, but you don't know which one causes which. In an experimental research design, you can establish a cause and effect because there is a clear independent variable that you manipulate with a dependent variable. There also must be a control group in an experimental design. Correlational example: long term and short term positive affect is directly associated with superior job outcomes, relatively more satisfying social relationships, and fewer symptoms of psychopathology, but it's unclear which causes which. Experimental example: "Pursuing Happiness in Everyday Life" Parks etc.. In this study the participants completed "happiness-increasing exercises for a week" (independent variable) and tested outcome measures of happiness (dependent variables)

What is the difference between a sample and a population? Explain why findings from a psychology experiment that solely draws from university students may have an issue with generalizability.

A population is all possible individuals that make up a group of interest in a study. A sample, on the other hand, is a small proportion of the population that is selected for inclusion in a study (Connolly, 2020, p. 19). For experiments, it is important that the sample population is representative of the actual population. This is often achieved through random sampling. Random sampling means that each member of the population has an equal chance of being included in the sample (p. 20). This is important since random samples are more representative of the general population than a non-random one. Despite this need for a representative sample, many studies rely heavily on college students to participate in their research studies - even when trying to answer questions relevant to populations beyond just that of a college student. Therefore, the large percentage of college students that make up the sample population for research may not be representative of the larger population that researchers are intending to test. College students tend to be younger, have higher cognitive skills, and seek peer approval more so than the general population (p. 23). Therefore, if a researcher is trying to answer a question about the general U.S. population, research that relies mostly on college students will have an external validity issue, as the findings may just be relevant to the tested sample population and not the U.S. population as a whole.

One method of addressing certain weaknesses in the Self Report method of measuring Subjective Well Being is collecting observational reports from "informants" closely acquainted with the individual being examined. Describe the ways in which a sample of informant reports could lead to a more accurate measurement of a subject's SWB.

A researcher gathering informant reports is able to develop a larger sample size of responses to compare and consolidate, while a self-report is limited and thus increases the likelihood of false positives and skewed results. Additionally, a subject's report of their own well being is often affected by their mood at the time of examination; a third party may be able to provide contextualized analysis of the individual. Lastly, relatively strong correlations have been drawn between informant reports and self-reports (ranging from .4 to the .5s). So by supporting self-report findings with a strong sample of informant reports, a researcher is likely to mount further evidence for the reliability of their findings.

Explain why a researcher may prefer using the Day reconstruction method (DRM) to using the Experience sampling method (ESM).

A researcher may prefer the DRM to the ESM because it is much less disruptive to participants than the ESM. The DRM only requires participants to provide data at the very end of the day, whereas the ESM requires them to stop their daily activity and provide data at several points throughout the day. Therefore, if the researcher is trying to collect data on a population that is unwilling or unable to provide data frequently enough for the ESM (given factors such as occupation), they would be able to gather much more significant data using the DRM instead. Furthermore, using the ESM is more costly and time intensive for researchers as well; therefore, they may prefer the DSM due to financial or temporal limitations.

What would the lexical definition of the positive be for the event of a couple who wants a child but produces a negative pregnancy test?

Absence of the Preferred, which is indirectly negative From Professor James Pawelski's lecture, we learned about the lexical definitions of the positive. There is the older meaning, which essentially means to make something present and having a certain quality or lacking a certain quality. The newer meaning is what is desirable, good and preferred. Essentially, there is a box chart that has preference and dispreference on the x axis and presence and absence on the y axis. When preference and presence overlap, the result is directly positive. When presence and dispreference overlap, the result is directly negative. When preference and absence overlap, the result is indirectly negative, like in the question. Finally, when dispreference and absence overlap, the result is indirectly positive. In conclusion, absence or presence combined with the desired preference or dispreference have the opportunity to produce both negative and positive results.

According to Keith and Pawelski 2015, how do the mechanisms of immersion, embeddedness, socialization, and reflectiveness, that underlie the potential positive effects of engagement with the arts and humanities, affect general psychological well-being?

According to Keith and Pawelski 2015, general psychological well-being is potentially improved by the mechanisms of immersion, embeddedness, socialization, and reflectiveness through, for example, the triggering of the Default Mode Network in the brain when looking at artwork and positive affective reactions when engaging in dance concerts. The Default Mode Network has been associated with the positive feelings of prospection and creativity.

Describe why an experimental research design can establish a causal relationship, while a correlational design cannot.

An experimental design can establish a causal relationship because it can directly analyze the effect of an independent variable on a certain dependent variable. The experimental design accomplishes this by randomly assigning people to control and experimental groups. The control group is used to provide a direct comparison to the experimental group, which is given the treatment/independent variable. If there are significant differences between the groups, a causal relationship can be established between the independent and dependent variables. However, a correlational design cannot establish a causal relationship because a correlational design only looks for associations between two variables. Two variables may be correlated with each other, but there may be another variable that explains why. Without a controlled experiment, one cannot establish a causal relationship.

Which quadrant does the following example lie in when mapping the positive/negative conceptual space of the eudaimonic profile?: An acceptance letter to one's dream school. a) Quadrant 1 - presence of the preferred b) Quadrant 2 - presence of the dispreferred c) Quadrant 3 - absence of the dispreferred d) Quadrant 4 - absence of the preferred

Answer: a) Quadrant 1 - presence of the preferred Quadrant 1 is where this example lies because it is characterized as being directly positive, where the person wants something and they get it ("presence of the preferred"). In this case, acceptance to one's dream school represents what the individual prefers, and the presence of this acceptance letter indicates that they get what they prefer.

What are the components of the continuum criteria in positive psychology and how do these contribute to fractal flourishing?

As a normative definition of positivity, Pawelski suggests that in addition to the inclusion criterion of simple preference, there is a continuum criterion made up of five components that constitute the extent to which something is positive. These components include 1) a relative preference for it; 2) sustainability across time; 3) sustainability across people; 4) sustainability across effects; and 5) sustainability across structures. Through the continuum criteria, Pawelski associates sources of positivity with sustainable preference that enables these sources to be positive in the long-term and across a number of other important factors. This sustainable preference allows for fractal flourishing, which refers to flourishing at all levels of analysis - whether across culture, individually and communally, in the short and long-term, and so on. According to Pawelski, this is the kind of positivity individuals ought to aim for, as it contributes to a positive wellbeing that is sustainable no matter that context.

What would the prospective role of technology be in future positive psychology interventions and relevant research?

As discussed in class, researchers have found that traditional happiness intervention research designs fail to reflect how happiness-promoting activities are used in the real world (Parks et al., 2012). It is essential to study the positive interventions in uncontrolled circumstances so as to understand happiness-increasing activities in a more authentic manner. To achieve such a goal, technology is brought into play. Several widely recognized applications of technology in positive psychology interventions include ESM and smartphone data collection. In addition to the examples mentioned, a team of researchers has developed a system named the EARTH of Well-Being, which utilizes Positive Technology to help increase positive emotions and promote psychological well-being for its users (Banos et al., 2014). Its functions include using virtual environments (VEs) to simulate positive situations that elicit joy or relaxation and applying multimedia resources to help users recall positive memories as well as past achievements (Banos et al., 2014). With the rapid development of the field of Positive Technology, it is highly possible that such technologies could be used as self-guided tools to provide positive intervention services to a variety of people.

Arts and humanities have shown to have an effect on human flourishing outcome. Design a hypothetical study to explore the relationship between activities of involvement in arts and humanities and one's flourishing. Clearly identify the research design you selected and explain the pros and cons of using the selected method.

Correlational Design: Participants would be recruited from the undergraduate population at the University of Pennsylvania, although we realize that this sample may not be as representative for several reasons that we have discussed in class (i.e., College students tend to be young and high in need for peer approval). It is in this context that our study may lack external validity. Keeping that in mind, participants will come into the designated lab and fill out a self-reported questionnaire that intends to measure their subjective well-being, which, according to Tay, Pawelski, and Keith (2017), is one of the aspects of human flourishing outcome. We decided to focus on a single aspect of human flourishing because it is a broad concept that is composed of multiple aspects, including positive neurological and physiological states, psychological capacities in educational and professional settings, and subjective well-being (Tay et al., 2017). In order to operationally define subjective well-being, we decided to define it as Hedonic well-being and measure things like positive emotions, fewer negative emotions, and higher life evaluations (Tay et al., 2017). It is in this context that subjects will rate on a Likert scale of 1 to 5 (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree) how much they agree with statements that intend to measure their Hedonic well-being. The data will then be taken to examine whether there is a relationship between activities of involvement in arts and humanities and subjective well-being. An advantage of using a correlational design is that it allows us to determine whether there is a relationship between the variables of interest. It is in this context that the results of this study will allow us to determine whether there is a correlation between activities of involvement in arts and humanities and subjective well-being. However, a disadvantage is that the study does not establish a causal relationship between the two variables because correlational studies indicate relationship patterns, not causes. That is, given that the results of the study suggest that involvement in the arts and humanities and subjective well-being are correlated, we cannot conclude from this study whether the former causes the latter or vice versa. The nature of the study as a correlational design also overlooks the possibility that a third variable might cause the two variables of interest. Furthermore, the self-report method (which is a descriptive design) employed within this correlational study may fail to accurately measure participants' subjective well-being because subjects might not have a good insight into their subjective well-being and/or fail to accurately report it.

Please explain (compare/contrast) descriptive research designs. Give an example study of one of them. OR What are the types of descriptive research designs? Give an example study of one type.

Descriptive methods describe phenomenas and do not explain them. They do not show cause and effect. The three different types are observational, self-report, or case studies. Observational studies include observing and recording a subject in their natural setting without manipulating any variables. The self-report studies involve a technique for investigating the attitudes, opinions, or behaviors of people. There are two main types of self-report studies: experience sampling method (ESM) or day reconstruction method (DRM). Using these subjects recreate their day/moments in time throughout the day. A study by Jeremy P. Hunter and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi found by using ESM that adolescents who were bored compared to a group with interest throughout their day impacted their psychological well being. This also relates to Pawelski's lecture when he spoke about how loneliness can be more damaging to your health than obesity. Unfortunately, some self-report measures can sometimes be subject to individual basis such as wanting to appear happier than they are, and lying about it. The last type of descriptive study is the case study. Case studies involve having an individual studied in depth in hopes of revealing universal principles. Sometimes these results are not generalizable however since they are based off of one individual.

What are some advantages and disadvantages of the three types of research designs touched upon in class (descriptive, correlational, experimental)?

Descriptive research methods are used to describe (not explain) various aspects of the phenomenon of interest. There are three types of descriptive research designs: observational studies, self-report studies, and case studies. Rather than establishing cause and effect relationships, these types of methodologies characterize, identify, and describe (Dulock, 1993). One advantage is that these methods allow for the collection of qualitative data, particularly under an unchanged, natural environment. They also are valuable in the early stages of exploratory research, as only one variable is necessary to begin investigation. However, the main disadvantage is that descriptive studies do not establish cause and effect relationships. In other words, the results of the study cannot explain — they can only describe. Additionally, they may be difficult to reproduce given the naturalistic settings. Correlational research methods are used to establish a relationship between two variables. It seeks to figure out if two or more variables are related and, if so, in what way. The key point with this type of design is that the variables under question are not manipulated by the experimenter. This is perhaps the greatest advantage — the fact that this type of methodology can be used when the variables in question cannot be manipulated (Jhangiani et al., 2015). The main disadvantage of this type of research, however, is that no causal relationship can be established. There is no clear cause and effect nor directionality conclusion that can be drawn since there is no manipulation of any variables. Experimental research methods are used to examine how variables are causally related when manipulated by researchers. There is always a clear independent and dependent variable in question, and the careful decision-making involved in creating the design means that the directionality problem can be avoided. There is a high level of control, and as such, experimental research methods tend to be easily replicable and have high internal validity (Ross et al., 2008). Some of the disadvantages, however, include the fact that it creates an artificial setting (thus hurting external validity).

After performing his study on subjective well-being (SWB), Michael is eager to share his findings with his professor. For his study, Michael had all of his friends perform two standard SWB surveys: One during the first week of the semester and another during finals week. Michael then compared the two to test for any effects on SWB by the increased stress. Upon seeing the data, Michael's professor informed him that it was going to be tough to generalize his findings. Why is this? How can Michael go about solving this problem?

Due to this studies lack of random sampling, it lacks external validity. Therefore, he is unable to generalize his findings to the rest of the population (college students). By only performing the study on a group of his friends, the survey becomes somewhat bias. This bias would then be strengthened by the inherit weakness in using self-report for SWB, meaning that his friends would likely answer the questions in a way they believed Michael would want. In order to strengthen his data, Michael should perform his study on a large, randomly selected group of college students.

Experience sampling method (ESM) is a self-report method in which participants complete surveys at the time of occasional signaling beeps. What specific obstacle led to the creation of ESM and why does ESM continue to have limitations? Please answer the latter part of the question in the context of the nurse example discussed in lecture.

ESM was created to resolve the issue of time lags as research indicated that more recent experiences resulted in more episodic memory retrieval, while more distant experiences resulted in more semantic knowledge retrieval. Researchers deemed that accurate self-reports would be possible if the reports were conducted with immediacy.Unfortunately, the biggest limitation for ESM is that it is time and resource intensive for both the researcher and participant. For instance, in the nurse example, nurses are quite busy during their work shifts. The random beeps that indicate survey completion requires the nurse to stop work and complete the survey, which is time and labor intensive as it disrupts the work-flow. Additionally, the researcher must invest time and resource into providing the beeps and surveys.

In what ways do the humanities impact individuals' well-being?

Engagement with the humanities has been shown to significantly improve well-being. Art, music, reading, and performance are fundamental to our well-being as humans. Engagement with these mediums helps with mood moderation, connection to others, etc. (Pawelski, 2018). Specifically, engagement with arts/culture improves well-being through several different mechanisms, including Immersion, Embeddedness, Socialization, and Reflectiveness (Pawelski et al., 2018, p. 217). Immersion can be defined as when a person's attention is fully captured by the activity with which they are engaged so much so that they feel "carried away." Immersive experiences tend to provide states of flow, which can also lead to greater in-the-moment sensory experiences. Embeddedness can be defined as the socio-cognitive psychological processes which allow for the development of perspectives, habits, or skills such as self-efficacy, self-regulation, emotion regulation, hope, and feelings of autonomy, and competence Socialization can be defined as the ability to understand your place within society and to take on and distinguish between various social roles and identities. Lastly, reflectiveness can be defined as when an individual intentionally develops, reinforces, or discards their own habits, characteristics, values, or world perspective (Pawelski et al., 2018, p. 217). In addition to the mechanisms through which arts/culture improves well-being, we see that humanities promote both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Hedonic well-being refers to the experience of positive emotion with limited negative emotions; it is characterized by pleasure, enjoyment, and satisfaction and the absence of distress. In contrast, eudaimonic well-being is somewhat more complex. It refers to overall life satisfaction and purpose in life, related to feelings of autonomy, personal growth, positive relations, and self-acceptance (Pawelski et al., 2018, p. 220). Arts and culture promote both hedonic and eudaimonic well-being as they tend to increase positive emotions as well as promote autonomy, personal growth, and purpose, among many other benefits. For example, playing a musical instrument could promote both autonomy and personal growth for the musician as they learn how to create music, while also allowing him/her to experience the positive emotions from producing and hearing beautiful melodies.

Compare the four proposed mechanisms for how the arts and humanities augment human flourishing from Professor Pawelski's lecture (and paper). Do you think they are mutually exclusive or could some of them be combined into one more general mechanism?

Example of a reasonable answer: The four mechanisms are quite distinct, but in my opinion can fit into two important categories. Immersion and reflectiveness are focused on the individual while embeddedness and socialization are defined by their social components. Immersion is focused on the moment to moment experience. In contrast, reflectiveness acts primarily as a guide for the individual's personal development as they move into the future. Embeddedness is concerned with how others see the individual as they engage with the activity. Socialization is focused on how participation in the activity affects how the individual interacts with different communities. I would argue they cannot be combined because each mechanism has a distinct lens to examine participation in the arts and humanities. Useful information: Immersion- The flow like state you (may) enter while engaged in an activity in the arts or humanities. Once someone is fully engaged and taken away by the activity they are participating in, they can reach a hedonic state. Embeddedness- Socio-cognitive processes such as mastering a skill and vicarious experiences. Greater enjoyment and competence of that activity through your mastery of it. Socialization- Identification with activities that are important to you and opportunities to socialize with others who have similar interests. Enhances cross cultural socialization. Reflectiveness- Personal development, guide for seeing what parts of yourself you want to keep or discard. Level of reflectiveness may be related to the level of engagement Explanation of rational: The idea of this question is to allow students to show their understanding of the mechanisms by comparing them and making an argument about their position. The position is not as important as their ability to show they have mastery over the mechanisms. In my opinion, this is a better way of making students demonstrate their understanding than asking directly because it forces students to think critically and engage with the material on a deeper level than memorization. It is harder to grade, so there is a tradeoff.

Explain the issue of external validity versus internal validity when working with college age students.

External validity describes the question of the generalizability of the study results. Internal validity describes the ability of your research methods to accurately measure what it claims to measure. When working with college age students, one must be cautious due to the fact that college students are not always representative of the total population and therefore the results from a study using this sample may not be generalizable. College students tend to be younger, easier to access, and high in cognitive skill compared to the general population. In terms of internal validity, a study showed that traditional happiness interventions were not reflective of the ways in which people seek happiness in real-life. Important to avoid both of these issues when working with college students.

An individual named Jason finds that his highest happiness emotion is associated with his ability to seek pleasure while simultaneously eliminating the sense of negative emotion. What is this emotional phenomona also know as?

Hedonia : This emotion mindset is classified as the prominence of a positive effect and the absence of a negative effect. For Jason, his highest happiness stems from his positive pleasure (positive effect) while also eliminating his negative emotion (pain).

What is the difference between Hedonia and Eudaemonia? Why is it important to distinguish the two when determining subjective well-being?

Hedonia and Eudaemonia are both measures of happiness/prosperity that can be used to indicate an individual's level of well-being. However, they differ in the feelings that are associated with each term. Hedonia involves feelings of pleasure, contentment, and enjoyment. Eudaemonia involves feelings of meaning/purpose, accomplishment, and identity. It is important two distinguish between the two, as it is necessary to find a good balance between Hedonia and Eudaemonia when pursuing a flourishing life. For example, an individual with high levels of hedonia but low levels of eudaemonia may experience feelings of happiness and relaxation, but may be "settling" in the sense that he/she is deriving little meaning or purpose in life. On the contrary, an individual with high levels of eudaemonia and low levels of hedonia may lead a very purposeful, driven life full of achievement, but he/she may lack feelings of enjoyment and "simple" happiness, which may ultimately result in a sour but achievement-focused life. It is important two distinguish the two terms to allow individuals to determine which type of well-being they seek to increase or improve upon, and to help achieve a good balance of the two in order to lead a fulfilled and happy, self-actualizing life.

Compare and contrast the hedonic and eudaimonic approaches to well-being. Why is it important to understand the difference and incorporate not just one, but both pathways in our lives?

Hedonia and eudaimonia are the two major views of happiness. Hedonia is primarily concerned with maximizing happiness and minimizing pain, while eudaimonia refers to growing, thriving, and becoming a better person. According to Josh Clark, the hedonic view of happiness views it as a "destination," while the eudaimonic view of happiness views it as a "journey" (Clark, 2019, para. 6). In other words, hedonia views happiness in the moment, while eudaimonia looks at happiness more in the long-term. Therefore, hedonia can be associated with things such as desire, pleasure, and physical and emotional needs, while eudaimonia is usually associated with cultivating oneself and living a meaningful life (Rose, 2016). It is important to realize that everyone has their own definitions of happiness, and some might emphasize the hedonic perspective more than the eudaimonic or vice versa. Nevertheless, it is important to practice both perspectives in order to live a life of fulfillment and happiness since each one affects us in different ways. The "destination" is just as important as the "journey" that it took to get there. Those who only practice hedonia will not receive long-term fulfillment since they are just acting upon desires and pleasures in a specific moment. In other words, their happiness and fulfillment will be temporary. Similarly, those who just practice eudaimonia will not receive fulfillment until later in life because they are preoccupied with learning how to grow and better him/herself (and this growth will not happen until later in life). Thus, regularly practicing both hedonia and eudaimonia (as opposed to practicing just one) will not result in temporary or delayed happiness, but it will result in ongoing and immediate happiness, as well as have a positive impact on one's sense of well-being.

How positive is Hedonia? Evaluate Hedonia through the "normative definition of the positive" as discussed by Professor Pawelski.

Hedonia describes the feeling of pleasure, satisfaction, or happiness and the absence of sadness. It is characterized by high positive affect and low negative affect. Pawelski discusses that there are one inclusion criterion and five continuum criteria (relative preference and sustainability across time, persons, effects, and structures) in evaluating positivity. Hedonia certainly passes the inclusion criteria as the presence of positive emotions is certainly preferred to its absence. However, it may not be the most positive aspect of happiness as it is likely not to be sustainable across time (people are often happy and sad at different times) and, depending on the context, may not be sustainable across persons, effects, and structures. Thus, while Hedonia is positive because of the inclusion criteria, there are things that can be considered more positive than Hedonia in the continuum of positivity.

How can the concepts of hedonia and eudaimonia be applied to improving well-being, with specific emphasis on how they differ? Please provide an example of how these concepts can be found in the real world as discussed in lecture.

Hedonia focuses on the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, while eudaimonia is measured with more complex feelings of personal autonomy and other intrinsic goals (Huta & Waterman, 2014, p. 1441). With that in mind, both hedonia and eudaimonia can be utilized in improving well-being. Specifically, hedonic well-being (HWB) emphasizes positive affect (subjective well-being) whereas eudaimonic well-being (EWB) is more reflective of self-actualization and personal growth (psychological well-being) (Tay, Pawelski, & Keith, 2018, p. 220). In applying these concepts in the real world, we can use the arts and humanities as a tool to increase hedonism and eudaimonism to the self. While mechanisms like immersion, embeddedness, socialization, and reflectiveness are all recognized as ways arts and humanities enhance human flourishing, the ways in which the arts and humanities can improve well-being are different between hedonia and eudaimonia. HWB is increased through temporary physiological and psychological reactions, which directly enhance human flourishing (i.e. feeling joy from watching a concert). On the contrary, EWB may be increased through long-term efforts that provide development in emotional breadth, which indirectly enhance human flourishing (i.e. finding purpose in life by building meaningful relationships) (Tay, Pawelski, & Keith, 2018, p. 217)

What are the benefits of the Kahneman et al.'s Day Reconstruction Method compared to the experience sampling method?

If completed relatively close to the actual day in question, the Day Reconstruction Method "will capture relatively accurate episodic memories of the recent events" (Lucas, 2). Therefore, it will accomplish the same goals as the experience sampling, while only requiring respondents to participate once a day at their own convenience. In this way, the Day Reconstruction Method is less cumbersome than experience sampling, while maintaining a similar level of validity (as empirical evidence has shown).

In considering a situational perspective of the role of arts and humanities in human flourishing, would we consider the four mechanisms of flourishing (embeddedness, socialization, reflectiveness, and immersion) to be mediating or moderating factors? Why?

In considering a situational perspective of the role of arts and humanities in human flourishing, we would consider the four mechanisms of flourishing to be mediating factors. We would do so because this model seeks to describe HOW the arts and humanities create human experiences that, in turn, lead to flourishing.

What are some potential research issues in determining how subjective wellbeing is impacted by the arts?

In his guest lecture, James Pawelski argued that engagement with the arts, such as theater or music, increases subjective wellbeing, which includes happiness and flourishing. However, there are several potential research issues that could emerge when studying this relationship. For example, sampling, which involves selecting a random group of individuals that is reflective of the population, will be difficult, as not all individuals have equal access or engagement with the arts. In particular, people who volunteer for studies such as these may be wealthier and more educated than the typical individual. Another potential issue concerns the direction of causality, in that it may be hard to determine whether engagement in the arts improves subjective wellbeing, or those with higher wellbeing choose to engage more with the arts. To address this issue, we could attempt to design an experiment in which individuals are exposed to the arts in a laboratory setting. However, it would be hard to design an experiment with external validity, or the degree to which the results of a study can be generalized to real-world phenomena, since this exposure may not accurately reflect how people engage with the arts in a natural setting. Sampling bias, causality, and validity are among several concerns that must be addressed when studying the relationship between wellbeing and the arts.

Describe a descriptive research design you might use to investigate coping strategies people use in the workplace to stay happy and avoid burnout. Explain why you chose this method.

In order to investigate strategies to avoid burnout that people use in their everyday jobs, I would use a self-report design. A self-report design allows the researcher to understand how people explain their own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. This design also lends itself most easily to investigating this question, as an experimental design would be too artificial to understand what people do to cope in their everyday lives. Additionally, while people sometimes have low insight into their thoughts and feelings, self-report measures are really the only way to tell what coping strategies people are using, as they are most likely very difficult to observe from the outside. The best way to administer this self-report would be to use Experience Sampling Method. This method would allow the subject to report on their behaviors throughout the day, which would allow the researcher to understand more nuanced ways in which people avoid burnout during the workday. This self-report questionnaire would ask the subjects about how they feel at that moment, as well as what they had done since the last questionnaire that had been relaxing or enjoyable. With these measurements, the researchers can see what types of activities people are engaging in, as well as how the frequency of these activities relates to workplace happiness.

In Harker and Keltner's 2001 study of Duchenne yearbook smiles the researchers found a correlation between the "Duchenne-ness" of the smile to the participant's marriage satisfaction. What kind of research design did the researcher's employ and could this study be considered a correlational study?

In this study, the researchers employed an observational study techniques which restricted the researchers to only observing behaviors in naturally occurring situations without manipulating any variables. Specifically, the researchers looked at yearbook photos of women and determined which smiles were considered to be more authentic and real (more Duchenne) versus fake (less Duchenne). This study was also a longitudinal study which tracked the participants over a period of time. The results showed that even after 20 years since the yearbook photos were taken, the smiles were correlated with the participants well-being and marital satisfaction. The more authentic the smile, the more satisfaction in their marriage. This study could also be considered a correlational study because this study established a relationship between the two variables that were not manipulated, the yearbook smiles and marriage satisfaction. However, this study cannot imply that there is a cause and effect relationship between the two variables because it is unclear if there were extraneous variables that could have affected the rating of marriage satisfaction.

Someone is flyering on Locust Walk to get people to participate in his study on people's outlook on the future. Would the people he interviews be representative of a random sample? If not, explain how the interviewer could get a random sample.

No, the people he is using in his experiment don't represent a random sample. A random sample has to be ''randomized'' by definition. Flyering on Locust Walk will not give him a ''random'' sample, but rather a skewed portion of the overall population. This group consists of mainly highly educated, well-off, college students, that have a general positive outlook on the future. Therefore, the sample that the researcher is using will give an unrepresentative result of the general population, meaning that the external validity is extremely poor. To improve the external validity of the research, the researcher has to incorporate a larger sample, including subjects with a more diversified background. This will improve the external validity because the results of the research will be more representative of the general population, and as a result be more significant.

Please define and explain some of the pros and cons of two (2) of the following three (3) types of studies: Observational Studies, Self-report, and Experiments

Observational Studies - Observing and recording behavior in naturally occurring situations, without trying to manipulate or control them Pros - Data can be very detailed and subjects may not even know they are being observed in certain cases (which makes results more reliable) Cons - Doesn't explain behavior, it just describes it (so researchers may be unable to understand the mechanisms explaining behavior with observational studies); data may include a degree of researcher biasCitation: Connolly, C. (2020). Methods I: Doing Positive Psychology [PowerPoint slides], Slide 5. Self-Report - A technique for investigating the attitudes, opinions, or behaviors of peoplePros - A quick way to gather a large sample size; surveys/questionnaires/other forms of self-reports can be easily replicated by other researchersCons - Results may not be totally accurate as subjects have certain biases; certain questions and answers may be misunderstoodCitation: Connolly, C. (2020). Methods I: Doing Positive Psychology [PowerPoint slides], Slide 8. Experiments - examine how variables are related when manipulated by researchersPros - Can demonstrate causal relationships; avoids the directionality problemCons - Often take place in an artificial setting; generally a more time-consuming process

What are the different types of descriptive designs? Please provide a description and ex- ample for each type of study. What is a disadvantage of descriptive designs?

Observational Studies: This type of study involves observing and recording behavior in naturally occurring situations without trying to manipulate or control the observed situation. Ex: The Smile Experiment: researchers looked at photos in a yearbook and studied the smiles of each student in an effort to determine the authenticity of each smile. Self-Report: This type of study involves investigating the attitudes, opinions, or behaviors of people. Ex: The Flourishing Scale: measures the subject's self-perceived success in various aspects of life such as relationships, self-esteem, and optimism. Case-Study: This study involves studying an individual or individuals in depth in hopes of revealing universal principles. Ex: Phineas Gage Case Study: This case study studied one of the most famous patients in neuroscience, Phineas Gage. The subject suffered a traumatic brain injury that severely dam- aged his frontal lobe. This study was extremely valuable in providing a correlation between lo- calization of brain function and behavior. A disadvantage of using descriptive design methods is that these techniques do not establish cause and effect. This design explains the research, but does not prove causality.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of examining psychological phenomena using observational studies versus self-report measures?

Observational studies and self-report measures are useful tools in documenting and analyzing human behavior in a natural context, rather than the manipulated confines of an experiment. Unlike the modified behavior often provided by the artificial demands of an experiment in which participants are asked to respond to tailored questions or complete a task, observational studies do not pressure individuals to 'perform' adequately or provide a socially appropriate answer. Longitudinal observational studies, such as the 'smile study' by Harker and Keltner, provide a natural situation in which human behavior can be studied over time in the hope of observing a correlational relationship between variables. However, one disadvantage found in observational studies that is remedied by self-report measures is the influence of the researcher, who confers their own subjective opinion upon the subject. A researcher's observations could provide varying levels of accuracy in identifying emotional and psychological states of its subjects. Self-report measures, on the other hand, are useful in obtaining the subject's own inner feelings, thoughts and emotions throughout time, during particular situations or concerning a certain topic of interest. Subjective well-being has been used in positive psychology in order to drill deeper into an individual's self-reflection on their emotional and psychological well-being. However, researchers have worried that participant's own memory may be faulty or convoluted, in that they associate certain events as bringing them greater happiness or sadness in retrospect. Unlike observational studies, participants may also be influenced by social desirability bias in their answers. Both observational studies and self-report measures have significant disadvantages in their inability to demonstrate a concrete correlational and particularly, a causation relationship between the considered variables. Using the 'smile study' again as an example, researchers cannot definitively isolate the direct relationship between individuals found to portray 'genuine' smiles in their yearbook photos and subsequent favorable life outcomes. Observational studies and self-report measures, while useful as a starting point in psychological analysis, cannot provide conclusive proof of linkage between variables and certainly cannot postulate a causation relationship.

What are PPI's and what is their role in positive psychology?

PPI's, or positive psychological interventions, are activities that empirically proven to elicit a positive change in a population by targeting positive variables such as expressing gratitude, being optimistic, engaging in empathy and acts of kindness, and savoring moments and experiences. PPI's have been shown to have long-lasting effects including increasing life satisfaction, subjective well-being, and prosocial behaviors as well as decreasing depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation.

According to Study 1 in Parks et al. (2012), what are the two main groups of happiness seekers, and what do these findings imply for future positive psychological interventions? What are the limitations of this study design?

Parks et al. (2012) found that happiness seekers can be generally categorized into two distinct groups: those who are "non-distressed" and those who are "distressed" (p. 1225). However, it is important to note that the non-distressed group is not perfectly happy and that the "distressed" group had above-average depressive symptoms, but did not necessarily receive a clinical diagnosis of depression. Since a significant proportion of happiness seekers demonstrated average levels of life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and affect balance, whereas another significant portion of happiness seekers showed depressive symptoms (Parks et al., 2012, p. 1224), this suggests that positive psychological interventions are not uniformly beneficial. The interventions may differentially affect happiness seekers depending upon people's baseline well-being. For example, certain positive intervention activities may be especially beneficial for people with depression compared to those without depression, whereas other activities may be too taxing or even harmful for people with depression (Parks et al., 2012, p. 1231). This calls for more nuanced research on how various positive psychological interventions affect different types of happiness seekers, as well as the development of differential interventions for happiness seekers based on their characteristics. One potential limitation of this study is that the researchers did not recruit a representative sample of all happiness seekers. Rather, most participants were white, well-educated, and female (Parks et al., 2012, p. 1225). This limitation greatly reduces the external validity (i.e., the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized beyond the context of the research; C. Connolly, lecture, January 23, 2020) of this study, as the results may not generalize to all happiness seekers, specifically those who do not fall into the aforementioned demographic groups (Parks et al., 2012, p. 1225). Additionally, the authors mention that their study is limited by the psychological and demographic variables that were assessed. For example, the researchers did not measure individual differences (e.g., by administering the Big 5 Personality Traits test) or other factors such as physical health (Parks et al., 2012, p. 1225). Thus, future work should assess these additional variables in order to gain a more complete understanding of the characteristics of happiness seekers.

According to Professor Pawelski, something can be described as "positive" either when it embodies the presence of something that is preferred or the absence of something that is dispreferred. Part 1: Provide one example that represents "positivity as the presence of the preferred" and one example that represents "positivity as the absence of the dispreferred." Part 2: For each (A) positivity as the presence of the preferred and (B) positivity as the absence of the dispreferred, provide the two-subfactors Pawelski cites as important contributors to the flourishing of that type of positivity.

Part 1: A positive pregnancy test result for a couple wanting a child. A negative test for cancer. (aka the absence of a result indicating you have cancer) *(or any example that clearly demonstrates the addition of a positive thing first and the absence of a negative thing second) Part 2: (A) Promotion (defined as increasing the preferred) Preservation (defined as maintaining the preferred) (B) Mitigation (defined as decreasing the dispreferred) Prevention (defined as avoiding the dispreferred)

Why does positive psychology rely on sustainable preferences (the idea that these methods can apply to everyone at anytime to flourish in all parts of life) and how does this relate to broccoli?

Positive Psychology is mainly being used outside of the clinical space, meaning that it has to be accessible to anyone at any age. These sustainable preferences extend to across time, persons, effect and even structures. In the paper by Tay et al, they describe that the humanities can effect all people through four facets: immersion, embeddedness, socialization and reflectiveness. Another point was that everyone was different, leading to the metaphor of broccoli fractals breaking off to be individually based for different aspects of life, but together create a whole, happy life.

So far in this class, we have discussed and filled out several questionnaires related to aspects of positive psychology. One of these was the Personally Expressive Activities Questionnaire, related to work and leisure. We also completed three questionnaires related to subjective happiness, well-being, and flourishing. Explain the difference between hedonia and eudaimonia as it relates to human flourishing, defining important terms related to the field of positive psychology (i.e. well-being, flourishing, etc.). Secondly, compare and contrast these questionnaires briefly.

Positive psychology is a field that focuses specifically on how positive variables and domains, such as gratitude, finding purpose, being optimistic and empathic, and more, affect the functioning of individuals and communities (Stone, 2018). There are several types of questionnaires that can be used to assess someone's baseline level of happiness or well-being. For instance, the Personally Expressive Activities Questionnaire analyzes predicted satisfaction in work and leisure activities in terms of two categories: hedonia, relating to pleasure, and eudaimonia, relating to subjective well-being and human flourishing. Well-being can be described broadly as comprising of both psychological and physical flourishing, including both medium and long term hedonic and eudaimonic well-being (Tay et al, 2018, p. 220). Overall, positive psychologists like Martin Seligman explain the aspects of well-being in the acronym, PERMA, which stands for positive emotion, engagement, relationships, meaning, and accomplishment (Seligman, 2018, p. 10). Flourishing can also be understood in terms of high well-being and low mental illness. The Subjective Happiness Questionnaire, the Flourishing Scale, and the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire all attempt to analyze subjective well-being and human flourishing. The Personally Expressive Activities Questionnaire focuses specifically on hedonia and eudaimonia as a means of evaluating predicted satisfaction in 3 to 5 years, while the other three questionnaires do not reference these terms explicitly and are focused on present day baseline conditions. All of these questionnaires are relevant to understanding one's self-assessment of perceived happiness and satisfaction/meaning in their lives, which is a key part of positive psychology.

According to the lexical definitions of the "positive," positive results of a mammogram for a woman are an example of _____________.

Presence of the dispreferred.

If someone receives happiness through participation in the arts and humanities, is this a hedonistic or eudemonistic pursuit?

Several empirical research studies have shown that engagement with the arts and humanities has a positive effect on human flourishing (Tay, Pawelski, & Keith, 2018). Engagement with the arts and humanities can be conceptualized as either a hedonic or eudaimonic approach to happiness depending on the form of engagement. Hedonism is a perspective on happiness that emphasizes its immediate satisfaction and pleasure, usually derived from external forces, whereas eudaimonism is centered on fulfilling one's long-term, meaningful goals and purpose (Delle Fave, Massimini, & Bassi, 2011). Accordingly, using the arts and humanities for the immediate beneficial effects they provide would be considered a hedonic pursuit while engaging with the arts and humanities in a manner that is long-term, productive, and related to personal goals would be considered eudaimonic. For example, listening to music has been associated with the activation of positive psychological states, contributing to one's hedonic well-being (Tay et al., 2011). On another hand, creating or teaching music in an effort to fulfill one's life purpose and meaningfully contribute to society is an example of how the arts and humanities can also facilitate eudaimonic well-being by making an individual feel purposeful and self-actualized. As demonstrated, participation in the arts and humanities can contribute to both hedonic and eudaimonic happiness.

What is subjective well being? What type of study designs are used to test it and what limitations do they bring?

Subjective well being is an individual's own evaluation of their quality of life (Lucas, 2018). The method used to test this is a self-report study which falls under descriptive design. Descriptive design is an approach of research that describes relationships observed naturally, and what is occurring at a given time (Connolly, 2020). The various studies, such as self-report, that constitute descriptive design do not assess or explain cause and effect relationships amongst variables. It avoids influence on the variable and provides a deeper understanding of phenomena such as subjective well-being (Walinga & Stangor, 2014). Self-report studies such as those used to measure SWB are really good for investigating one's own attitudes and opinions, as well as identifying behaviors (Connolly, 2020). There are concerns relating to accuracy, insight, and honesty. People tested may struggle with memory bias, which would cause them to evaluate their quality of life with only salient experiences instead of global ones, or focusing illusions, which would make them only focus on key parts of events when evaluating their quality of life. They may also fit their responses to what they believe the experimenter wants to hear, also known as the social desirability bias (Scollon, 2018).

How would you define subjective well-being and according to Louis Tay, James O. Pawelski, & Melissa G. Keith is it a better measure of hedonia or eudaimonia?

Subjective well-being is a broad term that describes how a person evaluates the quality of their life. The measure of SWB varies depending on the perspective of each person, as individuals view objective life outcomes differently depending on things such as previous life experiences, personality, etc. Additionally, "quality of life" depends not just on one specific moment or time period, but an evaluation of the entire frame of life that a person has experienced. Since well-being cannot reliably be defined by objective measures, self-report surveys are often utilized to quantify SWB. According to Louis Tay, James O. Pawelski, & Melissa G. Keith, subjective well-being assessments help define hedonic well-being, as they suggest that entities such as the arts and humanities promote positive emotions, less negative emotions, and higher subjective evaluations of life. In contrast, eudaimonic well-being would be best defined using psychological well-being assessments, since they expect the arts and humanities to increase autonomy, mastery, personal growth, purpose, and self acceptance among others.

What is subjective well-being and how do you measure it?

Subjective well-being is a person's evaluation of their life that breaks down into the cognitive and affective components. The cognitive component can be life satisfaction, and the affective component can be positive and negative affects. Subjective well-being can be measured using the ESM (Experience Sampling Method) and DRM (Day Reconstruction Method). ESM let participants record their moods and feelings at certain intervals over a period of time such as a week or month, like a daily dairy. DRM let participants record how they are feeling when they are doing certain activities and experiences in their daily lives.

Subjective well-being has both cognitive and affective components. Describe the difference between these. Does subjective well-being relate more to hedonia or eudaimonia? Why?

Subjective well-being is a self-reported measure of well-being typically obtained by a questionnaire. The cognitive component of SWB is about your thoughts relating to your own life satisfaction and asks questions such as "How satisfied are you with your life?" and "Do you feel like your life is going well?" The affective component of SWB is more about your emotions, moods, and feelings, and asks questions such as "Do you feel happy everyday" and "Do you feel happy more often than not?". SWB relates more to hedonia because it is about life satisfaction, maximizing happiness, and minimizing misery, whereas eudaimonia is more about the journey and pursuit in becoming a better person.

Based off of our in-class discussion regarding research methodology, identify the three main research designs and discuss the benefits as well as potential limitations of each one. Be sure to include an example for each type of design, drawing upon all of our in-class discussions.

The 3 types of research designs are descriptive, correlational, and experimental. Descriptive studies describe but do not explain the phenomenon. Further, no cause and effect relationship can be established. One benefit of this design is researchers can observe occurrences without manipulating any variables. As a result, this method is extremely cost-effective. Conversely, because researchers do not manipulate variables, no cause and effect relationship can be established. An example of a descriptive design is an observational study where researchers observe how many people say "thank you" to their Starbucks barista. This could be used to explore and describe which demographics tend to exhibit the greatest politeness. Next, with correlational studies, researchers can establish relationships between 2 factors. Correlational studies are beneficial because they allow researchers to study variables that might be unethical to manipulate in a lab. However, because of this, researchers once again cannot establish a cause and effect relationship. For example, as highlighted in class, researchers can explore whether and how positive affect is related to job outcomes and social relationships. Finally, the last research design is experimental. Experimental designs exclusively pertain to studies where there is a control group and an experimental group and there is an independent (manipulated) and dependent (outcome) variable. Further, researchers must use random assignment and random sampling to accurately conduct a valid and reliable study. A benefit of this is that finally, researchers can establish a cause-effect relationship because they are controlling every aspect of the environment. A downside is that this type of study can be very expensive, and it can be difficult to gather a representative sample. Moreover, there are certain variables that would be unethical to manipulate (such as happiness), so they cannot be studied in an experimental setting.

Compare and contrast the Experience Sampling Method (ESM) and the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM). In what situations would using either method be most applicable?

The Experience Sampling Method (ESM) is a self-report measure under a descriptive study design to measure subjective well-being (SWB). Participants under the ESM are signaled multiple times a day and prompted to complete surveys regarding what activity they are currently engaging with and their associated feelings. In the past, this has been done through beeper technology. Now, ESM can be executed through mobile phones. A benefit of ESM is that it provides descriptive data in real-time, which may appear to be more accurate. However, this method of study can also be time consuming and disruptive. The Day Reconstruction Method (DRM) is a descriptive research method to obtaining self-reported measures of personal attitudes, beliefs, or feelings. In this context we discuss utilizing the DRM as a method to measure subjective well being (SWB). DRM requires study participants to dissect their day at the end of the day according to what activities they completed that day. They then describe these activities and report how they felt during each one. Both methods are descriptive types of research design. When used in isolation (i.e not in conjunction with an experimental research design), they are both unable to establish a cause and effect relationship. This descriptive data is still useful to aid researchers in gaining a better understanding of people's realities, and can be used to identify a correlational relationship with another variable. Furthermore, both methods involve reporting daily activities, associated feelings and affective experiences. In contrast to ESM, DRM relies on a person recounting their memories of the day at the end of it, rather than in the very moment. This therefore provides an, albeit small, window in which a person's memory of their feelings may change and may lead to less accurate self-reporting. However, the significance of the variation of self-reported data between ESM and DRM has been found to be near negligible. When deciding between using either the ESM or DRM, it is important to acknowledge if participants have time constraints, as the ESM involves responding to surveys multiple times throughout the day, while the DRM can be completed at the end of the day. For example, a taxi driver who cannot access the method of self-reporting (likely his phone) at any given time throughout the day would benefit more from DRM. Alternatively, a mother on maternity leave being measured for signs of postpartum depression via a method of self-reporting, would be a prime candidate for ESM because her schedule most likely doesn't prevent her from participating in the study.

How do hedonia and eudaimonia relate to the role of the arts and humanities in enhancing human flourishing?

The arts and humanities enhance human flourishing in a number of ways, particularly through immersion, expression, acquisition, socialisation, and reflectiveness (Tay, Pawelski, & Keith, 2018, p.224). In these ways, the arts and humanities play both hedonistic and eudaimonistic roles. Hedonia is the experience and feeling of happiness while eudaimonia focuses on living life in a purposeful and fulfilling way (Deci & Ryan, 2008, p.2). From being temporarily captivated by the joy of music (hedonia) to building meaningful relationships with others and your self identity through literature (eudaimonia), the arts and humanities can tap into both experiences of human flourishing.

How do the two sides of the cape discussed in Dr. Pawelski's lecture map onto the study of traditional psychology and positive psychology, respectively?

The red cape superhero fights bad things, which maps onto traditional psychology. Traditional psychology has been centered around studying clinical populations with depression, anxiety, or other psychological disorders. On the flip side, the green superhero grows good things, which maps onto the realm of positive psychology. Positive psychology studies a non-clinical population of particularly flourishing individuals in order to learn what attributes enable their success in "the good life," i.e., social responsibility, courage and optimism.

How are Clinical Psychology and Positive Psychology similar and different?

The fields complement each other as both fields work to improve individuals' well-being. Clinical psychology targets a clinical population of individuals, I.e. those who are diagnosed with depression or another psychological disorder. Conversely, the aim of positive psychology is to identify the key characteristics of individuals who are flourishing and adapting those techniques to promote well-being among a non-clinical population.

What are the hypothesized mechanisms that could explain the role the arts have in human flourishing and how might they work?

The hypothesized mechanisms that may explain how engagement with the arts and humanities improve well-being are immersion, embeddedness, socialization, and reflection (Tay, Pawelski, & Keith, 2018, p. 217). These four mechanisms are thought to operate as mediators as they represent psychological experiences brought on my engagement in the arts and humanities that lead to better flourishing (p. 218). Immersion works by allowing one to be completely absorbed by the experience of engaging in the arts, improving one's mood as they are able to focus on the 'present' and decrease their worry and stress of the day while embeddedness is activated by engagement with the arts and leads to the development of certain skills or perspectives that can result in lasting positive outcomes (p. 217-218). Engagement in the arts leads to socialization in which a person gains social relations and is exposed to a variety of different roles also helping them to understand their own roles which is associated with a variety of positive outcomes including resilience while engagement in the arts can also lead to reflectiveness which allows one to intentionally develop, reinforce, or transform one's habits, values, or perspectives (p.218).

How would Pawelski define positivity and what criteria must something fulfill to be positive?

The normative definition of positivity has two main criteria. Firstly, the inclusion criterion requires for simple preference -- for something to be positive, someone needs to prefer it to its absence. Then, there's the continuum criteria, that states that for something to be positive, it needs to remain positive regardless of its frame of reference (relative preference), and it needs to remain positive across time, persons, effects (impacts), and structures (organizations, places, etc.). In other words, it needs to have "fractal flourishing", which means that no matter at which level you analyze it, it will always be positive.

In the study done by Parks et al., the researchers attempted to construct an image of the characteristics and day-to-day behaviors of happiness seekers. How did they incorporate smartphones into their experiment, and how does this relate to our discussion of experimental methods?

The researchers used smartphones in the third part of their study, where they tracked a smartphone app called Live Happy, which invited participants to try a number of mood and happiness boosting exercises at their own pace. They found that use of the app was correlated with increases in well-being. The use of an app to track the behavior of participants can be considered a modified version of experience sampling methods. ESM is a type of self-report measurement in which participants are given reminders or alerts throughout the day and asked to provide information about how they are feeling. While a useful way of gathering self-reported information at different time intervals, ESM is limited in the sense that it can be annoying and disruptive for participants. The use of this app surmounts the limitations of ESM because it was used voluntarily by participants on their own time, but was still able to provide the kind of rich data necessary to draw conclusions from the experiment.

What are two methods other than self-report that can be used to measure subjective well-being? How do these methods provide additional insight? What are their limitations?

The self-report method is effective yet holds limitations like many other studies. There can be "memory bias, social desirability, or focusing illusions" that cloud the accuracy of the data.[1]Researchers have found other methods to measure well-being and happiness in individuals. For example, one method is by looking at brain activity. Studies have been conducted that link happiness and positive emotions with certain parts of the brain. Vytal and Hamann (2010) found that the superior temporal gyrus was activated more frequently when the participant felt happiness. Limitations exist with tracking brain activity as researchers have also realized that "most structures are involved in multiple emotions and serve multiple functions."[2] Next, smiling has also been tied to identifying happiness in individuals. Multiple studies have been conducted to trace people's life happiness in relation to their smile. One study done by Harker and Keltner (2001) looked at women's yearbook photos and tried to find genuine smiles. They found that the photos were correlated with "self-reports of personality and emotion." 20 years down the line, this still held true. Seder and Oishi (2012) conducted a similar study and compared Facebook pictures to self-reported life satisfaction. They found that the smiles were correlated with current happiness and predicted future changes in life satisfaction. However, limitations remain. Some researchers warn that people differ in theories of smiling. "Some people smile when they are happy, others smile in an attempt to become happy."[3]Therefore, there can be discrepancies between emotion and expression.

You want to conduct a study to investigate whether decreased levels of art and music consumption over the course of a month have a negative impact on people's well-being. Describe the 3 different types of research design and provide a strength and a limitation for each one. Then, identify which design would be best suited for conducting your study.

The types of research design include descriptive, correlational, and experimental (Connolly, 2020, slide 3). Descriptive designs include observational studies, which describe behavior by observing and recording it in naturally occurring situations (Connolly, 2020, slide 5), self-reports, which investigate the attitudes and behaviors of people by asking them to provide answers for themselves (Connolly, 2020, slide 8), and case studies, which seek to reveal universal principles by studying one individual in depth (Connolly, 2020, slide 10). Though descriptive research is effective at describing the characteristics of a population or situation being studied, a significant limitation is that it does not answer questions about how, when, or why the characteristics occurred (Connolly, 2020, slide 5). Correlational designs help establish relationship patterns, or correlations, between two or more variables (Connolly, 2020, slide 14). One big strength of correlational studies is that they allow researchers to gather relational information in situations where performing an experiment may not be possible. Limitations, however, include the directionality problem, which relates to the impossibility of knowing which correlated variable is the cause and which is the effect, and the third variable problem, which relates to the fact that an observed correlation between two variables may be due to a separate third variable rather than any causal relationship between the observed two variables (Connolly, 2020, slide 14). Experimental designs examine how variables are related when manipulated by researchers (Connolly, 2020, slide 17). This involves manipulating a test variable, the independent variable, while keeping everything else constant (Connolly, 2020, slide 17). The researcher randomly assigns subjects to either a control group, which receives no form of treatment, or an experimental group, which receives the experimental treatment or condition (Connolly, 2020, slide 17). The researcher then measures the dependent variable, which is the variable affected during the experiment by the independent variable (Connolly, 2020, slide 17). Finally, the researcher assesses whether the results of the control group differ from the results of the experimental group, drawing a final conclusion either supporting or disproving the initial hypothesis (Connolly, 2020, slide 17). The primary strength of an experimental design lies in its ability to demonstrate causal relationships and avoid the directionality problem, which neither of the other designs can do (Connolly, 2020, slide 17). A notable limitation, however, is that experimental designs often take place in an unnatural, artificial setting, which could affect the results (Connolly, 2020, slide 17). A correlational study would be best suited for the situation. As a researcher, it is not ethical to conduct a study that would induce negative well-being (Connolly, 2020). However, it is still possible to examine whether levels of consumption of arts and music impact well-being by observing or measuring the well-being of participants who already vary in their levels of consumption. While establishing directionality would not be possible, a correlational study would allow for insight as to the negative impacts of decreased consumption of the humanities without actively causing participants harm (Connolly, 2020, slide 14).

Suppose you ran an experiment to see if mice lost weight when they exercised on a wheel. In your sample, all the mice are of the same small age range and from the same genetic background. What is the problem with this experiment and how can you correct this mistake?

This experiment lacks internal validity. By picking mice from the same age range and same genetic background, you're introducing confounding variables (age and genetics). Therefore, even if your results show that exercising on a wheel causes mice to lose weight, you can't make that claim because it could be age or genes that are influencing the weight loss. To correct for this mistake, you should use random sampling when selecting your mice and pick mice from all ages and genetic backgrounds. Once these variables are controlled, your experiments will have much higher validity.

You are a researcher who would like to study the relationship between subjective well-being (SWB) and a student's college major. The study involves indicating your college major and completing the Subjective Happiness Scale. Before you conduct the study, you want to understand the potential limitations of this research design. You intend to establish causation and generalize the results of this sample to the greater U.S. population. Please define the type of research method you are utilizing as well as one potential limitation of this study?

This research method is a correlational design, using a validated self-report scale to measure SWB. A correlational design involves studying the relationship between two variables. One potential limitation of this study is that college students may not represent the general U.S. population, because they tend to be younger, have higher cognitive skill and a higher need for peer approval. Although college students are easier to obtain as participants in research studies, the exclusive use of college students in the sample represents a potential problem with external validity. External validity involves how much a study's findings generalize beyond the sample to the greater population. Alternatively, since this is a correlational design, one could mention that correlation does not equal causation. In this study, any correlation between SWB and one's college major would not necessarily indicate a causal relationship between the two variables.

Please describe two self-report techniques used to measure subjective well-being (SWB) and explain the pros and cons to each?

Two common methods for measuring SWB are the Experience Sampling Method (ESM) and the Day Reconstruction Method (DRM). ESM requires participants to answer questions about their mood and affect in real-time. A participant would receive alerts several times per day over the course of several days. When the alert goes off, the participant would need to complete a questionnaire about their mood and activity at that moment. ESM is an accessible and convenient method because participants can easily participate using their smartphones. Additionally, it records emotions in real-time which allows for a more accurate description of affect. A limitation to ESM is that it is disruptive to the everyday lives of participants by requiring a response several times per day. The DRM asks participants to reconstruct their previous day's activities and record their emotions during each activity. It is less invasive than the ESM because the participant only needs to complete the activity once, rather than several times during the day. A downside to this method is that memory bias might impact how participants remember the events for the previous day. That said, studies have shown that the DRM has similar validity to ESM, making it a practical alternative to ESM.

Using one of the three research designs discussed in class, please describe the relationship that majoring in STEM or humanities has on well-being outcomes.

Using a type of descriptive design, Vaziri et al. used data from a self-report survey to determine that an individual's perception of fit to their current job is a more important role in their well-being than financial metrics or studying STEM/humanities. A self-report is a technique for investigating the attitudes, opinions, or behaviors of people. This design is often used when researchers struggle to establish variables that they can clearly manipulated. The importance of a descriptive design is that a relationship may be seen, but no causal effect can be determined. Vaziri et al.'s research consisted of two closely related studies with surveys from over 8,000 college-educated employed adults from the United States. Both their financial success measured through income and their well-being measured through the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index were taken during the surveys. All the participants were then separated into students who studied a STEM and humanities major in college. The regression analysis from the data showed that even though STEM majors had a slightly higher levels of personal income, the perception of fit between their interests and their job played the most significant role in their well-being outcomes. This is crucial for undergraduates to know that they should choose their major based on their own interest rather than potential income in order to have a more flourishing future well-being.

Are internal validity and external validity both necessary to consider for each type of research design (observational, correlational, and experimental)? Define each type of validity and explain your reasoning.

Yes, internal validity and external validity are both necessary to consider for observational, correlational, and experimental research designs because they help determine whether the study's results are trustworthy and meaningful, regardless of the research design. Internal validity measures how much the data collected in the study answers the research question and addresses the hypothesis. External validity measures the generalizability of the study's results. Internal validity is most necessary to consider for each research design because it increases confidence that your study measures what it said it was going to and that there aren't other possible explanations for the results of your study that you didn't consider. It also contributes to how replicable the study is, which is important for reaffirming the original study's conclusions. External validity is necessary to consider for each research design because it helps develop the field's understanding of the theory/concept being tested.

1. Please first explain the differences between hedonia and eudaimonia and identify their relationship with SWB and PWB 2. The following questions are selected from our pre-course assessments, i.e. the self-report questionnaires on well-being. Please identify each of them as SWB or PWB related question and explain why. My social relationships are supportive and rewarding. On a scale of 1 (less happy) to 7 (=more happy), compared to most of my peers, I consider myself less / more happy

a) Hedonia and eudaimonia address different aspects of happiness. Hedonia is related to subjective well-being (SWB) and concerned with pleasure and comfort, while eudaimonia is related to psychological well-being (PWB) and concerned with autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations, purpose in life, and self-acceptance. b) "My social relationships are supportive and rewarding" -- PWB, since this question assesses the aspect of one's positive relationships with others, which is categorized under eudaimonic well-being, and is beyond the general SWB evaluation of affective and cognitive satisfaction with life. "On a scale of 1 (less happy) to 7 (=more happy), compared to most of my peers, I consider myself less / more happy" -- SWB, since this question directly asks the individual to evaluate his/her subjective, as well as hedonic happiness and well-being, and does not evaluate the eudaimonic aspects like personal growth and life fulfillment.