Samenvatting alle hoorcollege SOH 2024 UU
Hoorcollege Week 1:
Negativity bias: bad is tronger than good
- Negative events have a bigger impact than positive events, example: people are
more upset when they lose 50 euro than when they receive 50 euro.
There is an evolutionary explanation for this: “evolution doesn’t want you to be happy or
satisfied. We’re supposed to survive and reproduce”.
25 years ago there was a shift in psychologly. Before that it was mostly about negative
things. From 2000 the positive psychology movement was launched. Example:
Fredericksons theory, 2004: the broaden-and-build theory of emotions.
Agenda:
1. Does happiness deserve scientific interest?
2. Definitions of happiness?
3. Measurement of happiness
4. Some controversial issues: hedocnic adaptation and the happiness pie
5. Course procedures
1. Does happiness deserve scientific interest
(1)Firstly, many people want to be happy
But also (2) government wants us to be happy -> some governments have a happiness index
Governments want this because happier people help the nation thrive:
- They are more productive
- They are healthy and live longer
- They contribute more to society
- Etc.
Science of happiness is a recent phenomenon.
Important name: Ed Diener (mostly important because he contributed in thinking about the
bridge between happiness on an individual level and policy making, he said happiness is too
important to leave it to the individual).
Questions we are going to take a look:
- Do circumstances and living conditions matter?
- Is happiness your own responsibility?
- Can you increase your level of happiness?
- Should government create conditions that make you happy?
2. Definitions of happiness
If happiness is a scientific topic, we need a definition. Happiness is about feeling good.
,First approach is the hedonic/subjective well-being as a composite of 3 related but distinct
facets (tripartite model):
Cognitive life evaluation -> this is about how you understand your life. If your overall
satisfied
Positive affect -> more emotionally
Negative affect ->
Another approach is more about eudaimonic well-being (Greek word for your true self, and
having a purpose in life, having meaning in life, feeling that you matter)
Difference: hedonic has a focus on cognition (maximaztion of pleasure end minimization of
pain).
Consensus: two main approaches
Controversy: what is the best approach? And to what extent is feeling happy reflect good or
bad conditions?
3. Measurement of happiness?
How can we know if someone is happy? Based on the assume that people can report their
happiness. How happy were you last week on a scale from 1-7 -> 7
Sometimes people do have difficulty reporting on their happiness. Problem is that happiness
is a biased judgment: people estimate their own happiness level by (too much) focus on one
particular issue (typically something they don’t have). -> = focusing illusion
Focus on self-report
Than, there are many more scales. More than 20. But most relevant/ most used are
1. Positive and negative affect scale -> this is a simple list of different kind of emotions
and you report to what extent theiy are present. They are momentary emotions
rather than long lasting emotions
2. Satisfaction with Life scale -> this scale is measured with simple 5 items.
- In most ways my life is close to my ideal (6)
- The conditions of my life are excellent (7)
- I am satisfies with my life (7)
- So far, I have gotten yhe important things I want in life (7)
- If I could live my life over. I wouldn’t change anything (3)
What does satisfaction in life mean? In general the overall satisfaction with lifes drives
specific elements of domains satisfaction.
Does objective Happiness exist? The case of objective happiness: Kahneman said life
satisfaction is a global retro perspective judgment. True/objective happiness accurs in real
time.
, Happiness is the temporal average pf subjective experiences reported in real time
over an extended period
Interesting: Our memory of how happy we were can be different of the experience you had
in the moment.
Kahneman: “Happiness feels good in the moment. But its in the moment. What youre left
with are your memories. And that’s a very strinking thing – that memories stay with you and
the reality of life is gone in an instant”
You can conclude out of this that it is better to feel satisfied overall than in the moment. A
satisfying life is not neccecary enjoyable and the other way around.
Some people say that people are responsible themselves for their happiness. This has some
implications for public policy.
4. Some controversial issues: hedocnic adaptation and the happiness pie
Hedonic adaptation:
Who would be happier, someone who has just had an accident or someone who had an
accident?
Studie: Lottery winners were not much happier than a neutral control group. And
paraplegics were a little less happy.
This phenomonen is called the hedonic treadmill. Which states that there is a basis level of
happiness. But you can go up or down when good or bad things happen. But in the end you
will always return to your basic level of happiness.
But there are some events that make it a bit more difficult to return to the base level of
happiness. So hedonic adaptation does not insinuate that efforts to increase happiness are
futile.
The happiness pie:
The happiness pie states that about 50% is due to factors that we cannot change (some
people say genetically), 40% is due to intentional activity and 10% is the circumstances.
That means that a lot of room is changeable.
The happiness pie in a formula: H(appiness)= S + C + V
S= (genetic) Set poiny
C = the individual Circumstances
V= Voluntary intentional activities
Hoorcollege Week 1:
Negativity bias: bad is tronger than good
- Negative events have a bigger impact than positive events, example: people are
more upset when they lose 50 euro than when they receive 50 euro.
There is an evolutionary explanation for this: “evolution doesn’t want you to be happy or
satisfied. We’re supposed to survive and reproduce”.
25 years ago there was a shift in psychologly. Before that it was mostly about negative
things. From 2000 the positive psychology movement was launched. Example:
Fredericksons theory, 2004: the broaden-and-build theory of emotions.
Agenda:
1. Does happiness deserve scientific interest?
2. Definitions of happiness?
3. Measurement of happiness
4. Some controversial issues: hedocnic adaptation and the happiness pie
5. Course procedures
1. Does happiness deserve scientific interest
(1)Firstly, many people want to be happy
But also (2) government wants us to be happy -> some governments have a happiness index
Governments want this because happier people help the nation thrive:
- They are more productive
- They are healthy and live longer
- They contribute more to society
- Etc.
Science of happiness is a recent phenomenon.
Important name: Ed Diener (mostly important because he contributed in thinking about the
bridge between happiness on an individual level and policy making, he said happiness is too
important to leave it to the individual).
Questions we are going to take a look:
- Do circumstances and living conditions matter?
- Is happiness your own responsibility?
- Can you increase your level of happiness?
- Should government create conditions that make you happy?
2. Definitions of happiness
If happiness is a scientific topic, we need a definition. Happiness is about feeling good.
,First approach is the hedonic/subjective well-being as a composite of 3 related but distinct
facets (tripartite model):
Cognitive life evaluation -> this is about how you understand your life. If your overall
satisfied
Positive affect -> more emotionally
Negative affect ->
Another approach is more about eudaimonic well-being (Greek word for your true self, and
having a purpose in life, having meaning in life, feeling that you matter)
Difference: hedonic has a focus on cognition (maximaztion of pleasure end minimization of
pain).
Consensus: two main approaches
Controversy: what is the best approach? And to what extent is feeling happy reflect good or
bad conditions?
3. Measurement of happiness?
How can we know if someone is happy? Based on the assume that people can report their
happiness. How happy were you last week on a scale from 1-7 -> 7
Sometimes people do have difficulty reporting on their happiness. Problem is that happiness
is a biased judgment: people estimate their own happiness level by (too much) focus on one
particular issue (typically something they don’t have). -> = focusing illusion
Focus on self-report
Than, there are many more scales. More than 20. But most relevant/ most used are
1. Positive and negative affect scale -> this is a simple list of different kind of emotions
and you report to what extent theiy are present. They are momentary emotions
rather than long lasting emotions
2. Satisfaction with Life scale -> this scale is measured with simple 5 items.
- In most ways my life is close to my ideal (6)
- The conditions of my life are excellent (7)
- I am satisfies with my life (7)
- So far, I have gotten yhe important things I want in life (7)
- If I could live my life over. I wouldn’t change anything (3)
What does satisfaction in life mean? In general the overall satisfaction with lifes drives
specific elements of domains satisfaction.
Does objective Happiness exist? The case of objective happiness: Kahneman said life
satisfaction is a global retro perspective judgment. True/objective happiness accurs in real
time.
, Happiness is the temporal average pf subjective experiences reported in real time
over an extended period
Interesting: Our memory of how happy we were can be different of the experience you had
in the moment.
Kahneman: “Happiness feels good in the moment. But its in the moment. What youre left
with are your memories. And that’s a very strinking thing – that memories stay with you and
the reality of life is gone in an instant”
You can conclude out of this that it is better to feel satisfied overall than in the moment. A
satisfying life is not neccecary enjoyable and the other way around.
Some people say that people are responsible themselves for their happiness. This has some
implications for public policy.
4. Some controversial issues: hedocnic adaptation and the happiness pie
Hedonic adaptation:
Who would be happier, someone who has just had an accident or someone who had an
accident?
Studie: Lottery winners were not much happier than a neutral control group. And
paraplegics were a little less happy.
This phenomonen is called the hedonic treadmill. Which states that there is a basis level of
happiness. But you can go up or down when good or bad things happen. But in the end you
will always return to your basic level of happiness.
But there are some events that make it a bit more difficult to return to the base level of
happiness. So hedonic adaptation does not insinuate that efforts to increase happiness are
futile.
The happiness pie:
The happiness pie states that about 50% is due to factors that we cannot change (some
people say genetically), 40% is due to intentional activity and 10% is the circumstances.
That means that a lot of room is changeable.
The happiness pie in a formula: H(appiness)= S + C + V
S= (genetic) Set poiny
C = the individual Circumstances
V= Voluntary intentional activities
