1

Module 9: Happiness Activities 1

Lecture 25: Cultivating Happiness with Gratitude

What is Gratitude?

Gratitude is derived from the Latin word ”gratia”, which means grace or gratefulness. Gratitude
has been conceptualized in many ways depending on the context. It has been conceptualized
as a moral virtue, an attitude, an emotion, a habit, a personality trait, and a coping response
(Sansone & Sansone, 2010). Gratitude is an acknowledgment that we have received
something of value from others. It arises from a posture of openness to others, where we are
able to gladly recognize their benevolence (Emmons & Mishra, 2011).

A broader and context free definition is-

Gratitude is the appreciation of what is valuable and meaningful to oneself and represents a
general state of thankfulness and/or appreciation (Sansone & Sansone, 2010).

One may feel grateful by many ways such as noticing how fortunate one’s life circumstances
are (it could have been much worse), by thanking someone who has contributed in one’s life,
recalling good things in one’s life (Lyubomirsky, 2007).

The practice of gratitude involves a focus on the present moment, on appreciating your life as
it is today and what has made it so (Lyubomirsky, 2007). People acknowledge the goodness in
their lives by becoming grateful.

Gratitude and Well-being/Happiness

Gratitude is foundational to well-being and mental health throughout the lifespan (Emmons &
Mishra, 2011).

Gratitude has been shown to contribute to diverse well-being measures-

Increases positive affect and decreases negative affect (Emmons & Mishra, 2011)
Negatively associated with depression, anxiety, loneliness, envy, or neuroticism
(McCullough, Emmons, & Tsang, 2002)
 2

Positively associated with prosocial traits such as empathy, forgiveness, and willingness to
help others (McCullough et al., 2002 ) and overall social well-being (Emmons & McCullough,
2003 ).

Overall improved well-being, including fewer health complaints and a more positive outlook
toward life (Emmons & Mishra, 2011)

Why Gratitude Promotes Well-being?

Emmons and Mishra (2011) provided following possible mechanisms-

(1) Gratitude facilitates coping with stress
It promotes healthy and adaptive coping styles and strategies such as seeking social support,
positive reframing, approach-oriented problem solving, and active coping (Wood, Joseph, &
Linley, 2007). It also associated with PTG (Peterson et al, 2008)

(2) Gratitude reduces toxic emotions resulting from self and social comparisons
It decreases upward social comparison resulting in envy and resentment (Emmons & Mishra,
2011). Gratitude is incompatible to toxic emotions such as envy or resentment.

(3) Gratitude reduces materialistic strivings (excessive concern for money and material
possession)
Excessive materialistic strivings may hinder well-being, happiness, and concern for others.
Gratitude is incompatible to excessive materialistic strivings (Polak & McCullough, 2006).
Therefore, it promotes well-being by reducing materialistic strivings.

(4) Gratitude improves self-esteem

Gratitude has been consistently linked with higher and stable self-esteem (Froh, Wajsblat, &
Ubertini, 2008). However, the direction of this relationship is not clear.

(5) Gratitude enhances accessibility to positive memories

Gratitude facilitates retrieval of positive experiences by increasing elaboration of positive
information (Watkins et al. 2008). Therefore, it boosts well-being by enhancing positive
memories and experiences.
 3

(6) Gratitude builds social resources

Gratitude promotes well-being by building social relations and resources. It also strengthen and
maintain existing relationships (Algoe, Haidt, & Gable, 2008). It promotes many other
characteristics that further build social resources such as extraversion, agreeableness,
empathy, emotional stability, forgiveness, trust, and generosity (McCullough et. al, 2002).
Gratitude is a strength of character that is highly desired in romantic partners (Steen, Kachorek,
& Peterson, 2003 ).

(7) Gratitude motivates moral/prosocial behavior

Gratitude by promoting social bonding and relations facilitates prosocial behavior. Gratitude
promotes both direct reciprocal altruism and “upstream reciprocity” (Nowak & Roch, 2007 ).
Upstream reciprocity involves passing on a benefit to a person uninvolved in the initial exchange
thus promoting prosocial behavior.

(8) Grateful people are spiritually minded

Studies have reported positive relationship between gratitude and spirituality (also religiosity)
(Emmons & Kneezel, 2005). The relationship can be bidirectional. Most of the religious and
spiritual traditions considers gratitude as a major virtue to be cultivated. Therefore, spirituality or
religiosity may promote gratitude.

Gratitude Exercises

Lyubomirsky (2007) suggested following strategies and pointers for gratitude exercise-

(1) Keep a gratitude journal

With this exercise we remind ourselves of the things for which we are grateful such as gifts,
grace, benefits, loved ones etc. More specifically this can be done by writing about it.

Choose a time in a day when you have some free time and free from distraction. It could be first
thing of the day in the morning or the last thing of the day at night or sometime in between such
as during commuting. Reflect on the three to five things for which you are currently grateful,
from the mundane (electric appliance got fixed) to the magnificent (spiritual insights, revelation
etc.). You may focus on some skills or abilities you have, opportunities life has given, goals you
 4

have achieved. You may reflect on good relationships and caring people in your life who have
contributed and sacrificed for you.

This exercise can be done once in a day, once or twice in a week or twice in a month depending
on the lifestyle and personal preference.

(2) Express gratitude directly to others

Expressing gratitude is best and most effective when done directly to the concerned person
such as by writing letters, by phone or face to face.

Seligman et al. (2005) conducted a study on gratitude visit.

Condition 1: The participants were given one week to write and then hand deliver a letter of
gratitude to someone who had been especially kind and caring to them but whom they had
never properly thanked.

Condition 2: The participants were given self guided happiness exercises.

The result showed largest boost of happiness by the gratitude visit participants.

Keep the strategy fresh

Even intentional activities such as expressing gratitude can become boring and come under
influence of hedonic adaptation. Therefore, it is necessary to include variety to keep the strategy
fresh. For example, Lyubomirsky (2007) suggested sometime one may vary the gratitude
practice in a number of ways-
-express gratitude only after particular triggers (such as after enduring a hardship or when you
are most needful of a boost).

-choose to write in a journal some weeks, talk to a friend other weeks, and express gratitude
through art (photography, collage, watercolor) during other weeks.
“When the strategy loses its freshness or meaningfulness, don’t hesitate to make a
change in how, when, and how often you express yourself” (Lyubomirsky, 2007).
 5

Obstacles in Promoting Gratitude

All people may not experience gratitude in same amounts and some individuals may be more
responsive to gratitude exercises than others. Cultural and attitudinal factors likely to moderate
gratitude’s effects on well-being (Bono & Emmons, 2017).

Culture

One study found that gratitude interventions focusing on family and others to be more effective
in collectivist samples, whereas those focusing on oneself were more effective with
individualistic samples (Boehm, Lyubomirsky, & Sheldon, 2011). More research is needed to
better understand how the experience, expression, and consequences of gratitude differ
across cultures. Future research need to understand universal versus distinctive patterns in
these areas would advance basic knowledge about gratitude in society (Bono & Emmons,
2017)

Attitudes
A number of attitudes are incompatible with gratitude-

perceptions of victimhood (Seligman, 2002)

 inability to admit to one’s shortcomings (Solomon, 2002)
envy and resentment (Etchegoyen & Nemas, 2003), and
an overemphasis on materialistic values (Kasser, 2002).
It may be necessary to confront these attitudes by such individuals on their own terms prior to
initiating a gratitude focus (Bono & Emmons, 2017).
.

Personality factors

A major personality variable that is likely to be an obstacle in gratitude is narcissism (Watkins

et al., 2003).
 6

In this direction Bono and Emmons (2017) reported-

“People with narcissistic tendencies erroneously believe they are deserving of special rights and
privileges without assuming reciprocal responsibilities. The sense of entitlement combined with
insensitivity to the needs of others engenders interpersonal exploitation. They might be reluctant
to express gratitude in response to benefactors whose generosity or kindness they summarily
dismiss as little more than attempts to curry favor…….. In short, if one feels entitled to
everything, then one is thankful for nothing” (P. 565).

References
Sansone, R. A., & Sansone, L. A. (2010). Gratitude and well being: The benefits of
appreciation. Psychiatry, 7(11), 18–21.

Emmons, R. A., & Mishra, A. (2011). Why gratitude enhances well-being: What we know, what
we need to know. In K. M. Sheldon, T. B. Kashdan, & M. F. Steger (Eds.), Series in positive
psychology. Designing positive psychology: Taking stock and moving forward (p. 248–262).
Oxford University Press.

Lyubomirsky, S. (2007). The how of happiness: A scientific approach to getting the life you
want. Penguin Press.

Seligman M.E., Steen T.A., Park N., Peterson C. (2005). Positive psychology progress -
Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize
your potential for lasting fulfilment. New York, NY: Free Press

Watkins, P. C., Woodward, K., Stone, T., & Kolts, R. L. (2003). Gratitude and happiness:
Development of a measure of gratitude, and relationships with subjective well-being. Social
Behaviour and Personality, 31, 431-451.
 7

Lecture 26: Cultivating Happiness with Acts of Kindness

Acts of Kindness

Kindness refers to actions intended to benefit others (Curry et al. 2018). Kindness has a strong
moral dimension just like gratitude. All religions prescribe practice of kindness as a holy virtue
and the basis of our happiness. Kindness includes a combination of emotional, behavioural,
and motivational components (Otake et al. 2006). At the emotional level it is compassion, at
the motivational level it is urge to help others and at the behavioral level it includes actual
helping behavior (Kerr et al., 2015).

What Counts as Kindness?

Acts of kindness need not be some great work of charity or help. It can be as simple as a
smile, or saying thank you or a word of encouragement. What's important is that it's an act
coming from genuine care and concern for another person. Acts of kindness can come from a
spur of the moment (noticing someone in need) or it can be thought and planned in advance
(planning to do something for a friend). Kindness require us to be aware of the people around
us - and to notice their needs and feelings.

Evolutionary mechanisms of kindness

Kindness may have strong evolutionary basis as it promotes social connections, cooperation
and flourishing of communities and societies. Evolutionary mechanisms favors kindness in a
varieties of ways. Curry et al. (2018) reported following mechanisms explaining kindness-

(1) Kindness to families (Kin altruism): Natural selection promotes kindness to genetic
relatives, such as family members (Hamilton, 1964). For example, love and kindness for off-
springs, siblings, parents etc.

(2) Kindness to members of one’s community (Mutualism)

Natural selection favours the tendency to be kind, to coordinate and collaborate with others who
shares a common interest such as team mates and group members.
 8

This tendency led humans to form clubs, gangs, sects etc. This form of kindness can explain
loyalty, solidarity, camaraderie, civic-mindedness, community spirit, and commitment to a cause
greater than oneself (Curry et al. 2018).

(3) Kindness to those who will meet again and return favor (Reciprocal altruism).
Natural selection favors kindness to those who might return a favor later (Axelrod, 1984;
Trivers, 1971). Reciprocal altruism can explain kindness in the form of sympathy, trust, returning
favours, gratitude, forgiveness and friendship (Curry et al. 2018). Reciprocal altruism predicts
that these tendencies will most likely to be shown in interactions where individuals expect to
meet again(Kraft-Todd, Yoeli, Bhanot, & Rand, 2015) and may include kindness to strangers as
it may be a way of making a new friend (Delton et al., 2011).

(4) Kindness to others when it enhances one’s status (competitive altruism)

Natural selection favours kindness that impresses peers and attracts mates (Gintis, Smith, &
Bowles, 2001). Competitive altruism can explain kindness in the form of generosity, bravery,
heroism, chivalry, magnanimity and public service (Curry et al. 2018) and these are elicited
specially in the presence of rivals and potential mates as it may enhance one’s status (Raihani
& Smith, 2015).

Kindness and Happiness

There is a saying “What goes around comes around”. With kindness we give happiness to
others and it returns to us. Apart from strict evolutionary reasons, one psychological reason
why people may engage in kindness is happiness. People show kindness as it gives them
happiness. This may explain a wide varieties of kindness behavior of human beings including
donations and charity works.

Many research supports this proposition that acts of kindness increases happiness and well-
being. An interesting study of kindness (Schwartz & Sendor, 1999; reported in Lyubomirsky,
2008) indicated the connection with happiness. This study followed 5 women with multiple
sclerosis (MS) over the 3 years. They were given the task of peer supporter for 67 other MS
patients by training them to compassionate and active listening. They were suppose to call
each patient 15 minutes per month. After 3 years, these 5 women reported-

experienced increased satisfaction, self-efficacy, and feelings of mastery.

 9

engaging in more social activities and less depression

shifted their focus away from themselves and their problems to toward others
stronger sense of self-esteem and self-acceptance

Acts of kindness has many positive effects such as-

Increase in happiness and well-being (Lyubomirsky et al. 2005)

-Decrease in symptoms of depression or anxiety and increasing positive emotions (Sin &
Lyubomirsky, 2009)

-Increase in social well-being and the quality of relationships (Otake et al. 2006).

Why Kindness Makes People Happy?

Lyubomirsky (2007) suggested following possible mechanisms of kindness-

-Kindness leads you to perceive others more positively and more charitably.

-Kindness changes self perception. Acts of kindness may help you to view yourself as a
compassionate altruistic person which may promote higher self-esteem, confidence and
optimism.

-Acts of kindness to others may distraction people from their own troubles and ruminations and
shifts the focus from the egoistic self to others.

-Acts of kindness for a worthy cause may give you a sense of your abilities, resources, and
expertise and feeling of control over your life.

-Through acts of kindness you may learn new skills or discover hidden talents and promote
self-efficacy and accomplishment.
 10

-Acts of kindness may promote a sense of meaningfulness and value in one’s life.

-kindness can lead to a cascade of positive social consequences such as others liking you,
showing gratitude or reciprocating favors.

-Kindness satisfies basic human need for connecting with others and satisfying the need for
relatedness.

How to Practice Kindness?

There cannot be techniques for practicing kindness. It flows when we are sensitive to the
needs of others and a caring attitude. As the Dalai Lama says "Be kind whenever possible.
It is always possible". Sometimes one can plan for acts of kindness such consciously
deciding and planning to help or support some people or organization by donating resources
or labor. One can do random acts of kindness which are spontaneous and non-premediated.

When Kindness May Take a Toll?

Research show that certain types of helping behavior may be detrimental to physical and
mental health. This include full-time caregiving of chronically ill or disabled loved ones. In such
cases caregivers may experience depression, fatigue, anger, resentment.

Caregivers of spouses with Alzheimer’s disease show depression levels three times greater
than the average person (Esterling et al. 1994). Caregivers of spouses with spinal cord injuries
report severe physical and emotional stress, burnout, fatigue, anger, and resentment
(Weitzenkamp et al. 1997). Here the problem is not kindness but accompanying grieving for
the loved ones and impending loss of life. Furthermore, such caregiving may interfere with
daily goals and functioning of the caregiver which may increase stress and frustrations
(Lyubomirsky, 2007).

At the emotional level such caregiving may have detrimental effect, but, it may increase certain
dimensions of eudaimonic well-being such as purpose and meaning of life as this is an
appropriate and honorable work and one sacrifices pleasures of life for the duty.
 11

A true acts of kindness should be done freely and autonomously and only such acts bring the
maximum improvement in well-being (Lyubomirsky, 2007). A forced help may not bring about
the benefits of kindness as it is not truly an act of kindness.

Kindness should not be forced on someone. Other people may not always welcome your
kindness and may put others in an uncomfortable and disadvantaged position (Lyubomirsky,
2007). Therefore, one should be sensitive to others need and preferences.

References
Curry, O. S., Rowland, L. A., Van Lissa, C. J., Zlotowitz, S., McAlaney, J., & Whitehouse, H.
(2018). Happy to help? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of performing acts
of kindness on the well-being of the actor. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 320-
329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.014

Otake, K., Shimai, S., Tanaka-Matsumi, J., Otsui, K., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2006). Happy people
become happier through kindness: A counting kindnesses intervention. Journal of Happiness
Studies, 7(3), 361–375. doi:10.1007/s10902-005-3650-z.

Kerr, S.L., O’Donovan, A. & Pepping, C.A. Can Gratitude and Kindness Interventions Enhance
Well-Being in a Clinical Sample?. J Happiness Stud 16, 17–36 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9492-1

Lyubomirsky, S. (2007). The how of happiness: A scientific approach to getting the life you
want. Penguin Press.
 12

Lecture 27: Social Comparisons and Happiness

Social Comparisons

Social comparison refers to the tendency of people to compare themselves to others on a wide
variety of dimensions. Social comparisons provides us useful guides for our behavior, and they
may also have emotional consequences, affecting our self-esteem and happiness (Herman et
al. 2019).

From the psychological perspective, the social comparison theory was first proposed in 1954
by psychologist Leon Festinger. He suggested that we have an innate drive to evaluate
ourselves in comparison to others i.e. self evaluation in relation to others. Social comparison
helps us to determine how we are doing compared to others (ability comparison), or how we
should behave, think, and feel (opinion comparison) (Festinger, 1954; in Verduyn et al. 2020).
Social comparison is universal across cultures and is evident in young children and is a core
feature of social evolution (Verduyn et al. 2020).

Functions of social comparison

Social comparison seems to be a fundamental human drive. It serves a variety of functions (in
Vogel et al., 2014)-
-fulfilling affiliation needs (Schachter, 1959),

-evaluating the self (Festinger, 1954),

-making decisions (Camerer & Lovallo, 1999),

-being inspired (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997),

-regulating emotions and well-being (Taylor & Brown, 1988)

 13

Social Comparison Process

Central to the social comparison process are-

(1) Upward versus downward social comparison and

(2) Assimilative versus contrastive social comparison.

Upward vs Downward Social Comparisons

There are generally two types of social comparisons: Upward and downward social
comparisons. Upward social comparison occurs when comparing oneself with someone better
or superior and have positive characteristics (Vogel et al., 2014). Downward social comparison
occurs when comparing oneself with someone inferior and have negative characteristics
(Vogel et al., 2014). Upward social comparison generally causes people to feel inadequate,
have poorer self-evaluations, and experience negative affect (Marsh & Parker, 1984).
However, sometimes it may inspire people to become like the target (Lockwood & Kunda,
1997).

Downward social comparison generally causes improvements in affect and self-evaluation

(Wills, 1981). However, sometimes it may make people feel negative because it reveals how
things could be worse (Aspinwall, 1997). Both upward and downward social comparison can
result in negative and positive effects on self-evaluation depending on contrastive and
assimilative comparisons.

Assimilation vs Contrast

Assimilation: It refers to the comparer’s self-evaluation changing towards the comparison

target (Verduyn et al. 2020).

Contrast: It refers to the comparer’s self-evaluation changing away from the comparison
target (Verduyn et al. 2020).
 14

Social Comparison and Self-evaluations

Upward comparison Downward comparison

Assimilation Positive self-evaluation Negative self-evaluation

Contrast Negative self-evaluation Positive self-evaluation

See video lecture for detailed explanations

Studies indicate that social comparisons are more likely when the comparison dimension is
relevant to the self, and when the comparison target is similar to the self (Verduyn et al. 2020).
However, people may also compare sometime with irrelevant targets (Gilbert, Giesler &
Morris, 1995). A recent meta-analysis showed that in offline contexts, individuals mostly tend
to compare to someone who outperforms them (upward comparison) in a contrasting manner,
resulting in lowered self-evaluations, envy and overall worsened mood (Gerber, Wheeler, &
Suls, 2018).

Social Comparison and Happiness

Research indicates that happiness depends on the relative income (how much earning in
comparison to a reference group) rather than absolute income. This reflects the influence of
social comparison on happiness. A meta-analysis revealed that people tend to engage in
contrasting upward social comparisons in offline social comparison which also have negative
impact of SWB (Gerber, Wheeler, & Suls, 2018). People with excessive tendency for social
comparison are more likely to encounter unfavorable comparisons and suffer negative
consequences (Lyubomirsky, 2008). Seeking happiness from social comparison is particularly
difficult task as no matter what you achieve, there will be someone better than you.
 15

Social Comparison, Social Media, and Happiness

In todays world, social media such as social networking sites provides a fertile ground for
social comparison (Verduyn et al. 2017) as people have enormous amount of information
about comparison targets on such sites. Users of SNSs such as Facebook are more likely to
portray their successes (and not failures), achievements and rosy images of their life.
Consequently, upward social comparison is more likely to take place on such sites (Verduyn et
al. 2020). In SNS, people are more often exposed to idealized images of others and share
more often self-enhancing information themselves (Verduyn et al. 2020). .

Diverse research studies including cross-sectional (Sherlock & Wagstaff, 2018), longitudinal
and experimental (Verduyn et al. 2015) studies on social comparison on SNSs indicate that
these comparisons typically result in decreases in SWB or happiness. A recent meta-analyses
(Yoon, Kleinman, Mertz, & Brannick, 2019) indicated that social comparison on SNSs in
general (non-directional i.e. collapsing across social comparison types) predicts a decrease in
SWB with a small- to medium-sized effect, while upward social comparisons predicted
decreased SWB with a medium-sized effect. However, some studies also revealed that social
comparisons in SNSs may not always decrease happiness or SWB. Social comparison on
SNSs is not associated with negative emotional consequences when-

-comparison is focused on opinions rather than ability (Yang, Holden, & Carter, 2018)
-there is a downward social comparison (Feltman, & Szymanski, 2018)
-assimilation (rather than contrast) to an upward comparison target (increases SWB and leads
to feelings of inspiration) (Park & Baek, 2018).

Verduyn et al. (2020) noted that the positive consequences of social comparison on SNSs are
exceptions rather than the rule. Online social comparison have a general negative impact of
SWB as revealed by meta-analysis (Yoon et al., 2019).
 16

How to Avoid Social Comparison?

Be aware of the negative consequences of unnecessary social comparison and avoid it. Too
much social comparison makes people highly insecure and vulnerable.

Practice gratitude and be grateful to what you have and resist envy (happiness and envy
cannot stay together).

Use social comparison as inspiration and motivation

Use self-evaluations using self-set internal standards (I should improve public speaking skills
and become better in future) rather than others performances influencing your feelings.

References

Festinger L (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Hum Relations, 7:117-140

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 001872675400700202.

Verduyn et al. (2020). Social comparison on social networking sites. Current Opinion in
Psychology, 36:1–6

Vogel et al. (2014). Social Comparison, Social Media, and Self-Esteem. Psychology of Popular
Media Vol. 3, No. 4, 206 –222