As an instructor of positive psychology, I've internalized the research-based conclusion that 40% of our happiness is within our personal control, and only 10% is based on our circumstances (the other half is genetics). This made sense to me, in that a basic tenet of therapy is that our mental health is impacted by how we frame things, that is, what we make of the circumstances we are in, and what we choose to do about them.
But when I read this article from one of my favorite sources of information on positive psychology, I began rethinking these statistics I've taken for granted, and asking myself the same question raised by the author.
How much control do we have over our own happiness?
And do our circumstances really play such a small role?
In my child development classes, I joke that if we had a nickel for every time I mentioned the nature-nurture interaction, we could all buy a drink at Starbucks. Why then, would I believe that circumstances, i.e. environment (part of nurture) plays anything less than a starring role in our happiness saga?
Right now, I'm listening to a book by NPR reporter Nina Totenberg (more on that next week). In the chapter I just finished, she said that her job as a reporter is to make the reader think. In addition, as a reporter, she often found herself going into her research with one opinion only to emerge with another.
This article had that impact on me. Fortunately, it has so many hyperlink rabbit holes embedded in it that there will be plenty of opportunities for me (and my students) to dig deeper. How, for example, did the research that drew the 10% conclusion define "circumstances"? And, returning to my first paragraph above, how much of our happiness and well-being are connected to the situation itself, how much is due to what we make of it and/or choose to do about it, and how much is a product of the synergistic interaction between these two almost inextricably intertwined variables?
Psychology is an inexact science. Yesterday's research, if it wishes to remain a fact of the field, needs to be consistently upheld by today's research. Yesterday's research didn't account for a worldwide pandemic that would plunge us into common circumstances yielding impacts beyond anything we could imagine.
But positive psychology research also supports the concept of post-traumatic growth. Finding its footing in the early 21st century, it offered up another horrific circumstance: September 11. And the research conducted in the shadow of those circumstances was a testimony to the resilience of the human spirit.
How much control do we have over our own happiness? I suspect the answer is different for each of us, especially since genetics is responsible for about half of the equation. Should we dismiss circumstances as a mere detail? Not at all. And, in fact, there are developmental theories (and plenty of research science) to attest to the fact that we are, in at least some small way, a product of our circumstances.
But we are also rational (mostly), determined human beings with the power to effect change. And, from where I sit, what percentage of the pie that consists of -- and whether or not that changes from day to day -- is immaterial. It's what we do with that power to change not just our own lives and circumstances, but those of other inhabitants of this world that will make the difference.
If you take the time to read the article, I'd love to chat. There's a really good chance I'll still be thinking about it for quite some time, mentally thanking its author for making me think about not just concepts and circumstances, but consequences and what it means to use whatever percentage of influence we have for good.
No comments:
Post a Comment