CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 147Psychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingAging and Gerontology Research

The How, Why, What, When, and Who of Happiness

Layous, Kristin, Lyubomirsky, Sonja·2014·Positive Emotion
DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199926725.003.0025
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Over the past decade, positive psychological scientists have gathered a great deal of evidence to support the benefits of positive emotions above and beyond simply feeling good (Frederickson, 2001, in press; Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005). Randomized controlled experiments have shown that numerous positive activities (e.g., expressing gratitude, committing acts of kindness, savoring positive events, and practicing optimistic thinking) lead to increases in positive emotions and well-being. To gain a deeper understanding of how positive activities work (rather than whether they work), our laboratory has tested the mediating and moderating factors that underlie the success of positive interventions. Specifically, our research focuses on the following questions: 1) What are the mechanisms by which positive activities work to increase well-being? 2) How should positive activities be performed to maximize their effectiveness? and 3) For whom do specific positive activities work best? This chapter reviews findings supporting our new positive activity model. The model proposes four mediating variables (positive emotions, positive thoughts, positive behaviors, and need satisfaction) and two categories of moderating variables (characteristics of the positive activity [e.g., their dosage and variety] and characteristics of the person [e.g., their motivation and effort]). Finally, the model posits the importance of person-activity fit for optimal positive activity success.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199926725.003.0025

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Various researchers have claimed that randomly assigning participants to intervention and control groups may not be an optimal means of assessing the efficacy of interventions as motivation to practice represents a key element in program efficacy.

    “Various researchers working on interventional studies have claimed that randomly assigning participants to intervention and control groups may not be an optimal means of assessing the efficacy of interventions as motivation to practice represents a key element in program efficacy (e.g., [77]).”

    From Mindfulness-based programs improve psychological flexibility, mental health, well-being, and time management in academics (2020) · cites this paper as [77]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Layous, K., & Lyubomirsky, S.
Affiliations
University of California, Riverside (US)
ORCID
Venue
Positive Emotion
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Published
2014-01-23
Pages
472-495
DOI
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199926725.003.0025
OpenAlex
W2488217528
Cited by
147
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
58.61
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
positive activities, positive emotions, well-being, positive interventions, gratitude, acts of kindness, savoring, optimism, positive behavior, need satisfaction, mediation, moderation, motivation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review