The Hedonic Treadmill – Are We Forever Chasing Rainbows?

hedonic adaptation treadmillCan you remember the last time you were dreaming of buying a new car, getting a promotion at work, moving into a nicer house or finding a partner to share life with?

Do you remember fantasizing about how happy you would be if you attained those things?

If you finally did attain one of those things, you may have found that the “happiness boost” didn’t last that long or wasn’t as intense as you’d imagined. Most of us have gone through this cycle.

The hedonic treadmill (also known as hedonic adaptation) is a theory positing that people repeatedly return to their baseline level of happiness, regardless of what happens to them.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau beautifully explained hedonic adaptation in his 1754 Discourse on Inequality with the following words:

“Since these conveniences by becoming habitual had almost entirely ceased to be enjoyable, and at the same time degenerated into true needs, it became much more cruel to be deprived of them than to possess them was sweet, and men were unhappy to lose them without being happy to possess them.”

How do we pursue happiness without grinding our bones into unsatisfied dust? There are many ways.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Positive Psychology Exercises for free. These science-based exercises will explore fundamental aspects of positive psychology including strengths, values, and self-compassion, and will give you the tools to enhance the wellbeing of your clients, students, or employees.

A Little History

Two psychologists, Brickman and Campbell, first wrote about this concept in 1971 with their essay, “Hedonic Relativism and Planning the Good Society.” In the 1970s, the concept was known as hedonic adaptation. It was 20 years when Michael Eysenck compared hedonic adaptation to a treadmill, a more modern and understandable example.

Thus, the hedonic treadmill was born.

Happiness Set Point

The-hedonic-treadmill-graphStudies have shown that our circumstances don’t account for most of our happiness.

Each person has a happiness set point, which refers to one’s genetically determined predisposition for happiness. This set point for happiness is responsible for about 50% of the differences in happiness from person to person.

In her book The How of Happiness, researcher Sonja Lyubomirsky says that:

  • If you struggle with a low set point, meaning, you tend to gravitate towards sadness or depression, don’t be so hard on yourself. You are, to an extent, dealing with a stacked deck;
  • Fifty percent, as high as it is, is not 100%, so there’s plenty of leeway for improvement. Your actions, thoughts, and attitudes account for about 40% of your happiness, which is quite significant. (The final 10% is determined by external circumstances.)

The theory of the hedonic treadmill states that regardless of what happens to people, their levels of happiness will eventually return to their baselines. Take this theory with a classic example: say you get married, move into a new house, get a promotion, lose a job, suffer an accident, etc., over time, you’re likely to return to your set point of happiness.

There is an initial spike in happiness or sadness, but as time goes on, the feeling of happiness or sadness caused by an event starts to dissipate, and habituation kicks in.

After some time passes, you’ll be back at the level of happiness at which you were before.

A possible misattribution of this theory could be the relationship between good things happening in a period of time and positive emotions experienced during that same period.

If someone is fortunate enough to experience an abundance of positive events spaced out over a relatively short period of time, the constant influx of happiness may lead a person to believe that his or her general happiness has increased.

But that’s not what the research suggests.


Along with Brickman and Campbell’s original research (1971), a notable piece of research on the hedonic treadmill studied two sets of people: One was a group of people who won large lottery prizes, and the other was a group of accident victims who were now paralyzed (including quadriplegic and paraplegic people).

The research revealed that, in the long term, neither group appeared to be happier than the other. (Brickman, Coates, & Janoff-Bulman, 1978). Of course, the lottery winners and paralysis victims experienced initial reactions of happiness and sadness, respectively.

The effects didn’t turn out to be long-lasting, and people in both groups shortly reverted to their previous levels of happiness. In the original theory of the hedonic treadmill, Brickman and Campbell proposed that people immediately react to good and bad events but in a short time return to neutrality (1971).

However, if the theory put forth by Brickman and Campbell is correct, any effort to increase happiness is pointless — meaning that if our happiness set point is on the low end of the spectrum, we’re doomed to unhappiness.

The good news is that further research, led by Ed Diener, has refined the initial findings and brought greater understanding into the subtleties of the hedonic cycle.

Here are five points, supported by more recent research, to take into consideration:

1. The set point is not neutral

After reviewing the data from earlier studies on the hedonic treadmill, Diener, Lucas, and Scollon (2006) found that approximately three-quarters of the samples studied reported affect balance scores (positive and negative moods and emotions) above neutral.

Even in diverse populations, including the Amish and the African Maasai, the wellbeing levels were above neutral.

So even if people adapt and return to a previous point, it’s a positive rather than a neutral one.

2. The set point is individualized

Recent research shows that even if everyone has a set point, it varies significantly from person to person. Personality traits play a role in someone’s happiness set point, and wellbeing is moderately heritable. So, different personality traits may predispose individuals to different levels of wellbeing.

3. We have multiple set points

The notion of a set point suggests that each person has a single, static baseline of happiness. But more recent work by Diener, Suh, Lucas, and Smith (1999) complicates this theory by arguing that happiness is composed of different factors that contribute to wellbeing, and these factors sometimes move in different directions.

For example, one could have both positive and negative emotions in decline but life satisfaction on the rise. The basic idea is that different forms of wellbeing can move in different directions at the same time.

4. Happiness can change

One of the conclusions often drawn from the first study is that no matter what we do, we can’t effect lasting change on our levels of wellbeing and life satisfaction. Examining wellbeing levels of nations might help clarify this, as research on this specific topic is scarce.

If there are marked differences in wellbeing across nations and these differences can be predicted from objective characteristics of those nations, that could mean that circumstances can have a long-term impact on wellbeing.

For example, one study cited that a nation’s “higher-than-average wealth” and “support for human rights” were strong predictors of the wellbeing of its residents. Researchers at The Economist also reported that 85% of the variance in wellbeing between nations can be explained by nine factors that included: gross domestic product per person, life expectancy at birth, political stability, and divorce rates.

So the question is, “Can our long-term average level of happiness change?”

To answer this question, Fujita and Diener designed a longitudinal study that examined changes in the baseline level of wellbeing over a period of 17 years in a large sample of Germans (2005).

The researchers found that even though there was significant stability in the happiness assessments, 24% of participants still experienced a significant change to their happiness level, and 9% of participants changed by two standard deviations or more. It seems that long-lasting change is possible.

“The very good news is there is quite a number of internal circumstances . . . under your voluntary control. If you decide to change them (none of these changes come without real effort), your level of happiness is likely to increase lastingly.” –

Martin Seligman

5. Individual differences in adaptation

Another assumption stemming from the original hedonic treadmill theory is that adaptation happens the same way for everyone. But research shows that there are individual differences in the rate and extent of adaptation.

For example, studies into the adaptation to marriage predicted that the happiest people would react more strongly to positive events. But the results showed otherwise: less-satisfied individuals were more likely to benefit from marriage in the long term.

One of the explanations for this is that atypical events or a big shift in our lives may produce the greatest change in happiness.

Can We Escape the Treadmill?

A study by Barbara Fredrickson and colleagues Cohn, Coffey, Pek, and Finkel showed that the stream of positive emotions induced through loving-kindness meditation can outpace the effects of the hedonic treadmill (2008).

Most research on meditation focuses on mindfulness meditation. However, because of the specific interest in eliciting positive emotions, Fredrickson et al. focused on loving-kindness meditation, a form of meditation that evokes feelings of warmth and care for oneself and others.

Researchers suggest that this kind of mind-training practice not only changes passing emotional states but also reshapes enduring personality traits by helping us learn about the nature of our own minds. Practicing loving-kindness meditation also helps dismantle false assumptions about what leads to happiness and wellbeing.

Over time, meditation may be the gateway to creating insights that change our outlooks on ourselves and others, thereby increasing empathy and compassion.

Differences in Happiness

Despite the hedonic treadmill, some people have an inherently optimistic nature. They seem much happier than others, no matter what is happening in their lives.

An individual’s definition of an event (threat or challenge), his or her interpretations, and the ways in which he or she continues to think about the event (e.g., with a sense of tragedy, a sense of humor, ruminating about the past) can have a big impact on his or her outlook.

In Sonja Lyubomirsky’s research on this subject, she found that happy individuals perceive, interpret, and subsequently think about life events and life circumstances in more positive ways than negative ones (1998). These differences in cognitive processes may, in turn, reinforce and promote people’s affective dispositions.

Happy individuals can evaluate events (especially negative ones) in positive and productive ways. Unhappy individuals tend to dwell on the negative aspects of events, find things that are “wrong” about positive events, or ruminate on how things were better before.

How to Become Happier

If people become accustomed to (or take for granted) anything positive that happens to them, then how can they ever become happier? As stated before, about 40% of our happiness is dependent on our actions, thoughts, and attitudes.

That means that we have the ability to improve.

Tal Ben-Shahar is an American and Israeli writer in the field of positive psychology and leadership. He suggests the following tips for amplifying our level of happiness (2006):

  1. Give yourself permission to be human: Accept your emotions, including fear, sadness, and anxiety. Rejecting them leads to frustration.
  2. Simplify your life. Focus on one thing at a time and reduce multitasking.
  3. Find meaning and pleasure. Engage in goals you want to achieve instead of what you feel obligated to do. Spend two hours per week on hobbies. Spend time with our loved ones.
  4. Focus on the positive and be grateful. Each day, write down five things for which you’re grateful.
  5. Increase the effort you put into your relationships. Go on a date with your significant other or spend more time talking to your children.
  6. Be mindful of the mind-body connection through exercise and the practice of mindfulness meditation, yoga, and breathing techniques. Research has shown that exercising leads to decreased levels of depression (Lyubomirsky & Tucker, 1998).

There are other tools we can use to shift our thoughts. By being mindful of what we think while reacting to situations, we can begin to focus on what we need to change in order to view the entire situation differently.

Byron Katie, author of the “The Work,” sums this up perfectly, explaining why our thoughts can cause both happiness and suffering. Here is a clip of her interview in a symposium discussing happiness.

To increase happiness, we can reflect on what we really want to do, choose the people and activities we really enjoy, learn by revisiting our negative thoughts, and focus on the present moment.

A Take-Home Message

The hedonic treadmill theory states that our circumstances, including extremes like winning the lottery or becoming a paraplegic, alter our happiness level temporarily, and we quickly adjust back to a fixed emotional set point.

Is this an important concept to grasp when it comes to understanding happiness? Absolutely.

Recent research challenges the assumption that adaptation is inevitable and shows that adaptation processes may vary depending on the events and individuals in question. Reviewing this research reveals that changes in our baseline levels of happiness are possible, that our baselines are often positive rather than neutral, and that we have multiple set points that might move in opposite directions.

These newer studies provide proof that interventions to increase happiness can be effective, and that changes can be targeted not only at an individual level but also on an organizational and social level.

What are your experiences with the hedonic treadmill? Do you think that people can change their set point of happiness?

Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Positive Psychology Exercises for free.


  • Baumeister, R. F. & Bushman, B. J. (2009). Social psychology and human nature (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
  • Ben-Shahar, T., (2006) Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness [Video file]. Retrieved from
  • Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(8), 917–927.
  • Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist, 61(4), 305–314.
  • Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R.E., & Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276-302.
  • Fredrickson, B. L., Cohn, M. A., Coffey, K. A., Pek, J., & Finkel, S. M. (2008). Open hearts build lives: Positive emotions, induced through loving-kindness meditation, build consequential personal resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1045-1062.
  • Katie, B. (n.d.). The work [website]. Retrieved from
  • Lyubomirsky, S. (2007). The how of happiness: A scientific approach to getting the life you want. New York, NY: Penguin.
  • Lyubomirsky, S. & Tucker, K., L., (1998). Implications of individual differences in subjective happiness for perceiving, interpreting, and thinking about life events. Motivation and Emotion, 22(2), 155-183.
  • Martin-Krumm, C., Lyubomirsky, S., & Nelson, S., K., (2012). Psychologie positive et adaptation: Quelle contribution? In C. Tarquinio & E. Spitz (Eds.), Psychologie de l’adaptation (pp. 335-353). Brussels, Belgium: De Boeck.
  • Rousseau, J.-J., Cress, D. A., & Miller, J. (1992). Discourse on the origin of inequality. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.


What our readers think

  1. Lux

    Hedonic means reinforce, and this article also makes me that the idea of enforcing deep learning to machines ie Robots is in the direction, that will help replace this issue with so called happiness. If positivity is directly proportional to happiness , why leaders though they think and act positive are stressed in life? Robots are hence there to remove the stress at all levels of human being and hence is part of this evolution though they are man made. Any take on this?

    • Nicole Celestine, Ph.D.

      Hi Lux,

      Glad this article got you thinking! Indeed, there’s been a bias toward ‘happy-ology’ that was reflected in positive psychology’s first wave. This meant many leaders, coaches, etc. mistakenly took on the idea that the way to be happy is to pretend one is not affected by negativity and stress, which is not the way to go. We need to be fully present and in touch with the negative sides of life to experience well-being, otherwise that negativity will spill out in maladaptive ways.

      Interesting thoughts about the role of AI, too. Indeed, there’s an opportunity with AI to eliminate the need to do routinized tasks, and increasingly knowledge work. But the question I’d ask is this: If life were entirely free of ‘stress’ (i.e., challenge), would we not grow bored and dissatisfied without something to pursue and strive for? 🙂 You’ll find an exploration of some of these ideas in our blog post on the topics of happiness and the difference between eudaimonic and hedonic well-being if you’re interested.

      – Nicole | Community Manager

  2. Gordana

    Great article, I really enjoyed reading! Do our new lifestyle and laziness lead to depression and dissatisfaction? It makes me think…

    • Nicole Celestine

      Hi Gordana,
      Glad you enjoyed the article. If by lifestyle and laziness you mean too much of a sedentary lifestyle, there is certainly evidence for a relationship between this and depression (check out this article).
      – Nicole | Community Manager

  3. Philip Oesterle-Pekrun

    Too optimistic, probably for the reason of not coming off as pessimistic to people who want to be cushioned by reassurance. Along with this, is there not a great chance that we have evolved to see past and future — life in general, then — with optimism? This tendency has been observed by many scientific studies; I will not cite them here.

    • Tijn

      Could you please cite some researches, I’m very interested in this subject

  4. Pierre

    Based on my life experience and research, I strongly believe in hedonic adaptation when it comes to pleasant and unpleasant life experiences. More precisely, I believe that we cannot experience more pleasant things without also experiencing more unpleasant ones, and that these two sides always balance out in the long run. This helps to explain why a drug user that experiences a euphoric high typically experience a painful comedown/withdrawal later on. It also helps explain why prolonged painful physical exertion can lead to feelings of anaesthesia and even euphoria (think of the “runner’s high”). It also helps explain why some people suffer from chronic pain, depression, and anxiety–and how to overcome those conditions and lead a fulfilling life. I’m currently finishing a book on this topic (available early 2020) and anyone can get a free copy at
    The reason that some research shows changes in set point is likely due to the way participants interpret study questions such as “How happy/satisfied are you?” Happiness and satisfaction are quite nebulous concepts that can be interpreted differently from one person to another. As psychologist Daniel Gilbert has pointed out, you can be “happy about” something while feeling quite sad. For example, you may be “happy about” your child receiving a scholarship to a great university, but “feel sad” to see them leave the nest. That is why I find that many of these “happiness” studies are measuring something quite ambiguous and therefore that their results are often misleading or muddled. Take care. 🙂

    • Philip Oesterle-Pekrun

      I agree with this. I do believe this hedonic treadmill effect to show entirely how our positive (reward) and negative (pushing us towards working to improve life) feelings work. I do not see a reason why humans would ever have evolved an absolute perception; we simply seek to constantly improve our lives. I also have some ideas on memory, and why recognizing this cycle is so hard for humans. I am quite fixated on this currently — there is no meaning in life other than hedonism, and even that is merely a facade, but the only one I can think of — so I have written a lot about it.
      I will just copy paste a summary of my overall ideas because why not. If you’re interested:
      I believe the hedonic treadmill is quite a well-known idea, so I will begin by saying that I agree with this from an evolutionary basis. We have no absolute goal or perception; we simply view everything relative to what we know. Our ancestors 50,000 years ago could not have dreamt of the safety and luxury we live in today, but are we any happier than them? I do not believe so. If it were so, we would not still have the feelings they had — feelings of inadequacy and the incessant urge to improve our lives when they are already so luxurious. We still chase the very same things — survival, social status, resources, reproduction — and our ancestors’ problems and evolution’s solutions certainly show themselves today in our desires and the lengths we go to to fulfill them. Humans — and I assume other species with brains and the capacity for emotion — also adapt to new situations, both better and worse, within their lifetimes. As a child, I was content for a bit after I had bought a new $20 toy. Now, I need better and more expensive things to feel the same amount of satisfaction. I also need to fulfill new desires as I develop, such as new relationships and a higher social standing, to feel some momentary satisfaction. When my life improves, I feel happy, but soon adapt to this change and become unsatisfied with my life once again. I have experienced this cycle over and over again and have seen its effects in the modern world in our chronic consumerism and our unending affinity for wealth, technological advancement, sex, love, and whatever other desires one can name. Does progress in these areas really make us happy? For a short time, yes. But after that short feeling of joy has passed, we reset to our previous state. I am never more content overall after having achieved my goals. I feel some joy, but it is ever-temporary and quickly diminishes to leave me feeling as if I had never accomplished the goal in the first place. No pleasure can last, for such a trait as everlasting fulfillment would have been detrimental towards the propagation of our ancestors’ genetics and it surely would have devolved if it came up in the first place. Surely, the humans who were restless to improve their lives would have triumphed.
      We all still chase satisfaction in one way or another because it is all we can do in life, often calling it something else like “interesting”. At the bottom, it is desire and pleasure. Something may be interesting rather than euphoric, but the reason something unknown is interesting and captivating is that we are driven to understand it. The unknown could be dangerous, and understanding is the gateway to truth and information, which are beneficial to survival and perhaps survival of one’s offspring or mate. Curiosity stems from the desire to understand the unknown. I digress. I have come to realize an extension (which I may have made clear already) of this rather demotivating idea of the hedonic treadmill: not only do we lack the potential for everlasting happiness, but positive feelings are also far rarer than negative ones. I do not believe that it would have made sense for our ancestors to experience more than short-lived happiness — just long enough to be memorable. It would be a waste of both time and energy. Memory is an interesting aspect of this idea. I believe that our memory has the fundamental tendency of bringing the more active or “interesting” experiences into recollection more often. Perhaps I am wrong in this unfounded specificity, but I do feel that positive experiences are far more memorable than mundane and depressing times, which may or may not be active with thought, but not with extrapersonal experience. I believe that most of our time is spent with such feelings — we spend a lot of time working for very short periods of rewarding joy. Very negative extrapersonal experiences, on the other hand, are frequently recalled (to our displeasure) to essentially teach us a lesson. I believe I have read about our tendency to remember positive experiences somewhere, and I would call this nostalgia. Nostalgia and hope cooperate to give us a skewed view of life. We believe that we were very happy and that we can feel such joy again once we achieve the next goal our mind has set for us, beliefs which are beneficial in making us work towards the propagation of our genetics. Because of this, I argue that we cannot trust things like surveys which ask people how positive/negative their life is. I took account of what I was feeling for a couple of days, during the moment instead of after, and came to find that most of my life is quite mundane and miserable, and is filled with dissatisfaction and self-loathing, even though I am in High School and have my livelihood paid for by well-off parents. When I do feel joy, I feel it only briefly and, while I do believe that genetic mutations can render the setpoints for everybody different to a degree, I also believe that pretty much everybody will feel, on average, less than content. I cannot think of a reason why we would experience positive feelings more often than negative ones, while I can think of a few reasons why spending more than half of our time relaxing and being content rather than working to improve our genetics’ chances of being passed on further would not be beneficial and would devolve if it even evolved in the first place. While the moment seems to reside at feeling mediocre, on the verge of misery perhaps, it all seems so joyous and easy when I look back on it. The optimistic tendency that we have when recollecting the past, nostalgia, leads us to view our current situations negatively, relative to those fond yet altered or “cherry-picked” memories of the past. This is all part of the process to drive us to improve our lives, the lives of our offspring, and the lives of our mates (and to a much lesser extent, possibly other genetically similar humans, if such a negligible connection has evoked an adaptation) more and more, as this obviously helps to spread our genetics, the unit of evolution We assume so optimistically because of the skewed view of life which evolution has given us. Ultimately, I ask: why would we have evolved to feel pleasure most of the time?
      A lot of people say that misery and depression would be counterproductive towards our grand goal (spreading our genetics), but I believe that we simply view the effects of such feelings through the lens of our modern society, rather than through the circumstances in which our ancestors found themselves. Misery is something we all feel. To cast it aside as an evolutionary mishap — which some people have argued — is not only unfounded speculation, but also highly unlikely. We all get depressed at times, so why should I not assume this feeling to be as much a part of our evolved human condition as anger? Rather, why would I assume that it is a mental illness or genetic mutation when there is no physical diagnosis for it and so many people experience it. As we know it now, depression and misery cause us to stay in our dwellings for far too long, recount negative experiences with no end, constantly think about the problems which cause the misery, and chip away at our bank accounts by ordering pizza online. Like people during major wars or economic depressions, our ancestors probably did not have a lot of time to be emotionally depressed. They could not order pizza online. I think that misery was a feeling that led to us to think deeply about our problems and how to solve them, in solitude, but also relatively temporarily. Our ancestors probably did not have to develop an emotion to get themselves out of their misery, as hunger (and other necessities of survival) served that purpose well enough. If they did develop such an emotion or drive, it was probably very weak, as it does not seem to work very well.
      While I have made my beliefs and their reasons clear, I do not know what exactly to do with this information. For now, I shall look no further than validation. I have had a number of long conversations on the topic and some have told me that I opened their eyes to this evolutionary curse, while others have disagreed with my logic or have found some other meaning in their life. I still believe that desire and joy are at the bottom of that meaning, just as I explained these to be at the bottom of curiosity. What is heaven but a combination of our (currently) greatest desires? Alas, I am in no position to judge those who have found a reason to live.

      • meh

        Not sure if you will see this, but very interesting thoughts. Was very surprised to say the least to find out you are still in high school and contemplating these sort of ideas (as I used to when I was back in school).
        I agree with many of your points. Our desire to understand things and figure things out (ironically the reason why we are on this blog site in the first place commenting on articles) has led us to develop an array of emotions – some positive such as satisfaction, curiosity, etc and negative such as depression and anxiety (what am I going to do if I don’t figure this out?). Coupled with the last few decades of this massive information spreading society (everything from social media to instant news notifications and constant communication) this has led us to mass anxiety and depression through waves. I’d like to think that our ancestors were anxious and depressed, but it most definitely has skyrocketed in recent times.
        We’re here for a limited time. I like to think about how depression and anxiety can be used to make us stronger and seen from a more optimistic viewpoint. Happiness is temporary if you make it temporary, especially if you couple it with pleasure (which is just a body response).

  5. Charlie

    Wonderfully concise! This article has everything you need to know to get started on this topic, Great read, thank you

  6. Dmtag

    Thanks to the writer
    A very useful article
    I am not a regular reader,nut I enjoy reading this .
    Keep forward

  7. احمد شعبان

    Great I already learned how the life is going on, thanks to everyone

  8. Om

    Dear Author,
    Life itself is momentarily. One dose not live in days, weeks or years. We live moment by moment, like a ticking clock. So the life, we experience, is also in moments. Thus, the pain and the pleasure are also in moments. The exhilaration and the intense pain of sadness, both fall sharply the next moment.
    It is a good article, however, the thought must be revised. It appears incremental by different researchers and contributors.

  9. Dilip bhaskar deodhe

    Great guidance for leaving happy. I am a Indian student and I never read article like this. Thank you so much.

  10. Nicolas

    Love The Article!!!

  11. Kamran

    The best article on this topic. Thank you

  12. Bri

    Great explanation!

  13. Tharaka

    Goodone thanks for sharing.
    this finding synthesizes with Buddhist thinking of happiness as a temporary state. as we suffer running to the happiness states [like working hard, studying hard ..etc] and realize later that happiness also does not last that long.

  14. best treadmills 2018

    awesome site thanks for sharing

  15. Alex


  16. george pig

    Very good post! We are linking to this great post on our site.
    Keep up the good writing.

  17. Valeria K.

    I also enjoyed the article, very comprehensive! I also appreciated the fact of including the references! Thank you 🙂

    • Catarina Lino

      Sure thing thing Valeria, it’s our pleasure, glad it was useful to you!

  18. Kareem abozaid

    Very insightfull

    • Catarina Lino

      Thank you Kareem, we really appreciate feedback from our readers 😉

  19. Laurenne Di Salvo

    I really enjoyed this article. I was familiar with a lot of the research. However, I enjoyed reading about the extension of some of the earlier research that I wasn’t familiar with. Thank you.

    • Catarina Lino

      Hey Laurenne,
      Glad you found this interesting. There’s a lot to explore with this topic, right? i think this subject in particular is a useful one for us to practice looking deeper at the research and not just taking in one catchy line.

  20. Imo Bakari

    This article is a serious meal for thought.I can sense the logic in the arguments. However, the writer is referencing recent research findings to inform the discussion. I think that this field is ripe for further investigation and re-evaluation of the concept of happiness. let the discussion continue.

    • Catarina Lino

      Hi Imo,
      For sure! I think the more recent research sheds some light into the picture but definitely agree that further investigation on this would be tremendously useful.
      Thank you for your feedback, we really love interacting with our readers here 😉

  21. Reza Zolfagharifard

    I like this article, because it’s well written, it’s up to the point and gives good references. Thank you. I look forward to reading your new articles. Good luck with whatever you’re doing.

    • Seph Fontane Pennock

      Same here. I think Paul writes at a high level already and has the potential to become a truly great writer. The thing is, he writes fast as well and I think that shows how natural it comes to him.
      Keep it up Paul! This is awesome 🙂


Let us know your thoughts

Your email address will not be published.


Read other articles by their category

3 Positive Psychology Tools (PDF)