Perspective

...now browsing by category

 

Conservative and liberal morality: five foundations

Thursday, October 23rd, 2008

Jonathan Haidt is a research psychologist at the University of Virginia. One of his main research interests is morality. Recently I ran across this quotation from him:

…the second rule of moral psychology is that morality is not just about how we treat each other (as most liberals think); it is also about binding groups together, supporting essential institutions, and living in a sanctified and noble way. When Republicans say that Democrats “just don’t get it,” this is the “it” to which they refer.

Haidt is not a conservative himself. But he seems to want to understand both liberal and conservative views of morality on their own terms, and he seems completely genuine in this effort. I was already familiar with his other research on happiness and related topics, which I thought was among the most interesting and compelling work anywhere in psychology.

Some conservatives are likely to cite him, saying something like: “See – conservative morality has more depth and completeness according to this research psychologist.” But intelligent and insightful conservative (and liberal) observers will go beyond this, and see the breadth of mind involved in each side genuinely trying to understand the other side on its own terms. I’ve known about Haidt’s outstanding research for years, but after seeing this new line of research I was even more impressed with him. The video below is a full presentation (not a 5-minute video), but well worth the time; I highly recommend it. It also is as timely as ever, with the presidential election coming up very soon.

According to research, people tend to accept information more easily that agrees with what they already think, and tend to screen more skeptically information that tends to challenge their beliefs. It can be a useful exercise to make extra effort to be open to the best arguments that a contrary view has to offer, and to question whether every part of a particular position you believe in is really as airtight as you thought.

A psychologist I know who does life coaching, Ben Dean, told a group at a conference I attended that some of his clients (and others he knew) were depressed after Kerry lost to Bush. I think it would be healthy for each side to consider the world from the perspective of the other side. It’s also helpful to realize that life won’t be much worse if their own guy doesn’t win the election.

Video: “The five foundations of morality, and why liberals often fail to get their message across”
http://www.newyorker.com/online/video/conference/2007/haidt

Oxford Happiness Questionnaire

Friday, October 17th, 2008

The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire was developed by psychologists Michael Argyle and Peter Hills at Oxford University. Take a few moments to take the survey. This is a good way to get a snapshot of your current level of happiness. You can even use your score to compare to your happiness level at some point in the future by taking the survey again. If you are using some of the interventions presented on this site to raise your happiness level, you can see whether your score on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire goes up as a result.

Instructions

Below are a number of statements about happiness. Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each by entering a number in the blank after each statement, according to the following scale:

1 = strongly disagree
2 = moderately disagree
3 = slightly disagree
4 = slightly agree
5 = moderately agree
6 = strongly agree

Please read the statements carefully, because some are phrased positively and others negatively. Don’t take too long over individual questions; there are no “right” or “wrong” answers (and no trick questions). The first answer that comes into your head is probably the right one for you. If you find some of the questions difficult, please give the answer that is true for you in general or for most of the time.

The Questionnaire

1. I don’t feel particularly pleased with the way I am. (R) _____

2. I am intensely interested in other people. _____

3. I feel that life is very rewarding. _____

4. I have very warm feelings towards almost everyone. _____

5. I rarely wake up feeling rested. (R) _____

6. I am not particularly optimistic about the future. (R) _____

7. I find most things amusing. _____

8. I am always committed and involved. _____

9. Life is good. _____

10. I do not think that the world is a good place. (R) _____

11. I laugh a lot. _____

12. I am well satisfied about everything in my life. _____

13. I don’t think I look attractive. (R) _____

14. There is a gap between what I would like to do and what I have done. (R) _____

15. I am very happy. _____

16. I find beauty in some things. _____

17. I always have a cheerful effect on others. _____

18. I can fit in (find time for) everything I want to. _____

19. I feel that I am not especially in control of my life. (R) _____

20. I feel able to take anything on. _____

21. I feel fully mentally alert. _____

22. I often experience joy and elation. _____

23. I don’t find it easy to make decisions. (R) _____

24. I don’t have a particular sense of meaning and purpose in my life. (R) _____

25. I feel I have a great deal of energy. _____

26. I usually have a good influence on events. _____

27. I don’t have fun with other people. (R) _____

28. I don’t feel particularly healthy. (R) _____

29. I don’t have particularly happy memories of the past. (R) _____

Calculate your score

Step 1. Items marked (R) should be scored in reverse:

If you gave yourself a “1,” cross it out and change it to a “6.”
Change “2” to a “5”
Change “3” to a “4”
Change “4” to a “3”
Change “5” to a “2”
Change “6” to a “1”

Step 2. Add the numbers for all 29 questions. (Use the converted numbers for the 12 items that are reverse scored.)

Step 3. Divide by 29. So your happiness score = the total (from step 2) divided by 29.

I recommend you record your score and the date. Then you’ll have the option to compare your score now with your score at a later date. This can be especially helpful if you are trying some of the exercises, and actively working on increasing your happiness.

UPDATE: A lot of people have been asking for some kind of interpretation of the raw number “happiness score” you get in step 3 above. What follows is just off the top of my head, but it’s based in part on the fact that the average person gets a score of about 4.

INTERPRETATION OF SCORE

I suggest you read all the entries below regardless of what score you got, because I think there’s valuable information here for everyone.

1-2 : Not happy. If you answered honestly and got a very low score, you’re probably seeing yourself and your situation as worse than it really is. I recommend taking the Depression Symptoms test (CES-D Questionnaire) at the University of Pennsylvania’s “Authentic Happiness” Testing Center. You’ll have to register, but this is beneficial because there are a lot of good tests there and you can re-take them later and compare your scores.

2-3 : Somewhat unhappy. Try some of the exercises on this site like the Gratitude Journal & Gratitude Lists, or the Gratitude Visit; or take a look at the “Authentic Happiness” site mentioned immediately above.

3-4 : Not particularly happy or unhappy. A score of 3.5 would be an exact numerical average of happy and unhappy responses. Some of the exercises mentioned just above have been tested in scientific studies and have been shown to make people lastingly happier.

4 : Somewhat happy or moderately happy. Satisfied. This is what the average person scores.

4-5 : Rather happy; pretty happy. Check other score ranges for some of my suggestions.

5-6 : Very happy. Being happy has more benefits than just feeling good. It’s correlated with benefits like health, better marriages, and attaining your goals. Check back – I’ll be writing a post about this topic soon.

6 : Too happy. Yes, you read that right. Recent research seems to show that there’s an optimal level of happiness for things like doing well at work or school, or for being healthy, and that being “too happy” may be associated with lower levels of such things.

Reference

Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2002). The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: a compact scale for the measurement of psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1073–1082.

I’ve used “don’t” rather than the more staid and formal “do not” in the phrasing of the questions above; I decided to give preference to my own sense of what is more natural and conversational in American English. (Remember that the questionnaire was developed in England.) I’ve also added the phrase “(find time for),” which psychology researcher Sonja Lyubomirsky uses for clarification in question 18.

Note: Michael Argyle died in 2002. If you would like to contact Peter Hills, you can email him at p_r_hills “AT” hotmail “DOT” com (seems to be outdated) or contact him by telephone/fax in the UK: Tel.: +44-1235-521-077; fax: +44-1235-520-067.

There is a problem with the comments below. None of the early comments are showing up since an upgrade a few days ago. Here’s one example, a comment from me:

Dr. Steve Wright says:

The highest score you can get on an item is a 6, and the lowest a 1. If you add up all your scores and divide by the number of questions (29 questions), you’d get an average score for all the questions. The highest possible average would be 6, the lowest possible would be 1. Right in the middle would be 3.5, so you might think that’s what the average person would get, but this is just a raw score. In fact, other studies show that people are generally somewhat happy on average. So it may not be surprising to hear that the average score on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire is right around a 4, which is essentially what you got (since you got 3.9 out of 6).

Rather than compare yourself to other people, it’s probably more meaningful to compare your score now to your score later, and see if there’s a change. Some of the exercises on this site have been shown in scientific studies to make a lasting, positive impact on happiness. You might want to try some of them (I’ll be adding more), and see if they work for you. A few gratitude exercises are already on the site:

*Gratitude Journal & Gratitude Lists

*Gratitude Visit

Planning, strengths, and the magic ratio

Wednesday, October 8th, 2008

The presidential candidates agree to the rules of the debate including time limits. A green light turns yellow and then red to let both men know that their time is up for answering that particular question. The candidates do what any reasonable person would expect: they run over the time limit a little bit, then a little more. (Of course.) It’s in their own interest to do so – especially given that they wouldn’t want to be upstaged by the other guy. But the organizers are caught completely off-guard by this predictable situation. It’s as though no one thought about this possibility, and there is no backup plan. The only thing the moderator can come up with is to chide the candidates repeatedly that they had agreed to the rules. Every time he does so he takes time and focus away from the discussion and the issues, which starts to seem a bit absurd after awhile. At one point one of the candidates makes a suggestion for him to raise his hand to get their attention.

Then, as if to highlight the lack of good planning, when the debate ends and the candidates naturally move toward each other to shake hands, the moderator stops them and asks them to move out of the way because he can’t see the teleprompter on the wall behind them.

This actually happened last night at the second presidential debate. It wasn’t a Saturday Night Live sketch.*

How could the organizers have failed to plan for likely outcomes? I really don’t know, but it has the appearance of not thinking things through, which is the point I want to make.

Thought experiment

Albert Einstein used “thought experiments” to think through the ramifications and logical consequences of certain initial conditions. It was a truly outstanding example of rational thought.

Why not try to do something similar in planning? Some things just work better with a good plan. And sometimes it’s worth taking time to think through some of the “what ifs?” It depends on how important something is, of course. But sometimes people spend a lot of time on things that actually matter less (and bring them less happiness and meaning) than other things. Try this: It can be a useful exercise to consider how you’d want to be remembered when you’re gone.

If you already know what needs to be done, lay out the process. Mentally walking through each step can be revealing, even without applying genius-level intellect to problems and solutions.

What if we’re talking about something bigger, and laying out the steps is premature? Don’t underestimate the power of a dream or vision, and its ability to inspire.

The magic ratio

The Appreciative Inquiry approach points out the value of identifying the “positive core” rather than utilizing only criticism, or being dragged down by hopelessness, irony, or negativity. Also, researchers have looked at the optimum ratio of positive to negative in interactions. Beginning with the landmark investigations of psychologist John Gottman, using what he called “the magic ratio” (5:1), Gottman and colleagues were able use analysis of positive to negative interactions in 15-minute conversations to predict divorce 10 years later with 94% accuracy. Psychologist Donald O. Clifton encourages highlighting what coworkers or employees do well instead of what needs improvement, and discovering the benefits of supporting their valuable contributions. But research discovered that when the ratio gets too high, about 13:1, effectiveness declines. That situation was out of touch and unrealistic. So reduce negative feedback, but don’t eliminate it.

A very useful contribution positive psychology might make to certain kinds of business or personal planning is looking at your personal strengths. This could be strengths in relation to your job, or in relation to your role in the personal task you’re planning for. It could be the strengths of those involved in some joint business or personal task. It could even be the strengths of your business or project team as a whole. Playing from your strengths rather than focusing primarily on weaknesses has been shown to work better.

Founder of modern “positive psychology” Martin Seligman says that using our strengths “makes work more fun, transforms a job or a career into a calling, and increases flow.

*If it had been SNL, the absurdity would have been taken much further: the moderator might have been asked to wave both arms over his head, jump up and down, and “do something more to get our attention”; “just throw a few crumpled up pieces of paper,” an eraser (chalk flies on impact from side of head), “try your shoe,” “use this taser” (then: “don’t tase me, bro!”), “here’s a harpoon gun” (“God knows I had worse in Nam”).

                  twitter.com/DrSteveWright