Does Happiness Change after Life Events - Essay Example

? DOES HAPPINESS CHANGE AFTER LIFE EVENTS? by + Does Happiness Change after Life Events? James Griffin in his article “What do happiness studies study?” discusses the necessity to re-think the existing approach to measuring the concept of happiness (Griffin, 2007). He points out that until recently, studies of happiness focused either on happiness as a subjective state or happiness as something that can be measured objectively through measure of what is really important in life. However, Griffin argues, none of these approaches seems to be right. Instead of focusing on the aspects of subjectivity and objectivity, which leads researchers to distinguishing a few non-reducible features which are thought to contribute to the characteristic quality of life, one should first explore the ambiguity of the very notion of quality of human life. This is based on understanding that when people speak of the human life quality, they are most likely to have different things in their minds. The main idea of the article by Richard Lucas “Adaptation and the Set-Point Model of Subjective Well-Being: Does Happiness Change after Major Life Events?” is that despite the fact that happiness levels are quite stable over time, their stability does not actually preclude important and lasting changes (Lucas, 2007). Analysis of the evidence presented by authoritative longitudinal studies disproves the widely accepted belief that having experienced important life events, individuals typically adapt. It also disproves the point raised by set-point theorists that due to impact of inborn personality factors, people inevitably get back to happiness set points which are genetically determined. While adaptation certainly occurs, levels of happiness undergo changes, and, finally, it is vital to bear in mind that life events have their own significance. Comparison of the two articles allows identifying a range of similarities between the two studies. First of all, their central theme is happiness. While Griffin (2007) focuses on the essence of the concept of happiness as the object of the research, Lucas (2007) centers on how happiness depends on major life events and studies patterns of happiness presented within individuals’ adaptation and the set-point model of individual well-being. The theoretical background is different, however. Specifically, Lucas (2007) study of happiness patterns relies heavily on the theory of adaptation. It says that people benefit from adaptation processes because the latter protect them from hazardous psychological and physiological outcomes of lengthy emotional states. On the other hand, owing to adaptation processes people may get distracted by new changes in the environment which will refocus them from the old threats within their emotional condition. It helps individuals to overcome difficulties and get happier under certain life circumstances. At the same time, people adapt to such factors as income, health, age, marital status, as well as number friends; so these, with time, have only a small impact on their happiness rates. Besides, the theory of adaptation posits that certain variables that account for people’s happiness, for example, a well-being variable, are hereditary. It means that people may not be severely affected by life events. Some scientists have come to conclusions that happiness was the matter of adaptation (comparison of two research groups – lottery winners and those with spinal cord injury – did not find any significant differences in the levels of happiness, which was attributed to adaptation). On the other hand, their colleagues found that the levels of happiness were three quarters lower in people with spinal cord injury. On the contrary, Griffin (2007) relies on a range of models to investigate the meaning of the concept happiness. Namely, he uses the perception model, objective/subjective juxtaposition, and the test model. The studies are similar in their research design and methodology: Griffin (2007) and Lucas (2007) have both conducted non-empirical or theoretical studies. They are based on reviewing of the recent literature with the help of qualitative analysis. Griffin (2007) compares various views on happiness and what makes up this notion before he comes to a conclusion that the basic meaning of the concept of happiness is grounded on the wrongly interpreted notion of quality of life. Indeed, one may produce different interpretations of the quality concept because “there is no single notion of “quality of life” to cover all the instances of values that do indeed contribute to how prudentially good a life is” (Griffin 2007, 147). He majorly uses induction and deduction to arrive at his conclusions. Other studies are used as examples and illustrations. Unlike Griffin, Lucas (2007) reviews a bigger number of studies. Namely, he focuses on large-scale panel studies that researched levels of life satisfaction in relation to dramatic life events such as loss of job, loss of a beloved, divorce, and severe disability. He does not simply rely on analysis and occasional comparisons, but distinguishes certain trends and classified findings obtained as result of induction. His method is literature review and analysis. If to compare, both studies offer some insights into the future stage of dealing with the problem. However, Lucas (2007) arranges this insight into a separate section “Future Directions”, whereas Griffin (2007) offers some suggestions for working out the research concept of happiness in his “Doubts about the Foregoing View Section”. Finally, if Lucas (2007, 78) ends with a clear finding which comes in the form of a definite response to the question posed (“Is there a happiness set point?”), Griffin (2007, 144) concludes with somewhat vague and open-to-interpretation suggestions, e.g. “What seems to me far more likely…”. He clarifies where the problem is rather than offers a viable solution to this problem, specifically – by what criteria the concept of happiness should be measured. Careful analysis and comparison/contrast of these studies allow claiming that they are different in style, too. While Griffin’s article is more of an essay, with its extensive focus on logical exposition, interpretation of concepts, and deduction/induction, Lukas’ is an academic literature review study with strong theoretical foundation. Interestingly, both studies arrive at unexpected conclusions: Lukas (2007) comes to realize that adaptation “is not inevitable” (which refutes other scholars’ view that it is necessary), levels of happiness are prone to changes owing to the effect of the life events, and vary during life even despite the fact it is possible to predict happiness rates in individuals. In Griffin (2007), the conclusion is no less unexpected. The scholar asserts that the very approach to measuring happiness in the current academic research is inadequate since it applies to wrong dimensions. Indeed, the statement that there are several values, essentially non-reducible, which in their various instances contribute to the general quality of life, at a time or throughout life as a whole, is found misleading. Hence, the very notion of quality of life as utilized in studies on happiness is quite vague and irrelevant, since it does not cover “all the instances of values that do indeed contribute to how prudentially good a life is” (Griffin 2007, 147). Further, the analysis of how the two studies are organized and which sources they are based allows finding certain differences. Namely, Griffin’s article resembles a philosophical essay and is separated in quite large parts entitled “Happiness”, “Subjective, Objective, or Neither”, and “Doubts about the Foregoing View”. The first part focuses on interpretation of the concept happiness and the very word “happiness” in its connotative and denotative meanings. The second part distinguishes between objective and subjective interpretations of happiness, as well as between the first kid and comments on his feasibility (Griffin 2010, 145). The third part is “Doubts about the foregoing view”. It is full of reflections on how to improve the accuracy of measurement of happiness within the context of the current studies in the academic agenda. As for the article by Lucas (2007), it is organized more formally and follows the established structure for articles published in psychological journals. Namely, it has an introduction, the theoretical part “Adaptation Research and Theory”, the analysis part which generates the key findings of the research “Using Large-Scale Panel Studies to Assess Adaptation to Life Events”, the predictions and implications part “Future Directions”, and the concluding part “Is There a Happiness Set Point?”. Lukas (2007) uses 16 credible and large-scale studies listed in the References to support the ideas of the paper. This number seems especially big if to compare it with 9 sources used by Griffin (2007, 148). Besides, Griffin uses predominantly philosophical literature to found his research into happiness (e.g. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Craig’s Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, or Rawl’s Theory of Justice). This once again evidences that the two articles belong to two different domains of happiness research: psychological and philosophical. In conclusion, this paper summarized and analyzed the two articles that explore the happiness theme. Having focused on major findings, methods of research, and other formal elements, it has been possible to distinguish between similar and different features. There are some, of course, just as philosophical paper differs from a psychological one. Reference List Griffin, J 2007, ‘What do happiness studies study?’ Journal of Happiness Studies, vol.8, pp. 139-148. Lucas, R 2007, ‘Adaptation and the set-model model of subjective well-being: Does happiness change after major life events?’ Current Directions in Psychological Science, vol. 16, pp. 75-79. Read More