Positive Psychology as a Field of Study - Essay Example

? Positive Psychology is a developing field at a significantly faster rate both in the academic groups as well as among popular cultures. Positive psychology has been seen to contribute positively as far as increasing the well being of an individual is concerned. Empirical research in this field has enabled for the endorsement of the idea of increasing well being (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000). There are six methodologies that have been to demonstrate the definition of positive psychology. These methodologies differ from one another. These methodologies have contributed the highest percentage as compared to other methods that have been used to address the study of positive personal traits and positive experience that is subjective (Hart and Sasso 2011). Research indicates that most of the past studies in psychology have had their focus on the concepts and ideas of pathology as well as providing a cure for what is regarded to be wrong. This field of positive psychology takes a shift from this providing a theoretical approach together with the use of applications in order to enhance what is regarded to be right with regards to strength and improve good health. In addition the development of positive psychology is seen to have come in place at the same of when resilience, states of well being, states of happiness and positive coping are being applied (Hart and Sasso, 2011). There are two major interventions that are commonly used in this field of positive psychology. They include clinical and non-clinical intervention. Well being and mindfulness therapeutic processes are just but examples. They are usually used in psychotherapy, counseling and coaching. Evaluation processes which are usually carried out by the use of interviews and questionnaires provides base under which the interventions are formulated (Seligman, Steen, Park and Peterson, 2005). This paper is but a study that encompasses a coaching plan which is aimed at helping me develop a better understanding of my psychological orientations. This plan is composed of two interventions namely cognitive and emotional strategies. Basically these interventions developed after a process of self evaluation in regard to virtues and character strengths was completed. The tools that were used in the process of diagnosis were based on enhancing as well as ensuring development of the virtues and character strengths. The outcome that I expected was that by using these two strengths both the states of well being as well as happiness would increase. Positive Psychology As already identified efforts aimed at improving and enhancing life in the past have had their focus being placed upon emotions that are negative, healing and providing a cure for what has been damaged (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). In line with this concentration on negated aspects is what is deemed imperative. There are quite a number of explanations behind such focus on aspects that are negative; the urgency of emotions that are negative prompts a change in behavior as well as self reflection. As for the emotions that are positive they remain unaffected as they pass through an individual’s body; historical occurrences and situations were damaging and unstable. Current theories of social science concentrates more on class positions, territory, conflict, aggressiveness and self interest (Joseph and Linley, 2006) Concentration on the negative aspects results to the emergence and development of emotions that are negative for quite a long time. In addition, the perspectives encompassed in positive psychology presents that the current thinking and concentration on the negative by theories of social science can be changed. This can be achieved through the shifting focus from the negative outcomes to the positive outcomes which is based on flourishing instead of focusing on enhancing survival by providing cures and repairing. In this case the shift involves the process of developing emotions that are positive for instance joy, love, hope, human virtues as well as strengths for instance creativity and wisdom that can be used for the purpose of preventing illness thus productivity in the society is enhanced (Joseph & Linley 2005). Assessment tools Processes of assessment form quite an integral part in the roles that are carried out by practitioners. These processes aid in the definition of an issue or rather problem from a diagnostic procedures that are accurate. The formal process of carrying a diagnosis and treatment of mental health related problems involves the use of diagnostic and statistic manual 1V (DSM-1V). It is most of the times used by psychologists and psychiatrists (Joseph & Linley 2008). However, practitioners of positive psychology have an alternative manual for diagnosis known as ‘A handbook and Classification of Character Strengths and Virtues’ (CSV). This manual facilitates diagnostic processes of strengths as well as measurement of states of happiness (Seligman et al, 2005). I used questionnaires from the internet to carry out an assessment of myself with the aim of testing my strengths as far as development of oneself is concerned. The values in action survey (VIA)-this questionnaire had a total of 240 questions that were aimed assessing my character in terms of strength. Creativity came top as my strength, curiosity came second, critical thinking or rather being open minded came third, learning; fourth and social intelligence the fifth strength. Brief strengths test- had 24 questions to assess 24 virtues as well as strengths. The strengths were categorized by the following criteria; usually, always used, occasionally and half of the time. Love for learning and curiosity came top in the results in line with the criteria of always used. General Happiness Scale- it assessed my happiness level which turned out to be 4.66/7. PANAS questionnaire- it assessed negative and positive emotions. For the negative emotional affect the result was 14/15 and for the emotional positive the result was 27/50. Fordyce emotions questionnaire- it assessed the time in terms of percentage that I had the feeling happiness. The result was 40% happy and in average state of happiness 7/10     Intervention Strategies and Coaching plan Well-being The state of happiness is described to be an emotion that is positive with the main aim being to contribute to the objectives of positive psychology. In order for happiness to be measured positive emotions are evaluated. In line with this two aspects are put into consideration that is emotions that are positive as well being satisfied with life demonstrated by the state of well being which is subjective in nature (Seligman et al, 2005). Subjective well-being refers to happiness from a scientific point of view. In this case optimism which simply involves having a positive mentality is understood to be made up of motivational, cognitive as well as emotional components. From studies it is demonstrated that people who bear optimistic characteristics are generally healthier and happier. In this case being optimistic is indicated to have influence in preventing states of depression (Joseph & Linley 2008). Additionally studies indicate that traditional methods of measuring happiness in a person resorted to a baseline level of happiness. Nevertheless, results from five interventions aimed at improving the universal strengths through the use of samples from the internet indicate that three of the interventions lasted for a period of six from continuous usage of the tests or exercises. Coaching Plan With reference to this study my coaching plan encompassed evaluating my personal strengths in order to identify the strongest for the purpose of developing them hence increasing emotions that are positive. Positive states will as well be enhanced thus improving my well being. All this add up to increased personal strength. Such outcomes could undergo measurement by simply filling again the questionnaires in the General happiness Scale and PANAS. From the outcomes of strength my first choice is curiosity that had the highest rating both on the brief strengths test as well as on the Values in action survey. The second strength of choice is the love for learning which had the rating of four on the values in action survey and in the brief strengths test it came second. The final results expected from the assessment process would be the emotional affect and the state happiness the questionnaires will indicate related to increased positivity after some months of adhering to the plan of coaching. Emotional Intervention A diary was made as a follow up on events as well as a tracker on how I responded to the events. The major purpose was to establish the current significance of emotions being regulated (Schuttle, Manes and Malouff, 2009). Research outcomes from a study on the role played by strategies of emotional regulation showed that well being was improved. This was achieved from the discovery that regulation of emotions as they occur relates to better results as compared to regulation of emotions after they have already occurred and are present. Quite a number of methods of regulation were debated upon in inclusion avoidance of situations and suppression of emotions. Nevertheless it was discovered that these two had very little implications. The methods identified to have major effects include; cognitive, situational, physical, behavioral, and experiential (Dunning, Heath & Suls 2004). With reference to this study my intervention method within the coaching plan encompasses the following action in case I am in the process of learning or I am curious about a situation so as to increase both emotional regulation and positive influence. Ensuring that, I spend more time in those circumstances or situations that will support the use of my strengths in a bid to increase emotional influence that is positive. Where possible to ensure that I change the circumstances that I am in so that I may have the chance to make use of my strengths and increase feelings that are positive. Focus more on things that are interesting around me in order to emotions and feeling that are positive. Ensure that I concentrate on those body signals which will result to increased emotions that are positive. Cognitive Intervention Awareness may be increased through a method of coaching that is usually highly recommended known as mindfulness training (Collard and Walsh 2008). This method involves a study on improvements and enhancement in well being of individuals under training who might have experienced increased calmness and less stress. Mindfulness training engages a part of the brain that prompts healing when it is accessed through the experiences of the body. Five concepts are encompassed within mindfulness training; they include; trust, patience, acceptance/an attitude that is not judgmental, enlightened interest for oneself and letting go. This concepts are put into effect through focusing on the current state or situation, the here and now perspectives and allowing feelings or thoughts to flow without trying to stop them (Harris, 2006). The following is an intervention aimed at increasing a state of the mind that is positive. Changing one’s perceptions about certain events and creating more positive ones for instance understanding and viewing a task as an environment of learning for instance, engaging in relaxed breathing and mediations daily for approximately ten minutes. Something crucial worth noting is that strategies in relation to mindfulness need to be regularly and routinely carried out if change is expected to happen. Conclusion Assessments within the field of positive psychology have been presented to majorly concentrate on the strengths in relation to the virtues and character of a person instead of having to focus on weaknesses. The main purpose for focusing on the strengths has been identified to be the creation of feelings that are positive thus making the exercise enjoyable. However a major drawback in relation to the internet based evaluation is that this process may lack reliability as a result of focusing more on the context. The contributions provided on positive psychology through the use of the assessment tools identified, coaching plan as well as interventions stands to be criticized due to the fact that they do not put into consideration other aspects that may impact on the state of happiness such as economic growth, religion, personal relationships and faith and income. Therefore there is still an opportunity for further contributions to be made in regard to the concept of positive psychology and how this may affect a person’s emotional state. References Schuttle, N. S., Manes, R. R., and Malouff, J. M. (2009), Antecedent-focused emotion regulation, response modulation and well-being Current Psychology, (28) 21-32. Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004), Flawed Self-Assessment, Implications for Health, Education, and the Workplace; American Psychological Society vol. 5, no. 3 Harris, R. (2006). Embracing your demons: An overview of acceptance and commitment therapy, Psychotherapy in Australia Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005), Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist  Collard, P., & Walsh, J. (2008), Sensory awareness mindfulness training in coaching: Accepting life’s challenges. Journal of Rational Emotive Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 26, 30-37 Hart, K. E., & Sasso, T. (2011), Mapping the contours of contemporary positive psychology. Canadian Psychology Joseph, S. & Linley, P.A. (2005). Positive adjustment to threatening events: An organismic valuing theory of growth through adversity. Review of General Psychology, 262–280. Joseph, S. & Linley, P.A. (2008). Psychological assessment of growth following adversity: A review. In S. Joseph & P.A. Linley (Eds.) Trauma, recovery, and growth: Positive psychological perspectives on posttraumatic stress. (pp.21–38). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley . Joseph, S. & Linley, P.A. (2006). Growth following adversity: Theoretical perspectives and implications for clinical practice. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 1041–1053. Seligman, M. E. P., and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000), Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist  What does not kill us, makes us stronger The adage, what does not kill us makes us stronger, is very popular being known globally but unfortunately up to this time, the prevalence of scientific evidence has not adequately supported it. Nevertheless a national multi-year longitudinal research focused on the impacts of adverse and challenging life events mostly on mental health has discovered that very crucial experiences do indeed propel resilience as well as conformity; this in turn results to improved mental health and fosters well being of individuals (Prati et al. 2009). The study, “Whatever Does Not Kill Us: Cumulative Lifetime Adversity, Vulnerability and Resilience," embarked on an examination of a national sample of individuals who reported their lifetime account of adverse and crucial moments and several measures of modern mental health as well as well being. The authors, Mark Seery, who is the senior professor of psychology at the University at Buffalo as well as senior author of the study, states that some previous research shows that exposure to adverse and crucial life experiences typically brings about negative impacts on mental health and the welfare of an individual; more adverse and crucial events predict that worse outcomes will be experienced (Splevins et al. 2011). However in this research of a national survey panel which comprised of 2,398 subjects analyzed on a habitual pattern from 2001 to the year 2004, Seery together with his friends discovered that those who were exposed to crucial events depicted better mental health and well being as opposed to individuals who had a high account of adversity or those with no account at all of adversity (Donovan 2010). Seery mentions that they tested for quadratic relationships between lifetime adversity and a range of longitudinal measures of mental health as well as well being; not forgetting global distress, symptoms of post-traumatic stress, impairment of their functionality and the satisfaction of life. In addition to this, he goes on ahead, to say that with reference to prior research, based on the impact of adversity, linear impacts emerged in the results acquired; these showed that more lifetime adversity was linked to higher levels of global distress, lower satisfaction in life, impairment in functionality and lastly PTS symptoms. Alternatively, Seery adds that the results acquired brought about quadratic patterns which demonstrated a critical qualification to the outwardly simple linkage between outcomes and lifetime difficulty. The findings depicted that an account of some difficulty in life, which was relative to both no hardship or high levels of hardship in life, showed lower global distress, higher life satisfaction, lower symptoms of PTS and finally lower impairment in functionality. This is a depiction of a stable and health mental state of an individual who is experiencing a very comforting life. In addition to that, the research team led by Seery, discovered that across the same longitudinal outcome analysis, individuals with an account of some lifetime hardship were depicted to be less negatively affected by recent adverse and challenging events as opposed to other individuals. Even though the data accumulated does not establish a basis of causation, Seery points out that the proof given is in line with the assumption that in moderation, going through difficulties in life can indeed contribute to the development and enhancement of resilience in an individual thus asserting that what really does not kill us makes us stronger (Donovan 2010). The study by Seery and his colleagues was strongly focused on hardships in life. From their findings, there is a reason to trust that other relatively ordinary experiences should also be foster the development of resilience in an individual. With reference to this, it can thus be said that other experiences which are not necessarily challenging can contribute to an individual being resilient. More over, it is not that hardships are the only experiences that can make an individual establish a resilient character in themselves. The research brings about the proposition that carefully designed psychotherapeutic interventions may be in a position to impact resilience in a person; there is however a lot of work which needs to be executed in a bid to fully understand resilience and discern where it comes from or rather its origin. This suggestions means that by understanding the origin of resilience, it is only then that one would be certain to affirm that lifetime adversity makes people even stronger. Further information about the adage is based on the German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche. He was also of the notion that what does not kill people makes them stronger instead. There is somewhat of controversy following Nietzsche's belief considering that his life was characterized by being miserable and short; it continues to echo in the American culture (Shpancer 2010). Basing information form a psychological perspective, Freud depicted suffering to be an inevitable part of life or rather nobody in life can be exempted from suffering no matter what. Hence ways have been established to try and make suffering seem less difficult and one way is by giving it transformative powers; others focus on the belief that there is an afterlife which will not be characterized by suffering, a sentiment that Freud does not support. The use of cocaine was also another way to ease pain and Freud himself was a fan but for sometime (Joseph 2012). More proof to support the idea by Nietzsche concerns the nature of the American culture which is defined by having a background characterized by trauma and accompanied by some hopeful belief; the idea is found to be self-affirming or rather self satisfying (Shpancer 2010). The acquisition of a certain belief makes people develop an attitude of tending to view, remember and report instances and experiences that support the idea. This is what is called as confirmation bias. There is actually no consideration of any other belief or evidence which may deem the idea null and void. The American culture is therefore best explained through having certain chosen beliefs which are focus on supporting the adage by Nietzsche, who judging by his life, lived miserably. It is from this that questions arise concerning his view on life experiences which made him arrive at that phrase. The fact that he died miserably makes his adage appear to be ironical. There is more evidence or rather reason why people have the notion that trauma is indeed transformative which is that people see variants of the traumatic process around them. For instance, bacteria that are not fully terminated by antibiotic will in turn mutate and thus become resistant to any more antibiotics. Relating this to individuals, it is held that individuals who go through the difficulty of training tend to improve their general performance. However, human beings are not bacteria and a good training exercise cannot be categorized as a traumatic experience. It is now clear that in somewhat of an evolutionary sense, those people who survive a calamity are defined as being the fittest. This definition does not assert that it is calamity that made them so. In the minds of many, there is unreliable judgment that people are strong because they have survived a calamity; it may have been and it is possible that they were strong people even before. Thus being strong is not dependent on one surviving a lifetime adversity. People should know that there are naturally strong individuals and that emerging from calamities is not what makes them strong. The brain is considered to be a tool which gives meaning to things as it is designed to arrange vast and sensory information into an orderly and logical perception which in turn is primarily organized in a narrative form. For instance something happens then leads to something else which then brings about a certain ending to the pattern (Gunty et al. 2011). When there is an occurrence of two things at the same time, there is an assumption that there is some meaningful linkage in them. The inclination to deduce causality from co-occurrence is not restricted to human beings only; pigeons in a cage receiving food at random intervals which is not associated with their behavior, will nonetheless exhibit a repeated movement which they happened to be doing earlier before there was any sign of food. Superstition is what describes the behavior of the pigeons. Human beings are known to b superstitious as well and many common beliefs are supported by or based on this error as it is deemed. Some of the superstitions are insignificant and unrealistic for instance, like a fan's belief that putting on their lucky cloth, shoes, jersey or cap will dictate a win for their team (Dekel et al. 2012). Since parenting behaviors co-occur with the developing personalities of children, many parents tend to believe that their behaviors are responsible for molding their children's personalities (Hefferon et al. 2008). However evidenced derived from a developmental research depicts that they do not have any effect. Causality, in such a circumstance, is reversed whereby naturally soft and easy children allow for their parents to feel competent. Whereas it is that, good children foster the existence of good parents. Human beings are eager to ease or relieve pain caused by suffering through rationalizing it. This is also supported by being inclined towards the tendency to look for any information which could be supportive of the pre-existing beliefs and in turn view meaning and causality as being in co-occurrence; all this assist in explaining how beliefs are arrived at. However, psychological research on the topic shows that, if one is stronger after a lifetime adversity, then it is a probability that the same can be but not because of difficulty. Hence what Nietzsche was trying to put across was that human beings are not stronger when in difficulties and thus what does not kill us without a doubt makes us weaker (Calhoun & Tedeschi 2006). Evidence derived from a developmental research shows that traumatized children, are at a greater risk of being traumatized again in future. Children who happen to grow up in a rather tough neighbourhood tend to become weaker but not stronger. They are more likely to experience difficulties in t he world. The effect on adults is also similar as that on children. For instance, in a study, healthy adults were asked to look at fearful and calm faces while at the same time undergoing an operational magnetic resonance imaging. The aim was to determine the activity in the amygdale which is the part of the human brain that creates and acts as a storage compartment for emotional memories. Half of those participating were at a distance of 1.5miles from the World Trade Centre on 9/11. The other group dwelled at a distance of 200 miles away. Those who live near the World Trade Centre on 9/11 exhibited significantly higher amygdale processes when viewing the fearful faces as compared to the other group (Butler et al. 2005). Dr. Barbara Ganzel said that the findings suggested that there were possibly long term neurobiological correlates of exposure to trauma even in individuals who appear to be resilient (Albraido-Lanza 1998). It has been known for quite a long time that exposure to traumatic experiences can lead to successive vulnerability to mental health disorders some few years after the experience. Ganzel's research is aimed at informing people that hardships do not boost one's resilience but rather they increase one's vulnerability. In an interview, an army man narrated his experiences while on mandatory service in Israel. The soldier whose work was to deal with the K9 unit says that dogs that are well taken care of, protected and loved for all of their lives are the ones that make the best anti-terrorist dog candidates (Helgeson, Reynolds & Tomich, 2006). This is after disregarding a belief held by most people that wild street dogs are the fiercest due to the living condition and environment that they have grown up in. the truth is however contrary to the belief; street dogs have no use as they lack training and are unpredictable (Weiss & Berger 2010). In the same way so do humans operate; hardships and chaos do not make an individual stronger at all and they also do not prepare one properly to deal with the terrors that are found in this world. Human beings need to be loved and cared for in order for them to be resilient because they in turn nurture and strengthen their capability to learn and conform; they also learn how to fight and how to face hardships later in life. Hence what does not kill one most definitely makes them weaker. Reference Abraido-Lanza, A.F. Guier, C. & Colon, R.M. (1998). Psychological thriving among Latinas with chronic illness. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 405–424. American Psychiatric Association (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd edn). Washington, DC: Author. Butler, L.D., Blasey, C.M., Garlan, R.W. et al. (2005). Posttraumatic growth following the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001: Cognitive, coping and trauma symptom predictors in an internet convenience sample. Traumatology, 11, 247–267. Calhoun, L.G. &Tedeschi, R.G. (Eds.) (2006). Handbook of posttraumatic growth: Research and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dekel, S., Ein-Dor, T. & Solomon, Z. (2012). Posttraumatic growth and posttraumatic distress: A longitudinal study. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice and Policy, 4, 94–101. Donovan P., (2010), Study Confirms: Whatever Doesn't Kill Us Can Make Us Stronger, Retrieved from http://www.buffalo.edu/news/releases/2010/10/11868.html Gunty, A.L., Frazier, P.A., Tennen, H. et al. (2011).Moderators of the relation between perceived and actual posttraumatic growth. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 3, 61–66. Hefferon, K., Grealy, M. & Mutrie, N. (2008). The perceived influence of an exercise class intervention on the process and outcomes of posttraumatic growth. Journal of Mental Health and Physical Activity, 1, 32–39. Helgeson, V.S., Reynolds., K.A. & Tomich, P.L. (2006). A meta-analytic review of benefit finding and growth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74, 797–816. Joseph, S. (2012). What doesn’t kill us: The new psychology of posttraumatic growth. London: Piatkus Little Brown. Prati, G. & Pietrantoni, L. (2009). Optimism, social support, and coping strategies as factors contributing to posttraumatic growth: A meta-analysis. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 14, 364–388. Malouff, J. M. (2009), Antecedent-focused emotion regulation, response modulation and well-being Current Psychology, (28) 21-32. Shpancer N., (2010), What Doesn't Kill You Makes You Weaker, Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-therapy/201008/what-doesnt-kill-you-makes-you-weaker Splevins, K.A., Cohen, K., Joseph, S. et al. (2011). Vicarious posttraumatic growth among interpreters. Qualitative Health Research 20, 1705–1716. Weiss, T. & Berger, R. (Eds.) (2010). Posttraumatic growth and culturally competent practice: Lessons learned from around the globe. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Read More