Providing the Scientific Backbone for Positive Psychology: A Multi-Level Conception of Human Thriving

This article begins with a consideration of what is missing in positive psychology – namely, an integrative framework within which to view the entire person, especially as nested within more-or-less supportive social contexts and cultures. Thus, I presented a multi-level hierarchical framework for considering and explaining human behavior, arguing that all levels of the framework are necessary for complete exposition. From this point of view, personality processes cannot be reduced to "mere" cognitive processes; there are trans-cognitive rules and laws operating at this higher level. I also considered a four level sub-framework within the personality level of analysis, consisting of organismic needs/characteristics, traits/dispositions, goals/intentions, and self/self-narratives. I contended that each of these spheres of the person operates via unique rules and regularities, processes that cannot be reduced to lower levels of analysis (such as biological, neurological, and cognitive levels of analysis). Finally, I described some recent research that simultaneously examines factors at multiple levels of the SLOPIC model, showing that each has influence for predicting SWB, and moreover, that all of these effects are mediated by basic need satisfaction. Hopefully this line of research will prove useful for other positive psychologists seeking "the big picture" on human flourishing

For the good of the group? Exploring group-level evolutionary adaptations using multilevel selection theory.

In this paper, we present an evolutionary framework, multilevel selection theory (MLS), that is highly amenable to existing social psychological theory and empiricism. MLS provides an interpretation of natural selection that shows how group-beneficial traits can evolve, a prevalent implication of social psychological data. We outline the theory and provide a number of example topics, focusing on prosociality, policing behavior, gossip, brainstorming, distributed cognition, and social identity. We also show that individual differences can produce important group-level outcomes depending on differential aggregation of individual types and relate this to the evolutionary dynamics underlying group traits. Drawing on existing work, we show how social psychologists can integrate this framework into their research program and suggest future directions for research

What Makes Lawyers Happy? A Data-Driven Prescription to Redefine Professional Success

This is the first theory-guided empirical research seeking to identify the correlates and contributors to the well-being and life satisfaction of lawyers. Data from several thousand lawyers in four states provide insights about diverse factors from law school and one’s legal career and personal life. Striking patterns appear repeatedly in the data and raise serious questions about the common priorities on law school campuses and among lawyers. External factors, which are often given the most attention and concern among law students and lawyers (factors oriented towards money and status—such as earnings, partnership in a law firm, law school debt, class rank, law review membership, and U.S. News & World Report’s law school rankings), showed nil to small associations with lawyer well-being. Conversely, the kinds of internal and psychological factors shown in previous research to erode in law school appear in these data to be the most important contributors to lawyers’ happiness and satisfaction. These factors constitute the first two of five tiers of well-being factors identified in the data, followed by choices regarding family and personal life. The external money and status factors constitute the fourth tier, and demographic differences were least important. Data on lawyers in different practice types and settings demonstrate the applied importance of the contrasting internal and external factors. Attorneys in large firms and other prestigious positions were not as happy as public service attorneys, despite the far better grades and pay of the former group; and junior partners in law firms were no happier than senior associates, despite the greatly enhanced pay and status of the partners. Overall, the data also demonstrate that lawyers are very much like other people, notwithstanding their specialized cognitive training and the common perception that lawyers are different from others in fundamental ways. Additional measures raised concerns. Subjects did not broadly agree that the behavior of judges and lawyers is professional, or that the legal process reaches fair outcomes; and subjects reported quite unrealistic earnings expectations for their careers when they entered law school. Implications for improving lawyer performance and professionalism, and recommendations for law teachers and legal employers, are drawn from the data

Can Mindfulness Help Law Students with Stress, Focus, and Well-Being: An Empirical Study of 1Ls at a Midwestern Law School

Recent calls for law students, lawyers, judges, and others in the legal profession to try mindfulness training to reduce stress and enhance wellbeing beg the question of whether mindfulness will work for those in the uniquely rigorous environment of law. There is no empirical research on mindfulness effects for lawyers - unlike the medical field, where research has found beneficial effects of mindfulness training for doctors, nurses, and other health care providers. To fill this gap in the literature, we conducted an empirical study of forty-seven first year, first semester law students at the University of Missouri School of Law during the 2013 and 2014 academic years to see what kind of impact, if any, mindfulness training might have on their stress, focus, well-being, and academic performance. We conducted the training during the eight weeks leading up to first semester exams

What Makes Lawyers Happy? A Data-Driven Prescription to Redefine Professional Success

This is the first theory-guided empirical research seeking to identify the correlates and contributors to the well-being and life satisfaction of lawyers. Data from several thousand lawyers in four states provide insights about diverse factors from law school and one’s legal career and personal life. Striking patterns appear repeatedly in the data and raise serious questions about the common priorities on law school campuses and among lawyers. External factors, which are often given the most attention and concern among law students and lawyers (factors oriented towards money and status—such as earnings, partnership in a law firm, law school debt, class rank, law review membership, and U.S. News & World Report’s law school rankings), showed nil to small associations with lawyer well-being. Conversely, the kinds of internal and psychological factors shown in previous research to erode in law school appear in these data to be the most important contributors to lawyers’ happiness and satisfaction. These factors constitute the first two of five tiers of well-being factors identified in the data, followed by choices regarding family and personal life. The external money and status factors constitute the fourth tier, and demographic differences were least important. Data on lawyers in different practice types and settings demonstrate the applied importance of the contrasting internal and external factors. Attorneys in large firms and other prestigious positions were not as happy as public service attorneys, despite the far better grades and pay of the former group; and junior partners in law firms were no happier than senior associates, despite the greatly enhanced pay and status of the partners. Overall, the data also demonstrate that lawyers are very much like other people, notwithstanding their specialized cognitive training and the common perception that lawyers are different from others in fundamental ways. Additional measures raised concerns. Subjects did not broadly agree that the behavior of judges and lawyers is professional, or that the legal process reaches fair outcomes; and subjects reported quite unrealistic earnings expectations for their careers when they entered law school. Implications for improving lawyer performance and professionalism, and recommendations for law teachers and legal employers, are drawn from the data

Goals, congruence, and positive well-being: New empirical support for humanistic theories.

is an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Missouri-Columbia. In addition to personal goals and well-being, Ken also studies social dilemmas and the types of values that enable their successful resolution. His longterm goal is to develop an integrated psychology of positive motivation by combining humanistic, evolutionary, and dynamical systems theories. TIM KASSER is an assistant professor of psychology at Knox College in Galesburg, IL. His research investigates a variety of aspects of values and goals, with a particular emphasis on people's materialistic, extrinsic aspirations. At Knox, he teaches classes such as clinical and abnormal psychology, theories of personality, dying and death, and dreaming. Summary Although some have suggested that humanistic theories and quantitative methodologies are inherently contradictory, this article will try to demonstrate that they can be quite complementary. To this end, the authors will review their own findings with regard to the nature of "positive motivation," research that has been based in humanistic theoretical ideas but that also has employed state-ofthe-art quantitative methodologies, longitudinal designs, and causal 3

Becoming Happier Takes Both a Will and a Proper Way: An Experimental Longitudinal Intervention to Boost Well-Being

An 8-month-long experimental study examined the immediate and longer term effects of regularly practicing two assigned positive activities (expressing optimism and gratitude) on well-being. More important, this intervention allowed us to explore the impact of two metafactors that are likely to influence the success of any positive activity: whether one self-selects into the study knowing that it is about increasing happiness and whether one invests effort into the activity over time. Our results indicate that initial self-selection makes a difference, but only in the two positive activity conditions, not the control, and that continued effort also makes a difference, but, again, only in the treatment conditions. We conclude that happiness interventions are more than just placebos, but that they are most successful when participants know about, endorse, and commit to the intervention