SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS TO

OTHER PEOPLE MATTER: PATHWAYS TO

HAPPINESS AND WELLBEING

Paul Jose

Victoria Univ. of Wellington

New Zealand Association of Positive Psychology

6 June, 2015

CONFERENCE THEME: OTHER PEOPLE MATTER Truism in positive psychology is that:

other people “bring joy, meaning, satisfaction and happiness to one’s life”

But of course the question is HOW? I am going to give two answers to this

question (but there are more than 2 pathways):1. Sharing positive experiences (savouring)2. Feeling a sense of social connectedness

with important groups

SAVORING Fred Bryant (Bryant & Veroff, 2007) has described

10 ways in which people try to “extend and deepen the effects of positive experiences”:

1. Sharing with others2. Memory building3. Self-congratulation4. Sensory-perceptual sharpening5. Making downward comparisons6. Absorption7. Behavioural expression8. Temporal awareness9. Counting blessings10. Kill-joy thinking

EXAMPLES OF SHARING ITEMS “I looked for other people to share it

with” “I expressed to others present how

much I valued the moment (and their being there to share it with me)”

“I hung around with others who know how to have a good time”

“I talked to another person about how good I felt”

DOES SHARING WITH OTHERS LEAD TO GREATER HAPPINESS? One of my PhD students, Erica Chadwick,

collected data from adolescents attending four schools in the Bay of Plenty region at two times separated by 4 weeks. Age range = 13-15 years Sample = 265 164 females and 101 males

Completed measures of savoring, subjective happiness, life satisfaction, gratitude, wellbeing, etc.

Here are a few of the findings associated specifically with the savoring technique of sharing with others

DOES SHARING WITH OTHERS PREDICT GREATER SUBJECTIVE HAPPINESS?

Sharing with others

T1

Subj hap T1

Sharing with others

T2

Subj hap T2

.55***

.13**

.62***

We found that sharing with others at T1 predicted an increase inhappiness at T2, but being happy at T1 had no impact on sharingwith others at T2.

DOES SHARING WITH OTHERS INCREASE GRATEFULNESS?

Sharing with others

T1

Gratefulness T1

Sharing with others

T2

Gratefulness T2

.52***

.17***

.57***

Yes, it does, and the pattern is almost identical to the previousfinding with subjective happiness.

ONE LAST MODEL: HOW ABOUT WELLBEING?

Sharing with others

T1

Wellbeing T1

Sharing with others

T2

Wellbeing T2

.54***

.19***

.48***

WB in this case was measured with Keyes’ Mental Health Short form (emotional, psychological, and social wellbeing). The pattern is thesame.

IS A MEDIATION LURKING IN THESE RESULTS? My mind tends to see the possibility of

more complicated relationships in these simple findings I have shown you here

What occurs to me is this:

Sharing

Grateful

Wellbeing

WHAT DID I FIND?

Sharing

Grateful

Wellbeing

.17**

.18**.16**

I did find statistically significant mediation. The results suggest that “sharing with others predicts an increase in gratefulness, which in turn predicts an increase in wellbeing”.

TAKE-HOME MESSAGES ABOUT SAVORING Sharing positive experiences with other

people tends to build:a sense of happiness, gratitude, and wellbeing.

Also, it seems that sharing with others specifically increases gratefulness, which in turn leads to increases in wellbeing.

SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS Social connectedness is a sense of being

significantly included in a social group Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan) lists

the need to belong or feel connected to others as fundamental

Barber, Stolz, and Olsen (2005) has defined it as “a tie between the child and significant other persons (groups or institutions) that provides a sense of belonging, an absence of aloneness, a perceived bond”

Fulfilling this basic need is expected to predict greater wellbeing

THE YOUTH CONNECTEDNESS PROJECT Jan Pryor and I received financial

support from the FRST Foundation to study the role of social connectedness in preparing youth for a good life

Key question: How does social connectedness promote better adjustment in adolescents?

It is a large scale longitudinal study (once a year for three years) of a largely representative sample of NZ youth

SAMPLE 1,774 New Zealand adolescents (10-15

years at Y1) participated in a self-report study annually for three years

Recruited from about 100 schools scattered around the North Island

Almost a nationally representative sample: fewer rural kids, overrepresentation of Maori, no South Island participants

All measures yielded Cronbach’s alphas > .80.

MEASURES Well-being consisted of three subscales of

3 or 4 items each adapted from the Ryff Wellbeing Scales (Ryff & Keyes, 1995): aspirations, positive relations with others, and confidence

Happiness: 3 items from the CES-D (Radloff, 1977): I enjoyed life. I was happy. I felt hopeful about the future.

SOCIAL CONNECTEDNESS Family connectedness:

it means a lot to be a member of my family for my family, spending time together is very important

School connectedness: I always get an opportunity to talk with my teacher(s) I feel proud about my school

Peer connectedness: I can trust my friends with personal problems I feel close to my friends

Community connectedness: my family and I know at least some of the people who

live in our street I am happy to live in my community

RESULTS A repeated-measures MANOVA showed

that:Positive affect and well-being decreased

slightly over 3 years, butDifferent patterns for social connectedness

Year 1 Year 2 Year 33.5

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

4

4.1

4.2

4.3

Fam ConnSchl ConnPeer ConnComm Conn

RELATIONSHIPS OVER TIME

Connectedness• Family• School• Peer• Community

Wellbeing T1

Happiness T1

Wellbeing T2

Happiness T2

How would different types of social connectedness predict wellbeingand happiness over time?

FAMILY AND SCHOOL CONNECTEDNESS ARE POWERFUL

Family

School

Peer

Commu-nity

Wellbeing

Happiness

.16**

.13**

.07*

.09**.10**

Family and school connectedness predicted bothoutcomes. Peer connectedness only one.

WB AND HAPPINESS PROMOTES CONNECTEDNESS

Family

School

Peer

Commu-nity

Wellbeing

Happiness

.09***

.14***.07**

.11***

.05*.05*

.05*

WB promotes all 4 types of connectedness.Happiness is less powerful.

KEY FINDINGS Savoring: sharing with others is an

effective approach for building wellbeing and happiness

Social connectedness also builds wellbeing and happiness

BUT not all aspects of social connectedness are beneficial: Peer connectedness fosters general

wellbeing but it doesn’t lead to increases in happiness

Community connectedness didn’t add anything above and beyond the other three types of social connectedness

TAKE-HOME MESSAGE Yes, “other people do matter” but we need

to specify who, how, when, and under what circumstances they matter

Unpacking this truism could take a lifetime We have identified several small pieces:

Sharing positive experiences with others fosters wellbeing and happiness

Feeling connectedness with one’s family and the people in one’s school also do the same

Peer connectedness yields mixed results, and community connectedness doesn’t seem to add anything new and useful

FUTURE DIRECTIONS I think associations with particular types of

people should be examined. I think that there are ‘multipliers’ and

‘subtractors’: Multipliers bring out in a person their positive

behaviours, emotions, and strengths, thereby encouraging positive experiences, moods and development

Subtractors draw resources away from a person, making them less happy, capable, and confident

I want to share positive experiences and socially bond with multipliers, and I want to avoid subtractors

THANK YOU

Appreciation is expressed to:Erica Chadwick Jan Pryor and the YCP teamFunding agencies (FRST, Marsden Fund)

You can contact me at: paul.jose@vuw.ac.nz