|
|
Mean Genes
Boston Globe, October 11, 2000 By
Gareth Cook Happy hunting. Researchers
delight in determining what brings us joy After psychologist David Lykken
gets done shoveling the snow from the walk leading up to his Minneapolis
home, the satisfaction he feels is worth "one Hap." He gets the same amount when he
draws from the oven a "perfect lemon meringue pie." Finishing a
book chapter is worth "more like four Haps." "It's a fun notion to
explain howl think [happiness] really works," said Lykken, professor
emeritus of psychology at the University of Minnesota. and one of the
foremost specialists in the new field of measuring, dissecting, and,
ultimately, understanding what makes people happy. Lykken studied 300 pairs of twins
and showed that people's overall happiness is at least 50 percent, and
perhaps as much as 90 percent, determined by their genes. The finding,
combined with hundreds of studies in recent years, has also proved that each
person has his own "happiness set point," a level of joy returned
to despite winning the lottery or losing the use of limbs. “The research shows that you
can't change the set point much," said Lykken. "You want to focus
on the little things that allow you to bounce around above the happiness
level." Lykken's study, concluded in
1998, is one of a gathering body of findings, in specialties ranging from
neuroscience to evolutionary biology, that are overturning popular ideas
about how happiness functions. In the short term, happiness is proving
remarkably volatile, spiking with the smell of pie, or tumbling after a paper
cut. But, over the long term, psychologists say the things that many assume would
make life better — such as money, beauty, or social prominence — don't seem
to matter. And now, buoyed by the rapid
progress, scientists are convinced the question of how to build a happier
society, once the domain of philosophers, could soon fall within their grasp. "In the affluent nations,
where there is wealth and freedom, the most pressing problems of our time
have been solved. So now there is the question: How do we get happier?,"
said Ruut Veenhoven, editor of an international Journal of Happiness Studies,
which began publishing earlier this year. Veenhoven, who is an associate
professor of sociology at Erasmus University in Rotterdam, said that when he
first started seriously investigating human contentedness more than two
decades ago, he was met with hostility from scientists who considered the
topic flaky. Now, he said, he has posted a "World Database of
Happiness" on the Web, a list of 3,277 scientific papers from around the
world. "The study of happiness is
really exploding," said Nancy Etcoff, a neurobiologist at Massachusetts
General Hospital who is working on a layman's book about the research. Over
the last decade, she said, neuroscientists have turned to studying the brain
mechanics of emotions, and there is new enthusiasm for exploring the positive
emotions, which are more diffuse and considered harder to study. Already, she said, researchers
have found that happiness and unhappiness function in separate circuits of
the brain. Peering at a computer screen, she said, scientists can watch as
positive emotions tend to activate the left half of the brain, while negative
emotions tend to light up the right side. This implies, she and other
scientists said, that antidepressants such as Prozac could make a patient
less unhappy, meaning fewer low moments, but not necessarily more happy.
Psychologists have seized on this insight, asking people to rate separately,
using a seven-point scale, the frequency in their life of happy and unhappy
moments. The results are startling for anyone who has ever said "if
only..." A 1998 study, for example,
found that people are pleased just after a raise, but that there is no
relation between salary and ultimate happiness. A 1995 paper reported that
physical attractiveness has at most a very marginal effect. Other researchers have shown
that whatever the rush of graduation day, education doesn't make for a
happier life; likewise, advances in "social standing" also have no
effect. Taking an evolutionary
perspective, Lykken said it is logical that happiness is so fleeting. Feeling
good, he said, is a reward system for accomplishments that make a creature
more likely to survive. But if happiness didn't fade away, an effect
theorists have dubbed the "hedonic treadmill," the result would be
a blissed-out complacency. "Nature uses pain and
pleasure as the stick to guide us," Lykken said.But the system rewards
us only if we exceed expectations, said Jay Phelan, who teaches biology at
the University of California, Los Angeles. Instead of giving his wife big presents
for her birthday, he gives her many small presents throughout the year from a
"gift closet," said Phelan, co-author of "Mean Genes," a self-help
book based on evolution. Indeed, joy derives from
surprise and challenges in our work and our relationships, according to
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, a professor of psychology at Claremont Graduate
University in California. He has probed happiness by equipping 850
adolescents nationwide with watches that beep when they are to record how
happy they are. The least happy teens, he
discovered, seem to be those from the upper-middle class, who for the most
part live comfortably in the suburbs and yet "develop an early cynicism
about life." In 1997, Veenhoven constructed
a kind of world atlas of happiness by multiplying national life expectancy by
national happiness averages to yield a number of expected "happy
years" for 48 countries around the world. Based on 1990 data, the list
was topped by Iceland, with 62.1 happy years, followed in tenth place by the
United States at 57.8 years. Russia came in 45th with 34.5 years, below
India. "The greatest good for the
greatest number has finally become measurable and more objective," said
Robert E. Lane, professor emeritus of political science at Yale University
and author of ‘The Loss of Happiness in the Market Democracies." The
book says happiness studies could help affluent nations restructure their
political systems. Veenhoven said his research
showed that once a nation has a certain amount of wealth, enough that people
don't die of starvation, further increases don't make citizens happier.
Similarly, Veenhoven said affluent countries that expanded welfare didn't
make their citizens any happier. But many cautioned that happiness
has limits as a political concept, because not everyone agrees on its
importance. Nations across Asia regularly
score lower on measures of subjective well being. The explanation for this
disparity probably lies with the fact that Eastern cultures tend to be more
"collectivist," emphasizing families and groups over individual
needs, according to Ed Diener, a professor of psychology at the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Diener recalled a trip in which his son asked a woman in the Indian state of Kerala whether she was happy. She responded: "I don't know, I'll have to ask my husband." |