<![CDATA[Lara Mossman

Figure 1.1 - Positive Psychology Themes and Topics

"All truly great thoughts are conceived by walking"
(Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols).

A chance meeting of two men walking on a Hawaiian beach in 1997 led to one of psychology's greatest shake ups. The men, Dr. Martin Seligman and Dr. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, were aware of each other's work, but had never previously spoken. In the days that followed they exchanged ideas about what they thought the future of psychology should be. Their discourse covered what makes life worth living, courage, generosity, creativity, joy and gratitude; topics that stood in stark contrast to mainstream psychological investigations of the twentieth century. It was during these discussions that the notion of a positive psychology movement was conceived (Csikszentmihalyi & McNamara, 2011). The term itself was not new and first appeared as a chapter heading in Abraham Maslow's 1954 book, Motivation and Personality (Maslow, 1970; Snyder, Lopez and Pedrotti, 2011). Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi envisaged that positive psychology would offer a balance to their observed weakness-orientated approach of the field. It was not intended to slight the value and pain attached to human suffering, rather, it was expected that positive psychology would help to present the whole human picture (Snyder et al., 2011).

The conception of positive psychology may have been in Hawaii, but its birth took place in San Francisco in 1998 at Seligman's presidential address to the American Psychological Association (Linley, Joseph, Harrington & Wood, 2006). During his speech he urged psychologists to remember psychology's forgotten mission: to build human strength and to nurture genius (Compton & Hoffman, 2013). In essence, Seligman was arguing that positive psychology had been part of the purpose of psychology since before World War II, but that for the most part the field had neglected it. He presented positive psychology as, "the scientific and applied approach to uncovering people's strengths and promoting their positive functioning" (Seligman, 1998, p.2). In the months that followed a group of scholars met in Mexico to advise on the conceptualisation and early progression of positive psychology. A steering committee was formed comprising of Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi, Ed Diener, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Chris Peterson and George Vallant (Linley et al., 2006). What had started as the seed of an idea now had momentum.

“The aim of positive psychology is to begin to catalyze a change in the focus of psychology from preoccupation only with repairing the worst things in life to also building positive qualities."
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p.5).

At the dawn of the new millennium Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) introduced the idea to the broader community in their seminal paper, 'Positive Psychology: An Introduction'. They stated that, "The aim of positive psychology is to begin to catalyze a change in the focus of psychology from preoccupation only with repairing the worst things in life to also building positive qualities" (p. 5). Linley et al. (2006) describe this redressing of the imbalance as the first aim of the field. The second aim they identify is to provide communication, understanding and relation between diverse areas of psychology and the application of the theory; to create a framework and language. The third aim is to offer a fresh lens through which to view research and practice, essentially calling to the fore a new set of questions to those of business-as-usual psychology. Gable & Haidt (2005) further this by stating what positive psychology's aim is not. They say that, "positive psychology's aim is not the denial of the distressing, unpleasant, or negative aspects of life, nor is it an effort to see them through rose-colored glasses" (p. 105). They believe that those researching positive psychology do acknowledge human suffering and the dark side of humanity. They position those in the field as studying "the other side of the coin" (p.105). In essence, positive psychology researchers ensure that psychology as a whole addresses the full range of human experiences. Topics such as joy and altruism are seen as important in their own right, not just as buffers to ill-being.

It is evident from the early literature that positive psychology was intended to take a broader approach than simply the individual level. Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi (2000) argued that positive psychology should study how various levels - such as individuals, groups and communities - flourish and attain their fullest potential. The purpose of positive psychology is essentially to study the conditions and processes that lead to optimal functioning at each of these levels (Gable & Haidt, 2005). To date the positive psychology lens has covered an array of topics, see figure 1.1 for general examples. These have been arranged into my own framework, which is not directly aligned to an established positive psychology framework. Figure 1.1 does, however, draw on aspects of a number of other mental health models (Keyes, 2000; Ryff, 1989; Huppert & So, 2013; Seligman, 2011). It should be noted, too, that many of the topics transcend the boundaries of any one category. The suggestion, too, is not that our wellbeing comes from one particular area, or indeed all of them; optimal functioning is a person-specific and context-specific endeavour, not a one-size-fits all activity.

In the years since the inception of positive psychology, the field has grown significantly (Rusk & Waters, 2013). With its advancement there have been a number of challenges and criticisms. Poor acknowledgement of prior theories and research into optimal functioning (Linley et al., 2006), neglect of the whole self and benefits of negative phenomena (Wong, 2011) and cult-like ambitions (Kristjánsson, 2012) are to name but a few. Further, as Gable and Haidt (2005) point out, the term positive is “complex and multidimensional” in its meaning (p. 108). Seligman himself has been presented as both a pioneer and mutineer. Love him or hate him, he is responsible for a catalysing the change in the focus of psychology to include building positive qualities. In itself, this statement implies that the original aims of the field have been met (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), so where to now? What does the future hold for positive psychology?

References

Crompton, W. C., & Hoffman, E. (2013). Positive psychology: The science of happiness and flourishing. Belmont, USA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Nakamura, J. (2011). Positive Psychology: Where did it come from, where is it going? In Chapter 1, Sheldon, K. M., Kashdan, T. B., & Steger, M. F. (2011). Designing positive psychology: Taking stock and moving forward. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.

Gable, S. L., & Haidt, J. (2005). What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 103-110, doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.103

Huppert, F. A., & So, T. T. C. (2013). Flourishing across Europe: Application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being. Social Indicators Resource, 110(3), 837-861.

Keyes, C. L. M. (2002). The mental health continuum: From languishing to flourishing in life. Journal of Health and Social Research, 43 , 207–222.

Kristjánsson, K. (2012). Positive psychology and positive education: Old wine in new bottles?, Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 86-105, DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2011.610678

Linley, P. A., Joseph, S., Harrington, S., & Wood, A. M. (2006). Positive psychology: Past, present, and (possible) future. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(1), 3-16, doi: 10.1080/17439760500372796

Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York : Harper & Row, c1970.
Wong, P. T. P. (2011). Positive psychology 2.0: Towards a balanced interactive model of the good life. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 52(2), 69–81.

Rusk, R. D., & Waters, L. E. (2013). Tracing the size, reach, impact, and breadth of positive psychology. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(3), 207-221, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2013.777766

Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57 , 1069–1081.

Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Building human strength: Psychology's forgotten mission. APA Monitor, 29(1), 2

Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Wellbeing. New York: Free Press.

Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology. An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5.

Snyder, C. R., Lopez, S. J., & Pedrotti, J. T. (2011). Positive psychology: The scientific and practical explorations of human strengths (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, USA. Sage Publications, Inc.

Wong, P. T. P. (2011). Positive psychology 2.0: Towards a balanced interactive model of the good life. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 52(2), 69–81.

]]>