CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
 CHAPTER -ONE

INTRODUCTIONS
HAPPINESS

Many people dwelt that they are happy or they suppose to be happier. The
key to full happiness is not a thought of feeling happy but actually being happy.
Most of people search happiness into materialistic object which is actually related
to their mind. True happiness starts within their conscious which relates to self-
esteem, confidence, and positive energy. James (1902) asserts that the pursuit of
happiness is an important determinant of human behavior. How to gain, how to
keep and how to recover happiness is in fact, for most people, at all times the
secret motive for all they do.

During last decades, health as a human right and social aim is recognized in
the world. Mental health criteria include satisfaction sense and tranquility which
reflect individual’s well-being. Diener et al. (2002) believe that well-being equals
personal happiness. Happiness is given so much importance because people, who
are happy, perceive the world as safer, make decisions more easily, are co-
operative, and live energized and satisfied lives. Subjective well-being, especially
measured in terms of “happiness” and “life satisfaction”, is increasingly considered
an important policy goal around the globe. The fact that the Japanese government
decided in 2010 to focus its annual survey, the National Survey on Lifestyle
Preferences, on happiness and its determinants is just one indicator of this
importance also in Japan (Tiefenbach & Kohlbacher, 2013b).

The pursuit of happiness is as old as history itself. Five hundred years before
the birth of Jesus, in the East, Confucius and Buddha separately prompted self-
discipline and spiritual practice as the means to a happier existence. In the West,
Greek philosopher, Aristotle in his Nichomachean Ethics proclaimed happiness to
be the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence.
Aristotle stated that happiness (also being well and doing well) is the only thing that
humans desire for its own sake. He observed that men sought riches, or honor, or
health not only for their own sake but also in order to be happy. Eudemonia,
(Eudemonia is a classical Greek word commonly translated as ‘happiness’)
etymologically, it consists of the word “eu” (good or well being) and “daimon”
(“spirit” used by extension to mean one’s lot or fortune) is for Aristotle an activity
rather than an emotion or a state. Happiness is characteristic of a good life, that is,
a life in which a person fulfills human and nature in an excellent way. People have a
set of purposes which are typically human, these belong to their nature. The happy
person is virtuous; he has outstanding abilities and emotional tendencies which
allow him to fulfill his common human ends.

Happiness has remained a universal concern ever since, with theologians,

philosophers, psychologists, politicians, social scientists and economists, all
weighing in with their own individual opines. The right to pursue happiness has
been even enshrined alongside life and liberty in the constitution of the United
States of America.

Explanation of happiness in mystical traditions, especially in advanced spiritual

techniques is related to full balance (conjunction or union) of so called inner energy
lines (energy channels of ‘should’ or deepest dimension of the human): nandi
(ancient Indian). In balanced state two main lines (left & right, ida & pingla) form
third line, called Shushuma. Speaking technically (full) activity of this third or central
line is happiness. Left and right lines include all aspects of normal human life: sleep
and awake, body and mind, physical and spiritual and so on. To attain balanced state
of these two lines is the main task of life – a paradoxical result of all kinds of activities
and endeavors combined with full relax or tranquility at the same time.

Personal happiness forms the centerpiece of Buddhist’s teachings which

directs that the ‘Eightfold path’ leads its practioner to the state of ‘Nirvana’, a
state of everlasting happiness. Buddhism encourages the generation of love,

[2]
kindness and compassion in all human beings to accomplish the desire to be
happy. Hinduism and Jainism also preach that key to happiness lies in the welfare
of all beings.

Scientists estimate that half of one’s mood derives from one’s happiness “set
point”. Depending on one’s genes, one may have a natural enthusiasm for life,
deriving pleasure from ordinary activities, or one may require unusual adventurous
thrills. Scientists have confirmed that happiness not only makes people feel good, it
does well also. When a person feels happy he is more willing to help others.
Psychologists call this the ‘feel-good, do good’ phenomenon.

A person’s overall happiness has a real physiological component too. The

neurotransmitter dopamine, in the mesolimbic pathway projecting from the
midbrain to structures such as the nucleus accumbency, is involved in desire and
seems often related to pleasure. Klein (2006) in his book “The Science of
Happiness” links these biological foundations of happiness to the concepts and
findings of positive psychology and social psychology.

There are essentials to happiness or the state of well-being, contentment

and satisfaction (Hurlock, 1953). They are acceptance, affection and achievement.
These are often called the “three A’ of happiness”. Acceptance by others is affected
by self-acceptance which comes from good personal and social adjustments. Shaver
& Freedman (1976) point out that happiness has a lot to do with accepting and
enjoying what one is and what one has and maintaining a balance between
expectations and achievements. Affection is a normal accompaniment of
acceptance by others. The more accepted people are, the more they can feel the
affection of others. Thus affection is essential to good personal adjustment and to
happiness. Achievement, the third A of happiness, relates to reaching a goal one
sets for oneself. If this goal is unrealistically high, the result will be failure and the
individual will then be dissatisfied and consequently unhappy.

[3]
 Many terms have been used interchangeably with happiness, including life
satisfaction, flow, peak experiences, well-being, and quality of life. Happiness,
which reflects psychological or a subjective well-being, denotes a state of mind
associated with success or satisfaction of desires or needs. Life satisfaction is similar
to happiness but lacks any reference to a state of mind. That is, success may be
accompanied by a positive mental state and the absence of success may be
accompanied by negative feelings; but, mental state is not a defining attribute of
satisfaction (Kozma et al., 1991). Therefore, a person can be satisfied or dissatisfied
with health, housing, finances, etc., while happiness is a more global construct.

Natvig et al. (2003) pointed out that well-being is often used interchangeably
with happiness although the focus of well-being is broader than happiness and it
includes contentment, health, prosperity, and wellness as well as happiness.

Flow and peak experiences are two additional concepts that are similar to
happiness. Averill & More (2000) noted that the concept of “flow” in which a
person’s abilities match the demands of a task comes very close to happiness, so
does Maslow’s notion of “peak experience”. However, flow and peak experiences
are subjective phenomena that are much more focused on the moment than
happiness. Happiness is viewed more as a trait than as a transient emotional state
(Lu & Lin, 1998).

Quality of Life (QOL) is another concept that is sometimes used

interchangeably with happiness, although QOL is broader than happiness. Meeberg
(1993) defined four critical attributes of QOL : feeling of satisfaction with one’s life
in general, the mental capacity to evaluate one’s own life as satisfactory or
otherwise an acceptable state of physical, mental, social and emotional health as
determined by the individual, and an objective assessment by another that the
person’s living conditions are adequate and not life threatening. Thus, happiness is
contained within QOL.

[4]
 Traditionally, doctors and scientists have focused on what was broken or
wrong. They studied what made people sick or unhappy and how to fix it. But over
the last 30 years or so, a new breed of scientists has refocused on what makes
people happy and healthy. This new science, called positive psychology, forms the
basis of the new science of happiness.

Happiness has been defined as “a lasting, complete, and justified satisfaction

with life as a whole (Tatarkiewicz, 1976). According to Kraut (1979) happiness
includes the belief that one is getting the important things one wants, as well as
certain pleasant affects that normally go along with this belief. Happiness has also
been conceptualized as a positive inner experience, the highest good and the
ultimate motivator for all human behaviors (Argyle, 1987, and Lu et al., 2001) and
as the degree to which an individual judges the overall quality of his or her life as a
whole favourably (Veenhoven, 1984).

Happiness has also been defined as “the preponderance of positive affect

over negative affect with a distinct focus on the affective evaluation of one’s life
situation” (Diener, 1984). Diener et al. (1991) assert that happiness is best regarded
as a state in which people feel a preponderance of positive emotions most of the
time. Diener (2000) further states that happiness can mean pleasure, life
satisfaction, positive emotions, a meaningful life or a feeling of contentment among
other concepts.

Authority on happiness, the Dalai Lama (1998) says that happiness is

determined more by the state of one’s mind than by one’s external conditions,
circumstances or events at least once one’s basic survival needs are met. This state
of mind is characterized by feelings of peace and contentment and manifests itself
as acts of compassion towards others.

Fredrickson (1998) defines happiness as the fuel to thrive and to flourish and
to leave this world in better shape than one found it.

[5]
 According to Hills & Argyle (2001) happiness is a multidimensional construct
comprising both emotional and cognitive elements. Three main components of
happiness have been identified: frequent positive affect or joy, a high average level
of satisfaction over a period and the absence of negative feelings such as
depression and anxiety (Argyle & Crossland, 1987).

Seligman (2002) one of the founders of positive psychology, asserts that

human beings seem happiest when they have (1) pleasure such as tasty foods,
warm baths, etc., (2) engagement or flow, the absorption of an enjoyed yet
challenging activity, (3) relationships as social ties have turned out to be highly
correlated with happiness, (4) meaning or a perceived quest of belonging to
something bigger and (5) accomplishments that is, having realized tangible goals.
Seligman (2002) gives the positive psychology definition of happiness as consisting
of both positive emotions and positive activities. He says the degree to which one
experience these feelings most of the time is his level of enduring happiness. He
uses happiness and well-being interchangeably. He states that happiness is an
important, if not the most important, aim of human endeavor.

Diener et al. (2002) emphasize personal well-being as cognitional and

emotional evaluation which is composed of three main elements: life satisfaction
and the existence of pleasant emotions (mood and emotions) and lack of
unpleasant emotions (mood and emotions). Ryff & Keyes (1995) introduce six
factors as psychological well-being constructive elements: self-government,
environmental dominance, personal growth, positive relationships with others,
purposefulness in personal life and self-acceptance; while Kahn & Juster (2002)
define the well-being as a positive state (happiness) which varies in a continuum
(from positive to negative).

Lyubomirsky (2005) states that happiness is the aim of a joyful, contented

life. This definition introduces the idea of subjective well-being. She found six
significant cognitive and behavioral volitional strategies of long term happiness: (1)

[6]
regularly setting aside time to recall moments of gratitude (i.e., keeping a journal in
which one counts one’s blessings or writing a gratitude letter), (2) engaging in self-
regulatory and positive thinking about oneself (i.e., reflecting, writing, and talking
about one’s happiest and unhappiest life events or one’s goals for the future), (3)
practicing altruism and kindness (i.e., routinely committing acts of kindness), (4)
pursuing significant, and intrinsic life, (5) savoring positive experiences (e.g., using
one’s five senses to relish daily moments), and (6) practicing one’s signature
strengths in new way.

Merriam-Webester’s Online Dictionary (2008) defines happiness as a state of

well-being and contentment, a pleasurable or satisfying experience of a person.

Personality models conceptualize happiness as a stable trait that depends

primarily on personality (Costa & McCrae, 1980). That is, personality traits are
thought to influence the way a person reacts to events, not the situations they
encounter or choose (Diener, 1984). This theoretical perspective assumes that
there is a global propensity to experience things in a positive way and, therefore a
person enjoys pleasure because he is happy.

Life events models propose that levels of happiness can fluctuate

substantially over time. Therefore, these models look to major positive and
negative life events to account for changes in happiness (Headey & Wearing, 1989).
This perspective suggests that happiness is the sum of many small pleasures
(Diener, 1984).

THEORIES OF HAPPINESS

(i) Hedonism Theory

In all its variants, hedonism holds that happiness is a matter of raw

subjective feeling. A happy life maximizes feelings of pleasure and minimizes pain. A
happy person smiles a lot, is ebullient and bright eyed and his pleasures are intense

[7]
and many. This theory has its modern conceptual roots in utilitarianism (Bentham,
1978). Philosophers who appear to accept hedonism include historical thinker like
Sidgwick (1907/1966), Wilson (1968), Campbell (1973), Bentham (1978), Benditt
(1978), Griffin (1979, 1986), Davis (1981a, 1981b), Sen (1987), Sprigge (1987, 1991),
Ebenstein (1991), and Mayerfield (1996, 1999). In psychology Parducci (1995) and
Kahneman (1999) are also adherents of hedonism. Hedonism has been criticized
because it reduces happiness to purely episodic experimental states.

(ii) The Desire Theory

Griffin (1986) holds that happiness is a matter of ‘getting what one wants’,
with the content of the want left up to the person who does the wanting. Desire
theory believes that fulfillment of desire contributes to one’s happiness regardless
of the amount of pleasure (or displeasure). Principle objection to desire theory is
that one might desire only to collect china tea cups or only to listen to country and
western music all day long. The world’s largest collection of tea cups, no matter
how satisfying, does not seem to add up to much of a happy life. One move to
deflect this objection is to limit the scope of desire theory to the fulfillment of only
those desires that one would have if one aimed at an objective list of what is truly
worthwhile in life.

(iii) The objective List Theory

Sen (1985) and Nussbaum (1992) hold happiness outside of feeling and onto
a list of truly valuable things in the real world. It believes that happiness consists of
human life that achieves certain things from a list of pursuits considered
worthwhile. Such a list might include career accomplishment, friendship, freedom
from disease and pain, material comforts, civic spirit, beauty, education, love,
knowledge and good conscience. Objection to this theory is that it must take
feelings and desires into account.

[8]
(iv) Authentic Happiness Theory

Lately Seligman (2002) has proposed the Authentic Happiness theory, which
believes that there are three distinct kind of happiness. The pleasant life is about
happiness in Hedonism’s sense. The good life – is about happiness in desire’s sense.
The meaningful life – is about happiness in objective list sense. Seligman’s
Authentic Happiness Theory (2002) synthesizes all the three traditions and allows
for a “Full Life” – a life that satisfies all the three criteria of happiness.

(v) The Evolutionary-Cybernetic Theory of Happiness

In an evolutionary view, the basic value is fitness. Fitness is the capacity to

survive and reproduce in a given environment. Cybernetics add that for living systems,
fitness is in the first place achieved through control, that is, the capacity to counteract
such deviations, such as, lack of nutrients, too high or too low temperature, or
damage to the organism. Therefore, control is the basis for cognition.

Momentary happiness can be defined as pleasant feeling or the subjective

experience of well-being. Long term happiness then corresponds to the
preponderance of pleasant feelings over a prolonged period. This corresponds to
the degree to which people feel satisfied with their lives as a whole. Though not
exactly the same, this sense of happiness is nearly synonymous with life
satisfaction, quality of life, or even self-actualization (Heylighen, 1992).

An evolutionary theory of happiness insists upon the connection between

the objective property of fitness and the subjective experience of feeling well.
Biologically, feelings function to orient an organism away from dangerous situations
(signaled by unpleasant affects such as fear, hunger or pain) and towards positive
situations (signaled by positive affects, such as enjoyment, love, satisfaction).
Therefore, positive feelings will normally indicate that the organism is approaching
the optimal state.

[9]
 Happiness can, therefore, be seen as an indication that a person is
biologically fit (near to the optimal state) and cognitively in control (capable of
counteracting eventual deviations from that optimal state). In other words, he can
satisfy all his basic needs, in spite of possible perturbations from the environment.
Such control over one’s situation has three components (Heylighen, 1992) namely,
material competence, cognitive competence and subjective time competence.

Thus, promoting happiness simply needs to promote material competence

(by providing resources and opportunities), cognitive competence (by education in
the broadest sense and by cognitive aids such as computers) and subjective
competence (by making people feel that they are competent or in control).

Veenhoven (1991, 1995) had created an extensive World Database of

Happiness, collecting the results of hundreds of studies in which people were asked
how happy or how satisfied they were with their life. He then studied the main
factors that correlated with the resulting happiness scores. His first conclusion was
that happiness was not relative or dependent on a purely subjective outlook, as
some theories posited. Indeed, happiness could be rather accurately predicted on
the basis of the objective “Livability” of the society in which the individual lived and
on the basis of his personal profile. The factors that had positive correlation with
happiness were wealth, education, freedom, equality, health, personal control, self
actualization and intimate relations.

In conclusion, although these observations can not prove that perceived

competence to satisfy needs is necessary and sufficient for happiness, they do
confirm the basic tenets of the evolutionary cybernetic theory of happiness.
Moreover, they clarify how happiness can be promoted in practice, namely by the
promotion of the above mentioned factors.

In addition, a number of academic theories suggest causes of happiness

(Diener, 1984). Telic theories maintain that happiness is gained when some state,

[10]
goal or need is fulfilled. Activity theories stress that happiness may be achieved
through social interaction, leisure or other specific activities. Social comparison
theories postulate that happiness results from a comparison between some
standard and an actual condition. The closer the standard to the actual condition,
the happier a person is.

In his theory of human motivation, Maslow (1970) states that leading a good
life will largely be determined by the amount of satisfaction experienced. More the
needs are satisfied, the happier people will be. Maslow’s theory distinguishes
between needs, which are hierarchically structured. If physiological needs are
gratified, safety needs emerge and then need to love and belonging, self-esteem,
cognitive, aesthetic self-actualization, and transcendence emerge. According to
Maslow (1970) lower needs are more localized, tangible, and limited than higher
needs, while gratification of higher needs is unlimited. Gratification of higher needs
makes people more profoundly happy; but to reach higher need gratification,
better environmental conditions (familial, economic, political, and educational) are
needed (Maslow, 1970). Maslow (1971) envisioned moments of extraordinary
experiences, known as peak experiences, profound moment of love, understanding,
happiness, or rapture, during which a person feels more whole alive, self-sufficient
and yet a part of the world .

IMPORTANCE OF HAPPINESS

Scientists have identified the key thought patterns that lead to feeling happy.
It means that happiness can be learned. With practice, a person can adopt these
thought patterns and increase his happiness. The other good news is that feeling
happy makes it easier to do the things that make one happier, so adopting
happiness habits may be easier than one thinks. Diener (2000) conducted an
international survey and found that life satisfaction and happiness were rated as
extremely important. It is observed that respondents in India on an average believe
that happiness and satisfaction are more important than money. Happiness is given

[11]
so much importance because people who are happy perceive the world as safer,
are more energized. Happy people feel good.

Many studies have shown that happy people live longer. One study followed
nuns who wrote a short biographical sketch before taking their vows. At the age of
85 90% of the nuns with cheerful biographies (top 25%) were still alive, compared
to just 54% of the least cheerful. At 94 years of age, 54% of the most cheerful top
quarter was alive compared to only 11% of the least cheerful. Happy people have
better health than unhappy people. Happy and positive feelings change the
chemical makeup of one’s body, producing chemicals that enhance immunity, cell
repair, and building strength. Happiness is the opposite of stress. The link between
stress and illness is very well known and well documented. Happiness and optimism
go together. Happy people bounce back faster. Optimistic people see bad things as
temporary and good things as permanent. Their positive expectations of good
things help them see and act on options and opportunities faster. Happy people are
more likely to be socially involved. Happier people look more attractive and being
happier makes one more likely to be attracted to someone else. Many studies have
shown that people, who are in a positive or happy mood, solve problems better and
faster. Their solutions are more inventive and they concentrate better. Happiness
also improves people’s ability to learn and remember things.

Scientists theorize that one’s positive emotions like happiness serves an

evolutionary purpose. Where negative emotions spur him to fight or flight by
generating chemicals in one’s body, positive emotions spur him to learn, explore
and grow the same way. In short, positive emotions create a completely different
way of thinking in people’s bodies.

Happy people are not violent. Happy people want peace more than they
want to make war. The physiological state caused by happiness helps happy people
see the solutions and be drawn to avoid conflict.

[12]
 Happy people are more likely to help others. There is a strong link between
feeling good and doing good. Not only does doing good help people feel good, but
studies have shown that happy people are more willing to share their good fortune
to help others than unhappy people. Happy people make the world a better place.
For all these reasons happiness is given so much importance in positive psychology
(Chhawchharia, 2012).

DETERMINANTS OF HAPPINESS

Everyone wants to be happy in life and to live in a happy society. Happiness is

worth pursuing because it is contagious and can spread among friends, neighbors,
siblings and spouses like the flu (Fowler & Christakis, 2009). Happiness affects human
beings in various ways such as good physical and mental health, long life,
accomplishment and good human relations (Seligman & Royzman, 2003; and Ben-
Shahar, 2007). The scientific community is concentrating more on the study of
happiness and the factors i.e., intelligence, work, physical attractiveness, parenthood,
social activity, marital satisfaction, social comparisons, culture, religion etc. are a few
to quote. Happiness feeling changes during different phases of life span.

HAPPINESS DURING LIFE SPAN

Happiness is affected by various factors as discussed above and the factors

are responsible for the variation in happiness at different ages and also for the fact
that happiness at one age does not necessarily guarantee happiness at other ages.

Indeed it is true that happiness is a subjective term and can vary significantly
depending upon our life’s experiences. On a general note, it can be convincingly
stated that young are extremely cheerful as they have a passion towards life,
curiosity, desire and of course, hope of living every moment that life has to offer.

On other hand, the older one grows, it is believed that life begins to take a
new shape, priorities change amazing, and the dreading issues of midlife crisis

[13]
followed by the old age tends to lower happiness levels. In fact, old age brings signs
of stiff joints, a weak body, low vitality, and loss of mental sharpness, which indeed
scares young people. However, these are mere assumptions that people have
forced upon themselves.

When it come to happiness, it can be said that older people, even though
they have to deal with lots of physical pain, have been rated happier than young
ones, who are increasingly sandwiched in the immense competition and the
pressure to prove themselves.

The surprising fact is that people find increase in happiness until around 30
then happiness heads downward into midlife and then back up again to higher
levels after the 50’s. This U-bend of happiness seems to hold true even across
cultural differences. People are the least happy in their 40’s and 50’s with the
global low point being 46 years. Past middle-age there seems to be growing
happiness into the later years that occurs regardless of money, and employment
status of children.

Adolescent people are mostly concerned with their own immediate and
concrete needs and advantage. For them happiness is mostly about fulfilling needs
that is their gadgets, their social cultures, looking attractive while unhappiness lay
largely in having denied to their needs. A shocking fact showed that happiness is
shifting from family to the outer world, relation among friends.

HAPPINESS DURING ADOLESCENCE

Because few adults separate early adolescence from late adolescence in

their minds, they tend to remember adolescence as a generally unhappy age. In
addition, publicity given to adolescent suicides in recent years, especially among
college students, has tended to strengthen the belief that this is an unhappy period
in the life span.

[14]
 Adolescents who are poorly adjusted, especially those who have been
making poor adjustments since childhood, tend to be the unhappy and the most
persistently unhappy throughout the years of early adolescence. Their unhappiness
comes more from personal than from environmental causes. They have
unrealistically high levels of aspiration for themselves and are self-rejectant in their
attitudes. Although all adolescents tend to be unrealistic during the early years of
adolescence, those who are poorly adjusted are not only more unrealistic than
average but also less likely to modify their aspirations. If, however, adolescents are
able to solve the problems they face with reasonable success and feel increasingly
confident of their abilities to cope with these problems without adult help, periods
of unhappiness gradually become less frequent and less intense. By the time they
reach the senior year in high school and look and act more like adults than like
children, happiness gradually outweighs unhappiness, and the stress and discontent
that characterized early adolescence largely disappears.

The greater happiness that is characteristic of late adolescence is due, in

part, to the fact that older adolescents are granted a status more in keeping with
their level of development than was true during early adolescence. They are, for
example, given more independence and consequently suffer fewer frustrations.
Even more important, they are more realistic about their capacities, and set goals
more within their reach; they use sustained and definitely directed efforts to attain
these goals; and they have built up a degree of self-confidence based on knowledge
of past successes which counteracts some of the feelings of inadequacy that
plagued them when they were younger.

If adolescents are realistic about the degree of acceptance they can achieve,
and are satisfied with the people who accept them and show affection for them,
their chances for happiness are greatly increased. It is important to realize that
meeting the adolescent’s need for acceptance, affection and achievement – the
three A’s of happiness – may depend on the environment or on the adolescent. This

[15]
is true of all ages, but especially of childhood and adolescence, when individuals are
dependent on their families and cannot control their environments as they will be
able to do when they have reached adulthood.

If the controls provided by the environment are such that they permit
adolescents to satisfy their needs, they will be happy provided their needs are
realistic in the sense that they have the capacities necessary to meet them, because
most adolescents become more realistic as adolescence progresses. This explains
why it is that they tend to be happier and better satisfied with their lives than they
were during the unrealistic period of early adolescence.

HAPPINESS DURING ADULTHOOD

Meltzer & Ludwig (1967) reported that happiness at different periods in the
adult years was remembered as being due to family marriage, good health, and
achievements, while unhappiness was associated with illness, physical injuries, death
of loved ones, unsuccessful work expreince, and failure to reach one’s goals. Linn
(1973) and Horn (1976) also reported that in adulthood happiness was mostly related
with the outer showbiz they wanted to show of their status, which had consult with
their jobs, love relationship, salary, and other things at this age. People tried to
maintain the respective prestige at any cost. They also became little emotional which
made them little weak and they started dwelt with low confidence because of the
emotions which they were having with their family and friends. These gave raise the
unhappiness among them. At this age, they never tried to look back towards their
adolescence because they mostly tried to achieve their goal for success and prove their
superiority among their friends as well as competitors, whereas, on the other hand,
they did that for fulfillment of their family’s needs and wants. Actually, they were
trying to improve and maintain not only their status but also their family’s status.

Happiness in middle-age as at all ages comes when the individual’s needs

and desires at that time are met and satisfied. Middle-age is the period of age

[16]
beyond young adulthood but before the onset of old age. According to Collins
Concise Dictionary 4th Ed. (1999), “Middle-age is usually considered to occur
approximately between the ages of 40 and 60”. To Oxford English Dictionary, “The
middle-age is the period between the early adulthood and old age, usually
considered as the years from about 45 to 65”. The US Census Lists includes both
the age categories 35 to 44 and 45 to 50 in middle-age, while prominent social
scientist, Erikson (1968), sees it ending a little later and defines middle adulthood
as between 40 to 65.

Like other periods in the life span, middle-age is also associated with certain
features that make it distinctive. During this period, the middle aged experience a
conflict between generativity and stagnation (Erikson, 1968). They may either feel
a sense of contribution to next generation and their community or a sense of
purposelessness. Middle-age has both positive and negative influence in one’s life.
To start with, it is a period of transition from adulthood to old age. Transition
always means adjustment to new interest, new values, and new patterns of
behaviour. Middle-ager men or women have to make adjustment to physical as
well as mental changes. Physically, the middle-aged experience decline in muscular
strength, reaction time and cardiac output. Adjustments to physical changes in this
period are especially difficult in the areas of appearance, physiological functioning,
and sexuality. Women expreince menopause. Their menopausal syndrome is due
partly to estrogen deprivation and partly to environmental stress, which is
psychological in origin. Men do have an equivalent to menopause, it is called
climetric which is a hormone fluctuation with physical and psychological effects
similar to menopause i.e., lowered testosterone levels result in mood swings and a
decline in the sperm count. However, most men and women remain capable of
sexual satisfaction in middle-age. Middle-aged men as a group have a greater
interest in clothing and appearance than middle-aged women because they
recognize its importance to vocational success. Middle-aged men’s interest in

[17]
money is different from that of women though, it is greater in women than in men,
who regard it as essential to security and to having the status symbol they crave.
At this period security and status revolve around establishing and maintaining a
relatively stable standard of living. In this period middle-ager has to relate one-self
to one’s spouse as a person, adjust to aging parents and assist teen-age children to
become responsible and happy adults. People having interest in religion and social
needs in early adulthood grow stronger spiritually as they have time to take care of
themselves better in contrast, when the children were young and attention
seekers. Now middle-aged want to keep them emotionally and spiritually advanced
through spiritual practices such as regular yoga, prayers, meditation, and so on
they do like to indulge in civic and social responsibility more than before. Sufficient
financial resources and presence of elder children are a few conclusive factors to
good social functioning at this age. Another feature of middle-age is that it is a
time of achievements. According to Erikson (1967), during middle-age people
either become more and more successful or they stand still and accomplish
nothing more. If middle-aged has a strong desire to succeed, they will reach their
peak at this time and reap the benefits of the years of preparation and hard work
that preceded it. Women who spent their early adulthood in homemaking re-enter
the vocational world after their children are grown up and on their own. Middle-
age is not only time for financial and social success but also for authority and
prestige. Middle-aged reach their peak between forty and fifty years. As leadership
role is generally held by middle-aged person, he describes himself as no longer
‘driven’ but as now the ‘driver’. It is also a time when they evaluate their
accomplishments in the light of their earlier aspirations and expectation of others,
especially family members and friends.

The negative aspects of this age is that it is often termed as dreaded period,
dangerous age, awkward age, time of stress, or time of empty nest. And thus time
of boredom leading to dissatisfaction and unhappiness.

[18]
HAPPINESS DURING OLD AGE

After taking into consideration years of education, work-force status, marital

status, and presence or absence of children in the house hold, the researchers
found that signs of midlife depression were consistent irrespective of socio-
economic status, as only in their 50s do most people emerge from the low period
but encouragingly by the time people are 70, if they are still physically fit, then on
average they are as happy and mentally healthy as a 20-year old. Perhaps realizing
that such feelings are completely normal in mid life might help individuals survive
their phase better that is in the old age.

A randomized controlled trial (McAuley et al., 2000) was conducted to

examine: (a) the effect of two physical activity modes on changes in subjective well-
being (SWB) over the course of a 12-month period in older, formerly sedentary
adults (N = 174, Mage = 65.5 Years), and (b) the role played by physical activity
participation and social support in changes in (SWB) over time. Participants were
randomized into either an aerobic activity group or a stretching and toning group. A
curvilinear growth pattern was revealed with well-being significantly improving
over the course of the intervention followed by significant decline at the 6-month
follow up. Subsequent structural analyses were conducted showing that frequency
of exercise participation was a significant predictor of improvement in satisfaction
of life, whereas social relations were related to increase in satisfaction with life and
reduction in loneliness. Improvement in social relation and exercise frequency also
helped to the decline in satisfaction with life at follow up. It appears that social
relation integral to the exercise environment are significant determinants of
subjective well-being in older adults.

In older age people move towards spiritual life. They think more of godly
things rather than materialistic thing. Cosmides & Tooby (2000) assert that
happiness comes from “encountering unexpected positive events” and older people
experience rather much more positivity than others. Algoe & Haidt (2009) also

[19]
assert that “happiness” may be the label for a family of related emotional states,
such as joy, amusement, satisfaction, gratification, euphoria and triumph and all the
above factors belong to people of older age. They earn these factors through their
experiences. The negative aspect of this age is health and loneliness. Health issue at
this juncture can not be avoided but can be minimized by making their body and
mind fit by regular exercise, Yoga, meditation etc. Loneliness can be met by
indulging themselves to various activities which can keep their mind as well as their
body fit. Overall trying hard, optimistic view, self-satisfaction, limited requirement
are the key of happiness.

Sears (1977) has reported that among men of very high intelligence there is
tendency to regard life satisfaction as coming more from happy family life, from
successful achievement in occupation. This conclusion is drawn at average age sixty
two as the men look back and try to assess what contributed to their satisfaction at
different ages of the adult years.

Lacey et al. (2006) surveyed a bunch of people between 30 yrs.-70 yrs. They
concluded that people near 70 yrs. group were more happier.

Regarding the well-being effects of age, the international literature finds a U-

shaped age-effect (Oswald, 1997; Frey & Stutzer, 2002; Blanchflower & Oswald, 2008).
Easterlin (2006) however, refers to a number of psychological studies which show that,
although the marginal age effect is still U-shaped, happiness over the lifespan –
without keeping all other variables constant – describes an inverted U-shape (Argyle,
1999; Diener et al., 1999; and Myers, 2000). Using fixed-effects estimations on large
panel datasets from Germany, the UK and Australia Frijters & Beatton (2012) find
almost no change in subjective well-being between the age of 20 and 50 years. Using
the same fixed-effects estimations on the same UK panel data, Clark (2007) as well as
Baird et al. (2010) find a U-shaped age effect between the age of 20 and 50 years,
indicating that even the analysis of panel data yields no consistent results.

[20]
 Some studies in Japan more or less confirm the U-shaped age effects
(Kusago, 2007; Oshio et al., 2011; Tsuji, 2011; and Ohtake, 2012), while other
studies show different results such as downward sloping effects (Yamane et al.,
2008), inversed U-shapes (Tsutsui et al., 2010) or no significant relationship at all
(Sano & Ohtake, 2007; and Inoguchi & Fuji, 2009).

Tiefenbach & Kohlbacher (2013b), in analysis of data of the National Survey on

Lifestyle Preferences of the years 2010 to 2012, observed the universality of U-shaped
age effects in happiness. This finding confirmed the earlier finding of Oswald (1997)
and Blanchflower & Oswald (2008). A very unique result of their study was that the
age effects could only be found among men, whereas the age groups dummies had
almost no statistically significant coefficients for women. It has been argued that the
reason behind happiness and contentment of older people is that they think less
about the negative emotions and better adapted to accept the present.

HARDINESS AND HAPPINESS

A person’s coping style can be thought of as a personality trait, such as, say,
messiness or curiosity or talkativeness. In other words, different people typically
use different coping strategies when experiencing a stressor and as such making
themselves happy or unhappy. Some personality characteristics are associated with
health, even in the face of stress. Kobasa (1979) and Kobasa et al. (1982) have
found that health is associated with the combination of the following personality
traits, termed as hardy personality:

• a strong sense of commitment to oneself and one’s work;

• a sense of control over what happens to a person, similar to the concept of

self-efficacy; and

• a view of life’s ups and downs as challenges, as opportunities to learn, rather

than as stressors.

[21]
 In a study of middle and upper level managers, Kobasa (1979) found that
those with the traits of a hardy personality had lower rates of illness. Although,
some research has supported the link between hardiness and better health
(Williams & Lawler, 2003), not all studies have found such results (Wiebe &
McCallum, 1986; and Hull et al., 1987).

Hardy people are committed to their work, their families, and their own
involvements, and they believe that what they are doing is important. Second, they
view themselves as having control over their outcomes as opposed to feeling
powerless to influence events. Finally, they appraise the demands of the situations
as challenges, or opportunities, rather than threats. As a result, demanding
situations not only become less stressful, but they can actually stimulate higher
levels of performance (Kobasa et al., 1985). Individuals who score high on a test of
hardiness have more positive views of themselves (Allred & Smith, 1989), and a
significantly lower incidence of common physical and psychological symptoms
(Kobasa et al., 1982). They also show less effects of job stress (Neubauer, 1992).

Of these three hardiness components, perceived control is apparently the

strongest in buffering the stress (Funk, 1992; and Steptoe, 2000). It is the extent to
which people can do something to control or reduce the stress, as well as their
perceptions of a sense of control (Maddi, 1998; Ouellette & DiPlacido, 2001; and
Thompson, 2001). Perceived lack of control in the face of stress can produce
learned helplessness (Seligman, 1975), which can lead to depression. In contrast,
having a sense of control reduces stress and can lead to the development of
problem-solving strategies to cope with the stress. A sense of control may be
especially important for people who are vulnerable to health problems, such as
people with cancer and older adults.

A sense of personal control may also help people avoid a risky life style.
Across a wide range of studies, a sense of personal control over stressful events has

[22]
been related to emotional well-being, successful coping with a stressful event,
behaviour change that can promote good health (Thompson & Spacapan, 1991;
Decruyenaere et al., 2000; Pickering, 2001, and Taylor, 2003).

A 5-year longitudinal study showed that women who felt in control of their
lives did not show increases in future illness when stress decreased, whereas those
low in perceived control did (Lawler & Schmied, 1992). Other researchers also have
found support for the role of hardiness in illness and health (Waysman et al., 2001).

Nayyeri & Aubi (2011) aimed to review hardiness components, (commitment,

control, and challenge) contribution in illuminating well-being. An incidental sample
of 50 managers and administrators of the Islamic Azad University (Khorasans’
branches) was administered Personal View Survey (PVS) and Well-Being sub-scale of
California Psychological Inventory. Results showed that hardiness predicted 38.1%
and control component predicted 36.7% of the variables related to the well-being in
a significant manner. In other words, increase or decrease in manager's hardiness
and control had significant variations in relation to their well-being.

Hardy people apparently are better prepared to deal with life’s stressors
because they believe in themselves (Karademas & Klantzi-Azizi, 2004). People with
a high sense of self-efficacy are less likely to become ill when confronted by
stressors than those with a low sense of self-efficacy (Holahan et al., 1984). Hardy
people are also less likely to be depressed, regardless of their allostatic load,
compared with nonhardy people (Pengilly & Dowd, 1997, 2000). During a
simulation of submarine’s becoming disabled, hardy sailors reported less stress
than their nonhardy comrades (Eid et al., 2004).

Attempts to teach hardiness have been somewhat successful. Ten-session

hardiness training helped a group of managers to develop new ways to appraise
stimuli as less stressful, to expand their repertoire of coping strategies, and to
increase their sense of control and commitment. Those managers who received this

[23]
hardiness training experienced more job satisfaction and social support and less
illness than managers who learned relaxation techniques or who were in a support
group (Maddi et al., 1998).

Hardy people face the future with some optimism even when confronting a
serious stressor such as job loss or a death of loved one. An individual’s perspective
on current and future events can also influence health status in both the short term
and the long term. For example, the tendency toward using pessimistic
explanations for bad events has been associated with poorer health than an
optimistic style. What make this finding remarkable is that the health status of
individuals in their sixties was related to how they explained when they were 25
years old (Peterson et al., 1988).

Since the initial attempt by Kobasa et al. (1982), other investigators also have
found the relationship between hardiness and psychological health, most often
focusing on hardiness as a predictor of depression (Ganellen & Blaney, 1984; Funk
& Houston, 1987; Benassi et al., 1988; and Rhodewalt & Zone, 1989). The studies
have examined the relationship between hardiness and psychological disturbances
other than depression and both found a direct relationship between hardiness
measured globally and psychological distress.

Research findings also showed that hardiness acted as a bumper against

stresses in various life situations (Kobasa, 1979; and Maddi et al., 1998) and it
enhanced independence feeling (Howard et al., 1986) and increased autonomy
(Butel, 1989) and caused the performance promotion and improvement (Atella,
1999; and Koshaba & Maddi, 1999). Besharat et al. (2005), in their survey, also
observed this result that there was a positive correlation between persistence and its
components with psychological well-being, and these variables could predict the
changes related to the psychological well-being in a significant way. Cunningham &
De La Rosa (2008) and Schreurs et al. (2010) also approved the effect of the ability to
job control on life satisfaction, job satisfaction, health, and individual's well-being.

[24]
 Teimory & Mashhadi (2009) also observed that the tenacious people in
comparison with those who had a lower hardiness, tolerated a lower level of
conflicts and had more problem-focused coping skills.

Beasley et al. (2003) approved the moderating role of hardiness in life by

reducing the effects of emotion-focused coping in distress scales, for men and
women. Sinclair & Tetrick (2002) accessed to the result that hardiness dimensions
(commitment, control and challenge) predicted the health beyond its general
dimension. Also Maddi et al. (2002) believed that hardiness and its components
were a reflection of mental health.

The measure of global hardiness has been criticized on psychometric grounds

specifically. Several researchers have demonstrated that the three components of
hardiness predicted health outcomes independently, thus suggesting that hardiness
was a multidimensional rather than a unitary phenomenon (Ganellen & Blaney, 1984;
and Hull et al., 1987). In addition, Hull et al. (1987) had demonstrated that only the
hardiness components of commitment and control had acceptable psychometric
qualities and predict health outcomes consistently. Adolescents high in either
commitment or control experienced fewer somatic problems than did adolescents
low in commitment or control. In addition, the relationship between control and
physical health depended upon the adolescents experiencing a large number of
stressors; high control was associated with fewer reports of somatic problems. This
stress-control interaction in predicting physical health is consistent with finding of
Brand et al. (1986) and Kubitz et al. (1986).

A similar finding emerged for the hardiness component commitment but

only among males. Among females, high commitment was associated with fewer
somatic problems under conditions of low stress. In light of gender effect for
somatic problems, whereas challenge was unrelated to the experience of somatic
problems among females, for low stress males’ high challenge ironically was

[25]
associated with an increase in the experience of somatic problems. This puzzling
finding assumes greater significance in light of other evidence demonstrating that
challenge is associated with health outcomes, and at worst, predicts health
outcomes in a manner opposite of prediction (Kobasa, 1980; Hull et al., 1988).
When viewed cumulatively, these findings suggest that challenge at best is
unrelated to health outcomes, and at worst, predicts health outcomes in a manner
opposite to theoretical expectations. Similarly, commitment and control interacted
with gender and stress in predicting psychotic symptoms.

Sharpley & Yardley (1999) reported that cognitive hardiness was a strong
predictor of depression – happiness, with individuals high in cognitive hardiness
scoring higher on the happiness end of the continuum.

Beasley et al. (2003) observed evidences in support of buffering model in

which cognitive hardiness moderated the effects of emotional coping or adverse life
events on psychological distress.

NEED LEVEL AND HAPPINESS

Throughout time, as attested to by archaeological records and later in

written texts, as human beings have evolved, they have been informally identifying
and searching to have their needs satisfied (Cartmill, 1998). Humans are social
beings, who developed the ability to communicate their basic needs some 30,000
years ago. As Hobbs (1987) points out, “People have always had needs, and there
can be little doubt that they always expressed them, especially to those close to
them in family or community who, they perceive, can satisfy their needs” (p. 20).

Need as defined by Altschuld & Witkin (2000), is “a measurable discrepancy

between the current and desired status for an entity. There are many ways to
determine current status and many versions of desired, ought to be, expected,
likely, required, normative, and so on-status” (p. 253). McKillip (1987) defines need

[26]
as “the value judgment that some group has a problem that can be solved” (p. 10).
Both of these definitions imply that the problem or a measurable discrepancy can
be recognized and defined.

Hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology, proposed by Maslow in his

1943 paper ‘A Theory of Human Motivation’. Maslow (1954) subsequently
extended the idea to include his observations of humans’ innate curiosity. His
theories parallel many other theories of human development psychology, all of
which focus on describing the stages of growth in humans.

Maslow (1943) studied what he called exemplary people such as Albert

Einstein, Jane Addams, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Frederick Douglass rather than
mentally ill or neurotic people, writing that “the study of crippled, stunned,
immature, and unhealthy specimens can yield only a cripple psychology and a
cripple philosophy”. Maslow (1943) studied the healthiest 1% of the college
student population.

Maslow’s theory was fully expressed in his 1954 book ‘Motivation and
Personality’. Maslow (1954) attempted to synthesize a large body of research
related to human motivation. Prior to Maslow (1943), researchers generally focused
separately on such factors as biology, achievement, or power to explain what
energizes, directs, and sustains human behaviour. Maslow (1954) posited a
hierarchy of human needs based on two groupings – deficiency and growth needs.
Within the deficiency needs, each lower need must be met before moving to next
higher level. Once each of these needs has been satisfied, if at some further time a
deficiency is detected, the individual will act to remove the deficiency. According to
Maslow (1954), an individual is ready to act upon the growth needs if and only if
the deficiency needs are met. Maslow’s (1954) initial conceptualization included
only one growth need – self-actualization. Maslow (1971) later differentiated the
growth need of self-actualization. Specifically, identifying two of the first growth
needs – cognitive need and aesthetic need – as part of more general level of self-

[27]
actualization (Maslow & Lowery, 1998), and one – self-transcendence need –
beyond the general level that focused on growth beyond that oriented towards self
(Maslow, 1971).

Maslow’s (1954) hierarchy of needs is often portrayed in the shape of a

pyramid, with the largest and most fundamental levels of needs at the bottom, and
the need for self-transcendence at the top. The most fundamental and basic four
layers of the pyramid contain what Maslow (1954) called “deficiency needs” or “d-
needs” : esteem, friendship and love, security, and physiological needs. With the
exception of the most fundamental (physiological) needs, if these “deficiency
needs” are not met, the body gives no physical indication but the individual feels
anxious and tense. Satisfying these lower-level needs is important in order to avoid
unpleasant feelings or consequences and thus unhappiness.

Maslow (1964) termed the highest level of the pyramid as growth needs
(also known as being needs or B-needs). Growth needs do not stem from a lack of
something, but rather from a desire to grow as person.

1. The Physiological Needs: The needs that are usually taken as the starting
point for motivation theory are the so called physiological drives. Two recent lines
of research make it necessary to revise the customary notions about these needs:
first, the development of the concept of homeostasis, and second, the finding that
appetites (preferential choices among foods) are a fairly efficient indication of
actual needs or lacks in the body.

Homeostasis refers to the body’s automatic efforts to maintain a constant,

normal state of the blood stream. Cannon (1998) has described this process for (1) the
water content of the blood, (2) salt content, (3) sugar content, (4) protein content, (5)
fat content, (6) calcium content, (7) oxygen content, (8) constant hydrogen ion level
(acid base balance), and (9) constant temperature of the blood. Obviously this list
could be extended to include other minerals, the hormones, vitamins, etc.

[28]
 Young (1996) has summarized the work on appetite in its relation to body
needs. If the body lacks some chemical, the individual will tend in an imperfect way,
to develop a specific appetite or partial hunger for that missing food element.

These physiological drives or needs are to be considered unusual rather than

typical because they are isolable and because they are localizable somatically. That
is to say, they are relatively independent of each other, of other motivations, and of
the organism as a whole, and second, in many cases, it is possible to demonstrate a
localized, underlying somatic base for the drive.

It should be pointed out again that any of the physiological needs and the
consummatory behaviour involved with them serves as channels for all sorts of other
needs as well. That is to say, the person who thinks he is hungry may actually be
seeking more comfort, or dependence than for vitamins or proteins. Conversely, it is
possible to satisfy the hunger need in part by other activities such as drinking water
or smoking cigarettes. In other words, relatively isolable as these physiological needs
are, they are not completely so. A person who is lacking food, safety, love, and
esteem would most probably hunger for food more strongly than for anything else.

If all the needs are unsatisfied, the organism is then dominated by the
physiological needs, all other needs may become simply nonexistent or be pushed
into the background. It is then fair to characterize the whole organism by saying
simply that it is hungry, for consciousness is almost completely preempted by
hunger. All capacities are put into the service of hunger satisfaction, and the
organization of these capacities is almost entirely determined by the one purpose
of satisfying hunger. The receptors and effectors, the intelligence, memory, habits
all may be defined simply as hunger-gratifying tools. Capacities that are not useful
for this purpose lie dormant, or are pushed into background.

However, when there is plenty of bread and when belly is chronically filled,
at once other (and higher) needs emerge and these, rather than physiological

[29]
hungers, dominate the organism. And when these in turn are satisfied, again new
(and still higher) needs emerge, and so on. This is how the basic needs are
organized into a hierarchy of relative prepotency. Maslow (1954) also believed that
these needs are the most basic and instinctive needs in the hierarchy because all
needs become secondary until these physiological needs are met.

One main implication of this phrasing is that gratification becomes, as

important concept as deprivation, for it releases the organism from the domination
of a relatively more physiological need, permitting thereby the emergence of other
more social goals. The physiological needs, along with their partial goals, when
chronically gratified, cease to exist as active determinants or organizers of
behaviour. They now exist only in a potential fashions in the sense that they may
emerge again to dominate the organism if they are thwarted. But a want that is
satisfied is no longer a want. The organism is dominated and its behaviour is
organized only by unsatisfied needs.

2. The Safety Needs: With their physiological needs relatively satisfied, the
individuals’ safety needs take precedence and dominate behaviour. These needs
have to do with people’s yearning for a predictable orderly world in which
perceived unfairness and inconsistency are under control, the familiar frequent and
the unfamiliar rare. In the world of work, these safety needs manifest themselves in
such things as a preference for job security, grievance procedures for protecting the
individual from unilateral authority, savings accounts, insurance policies,
reasonable disability accommodations, and the like.

Safety and security needs include:

• personal security,

• financial security,

• health and well-being, and

• safety net against accidents/illness and their adverse impacts.

[30]
 All that has been said to the physiological needs is equally true, although in
less degree, of these needs. The organism may equally well be wholly dominated by
them. They may serve as the almost exclusive organizers of behaviours, recruiting
all the capacities of the organism in their service, and then the whole organism can
be described as a safety-seeking mechanism. Again it can be said of the receptors,
the effectors, of the intellect, and of the other capacities that they are primarily
safety seeking tools. Practically every thing looks less important than safety and
protection. Even sometimes the physiological needs, which, being satisfied, are now
underestimated. A man in this state, if it is extreme enough and chronic enough,
may be characterized as living almost for safety.

One can approach an understanding of safety needs perhaps more efficiently

by observation of infants and children, in whom these needs are much more simple
and obvious. One reason for the clearer appearance of the threat or danger reaction
in infants is that they do not inhibit this reaction at all, whereas adults in the society
have been taught to inhibit it at all costs. Thus even when adults do feel their safety
to be threatened, one may not be able to see this on the surface. Infants will react in
a total fashion and as if they were endangered, if they are disturbed or dropped
suddenly, startled by loud noises, flashing light, or other unusual sensory stimulations
by rough handling, by general loss of support in the mother’s arms, or by inadequate
support. Otherwise the needs for safety is seen as an active and dominant mobilizer
of the organism’s resources only in real emergencies e.g., war, disease, natural
catastrophes, crimes, societal disorganization, neurosis, brain injury, breakdown of
authority, chronically bad situations.

One indication of the child’s need for safety is his preference for some kind of
undisrupted routine or rhythm. He seems to want a predictable, lawful, orderly world.
For instance, injustice, unfairness, or inconsistency in parents seems to make a child
feel anxious and unsafe. This attitude may not be so much because of the injustice per
se or any particular pains involved but rather because this treatment threatens to

[31]
make the world look unreliable, or unsafe, or unpredictable. Young children seem to
thrive better under a system that has at least a skeletal outline of rigidity, in which
there is a schedule of a kind, some sort of routine, something that can be counted
upon, not only for the present but also far into the future. The child needs an
organized and structured world rather than an unorganized or unstructured one.

It can be generalized that the average child and less obviously, the average
adult in our society, generally prefers a safe, orderly, predictable, lawful, organized
world, which he can count on and in which unexpected, unmanageable, chaotic, or
other dangerous things do not happen, and in which in any case, he has powerful
parents or protectors who shield him from harm.

The healthy and fortunate adult in our culture is largely satisfied in his safety
needs. The peaceful, smoothly running, stable, and good society ordinarily makes its
members feel safe enough from wild animals, extremes of temperature, criminal
assault, murder, chaos, tyranny, and so on. Therefore, in a very real sense, he no longer
has any safety needs as active motivators. If one wishes to see these needs directly and
clearly he must turn to neurotic or near-hear neurotic individuals and to the economic
and social underdogs, or also to social chaos, revolution, or breakdown authority. In
between these extremes, one can perceive the expression of safety needs only in such
phenomenon as, for instance, the common preference for a job with tenure and
protection, the desire for a saving account, and insurance of various kinds.

Other broader aspects of the attempt to seek safety and stability in the world
are seen in the very common preference for familiar rather than unfamiliar things or
for the known rather than the unknown. The tendency to have some religion or
world philosophy that organizes the universe and the men in it into some sort of
satisfactory coherent, meaningful whole is also in part a moderately safety seeking.

Some neurotic adults in our society are, in many ways, like the unsafe child
in their desire for safety, although in the former it takes on a some what special

[32]
appearance. Their reaction is often to unknown, psychological dangers in a world
that is perceived to be hostile, over whelming, and threatening. Such a person
behaves as if a great catastrophe were almost always impending, i.e., he is usually
responding as if to an emergency. His safety needs often find specific expression in
a search for protector, or a stronger person on whom he may depend.

The safety needs can become very urgent on the social scene whenever
there are real threat to law, to order, to the authority of society. The threat of
chaos or of nihilism can be expected in most human beings to produce a regression
from any higher needs to the more proponent safety needs. A common, almost an
expectable, reaction is the easier acceptance of dictatorship or of military rule. This
tends to be true for all human beings, including healthy ones, since they too will
tend to respond to danger with realistic regression to the safety need level, and will
prepare to defend themselves. But it seems to be the most true of people who are
living near the safety line. They are particularly disturbed by threats to authority, to
legality and to the representatives of the law.

3. The Love and Belonging Needs : If both the physiological and the safety
needs are fairly well gratified, there will emerge the love and affection and
belongingness needs and whole cycle already described will repeat itself with this
new center. Now the person will feel keenly, as never before the absence of friends
or loved ones. He will hunger for affectionate relations with people in general,
namely, for a place in his group or family, and he will strive with great intensity to
achieve this goal.

This aspect of Maslow’s (1954) hierarchy involves emotionally based

relationships in general, such as friendship, intimacy, and family.

Humans need to feel a sense of belonging and acceptance, whether it comes

from a large social group, such as clubs, office culture, religious groups, professional
organizations, sport’s teams, gangs, or small social connections (family members,

[33]
intimate partners, mentors, close colleagues, confidents). They need to love and be
loved (sexually and non-sexually) by others. In the absence of these elements, many
people become susceptible to loneliness, social anxiety and clinical depression. This
need for belonging can often overcome the physiological and security needs,
depending on the strength of the peer pressure. An anorexic, for example, may ignore
the need to eat and the security of health for a feeling of control and belonging.

In our society thwarting of these needs is the most commonly found core in
cases of maladjustment and more severe pathology. Practically all theorists of
psychopathology have stressed thwarting of the love needs as basic in the picture
of maladjustment.

4. The Esteem Needs: All humans have a need to be respected and to have self-
esteem and self-respect. The esteem needs presents the normal human desire to
be accepted and valued by others. People need to engage themselves to gain
recognition and have an activity or activities that give them a sense of contribution
to feel accepted and self-valued, be it in a profession or hobby. Imbalances at this
level can result in low self-esteem or an inferiority complex. People with low self-
esteem need respect from others. They may seek fame or glory, which again
depends on others. However, many people with low self-esteem will not be able to
improve their view of themselves simply by receiving fame, respect and glory
externally, but must first accept themselves internally. Psychological imbalances
such as depression can also prevent one from obtaining self-esteem on both levels.

Most people have a need for a stable self-respect and self-esteem. Maslow
(1954) noted two versions of esteem needs, a lower one and a higher one. The
lower one is the need for respect from others, the need for status, recognition,
fame, prestige, and attention. The higher one is the need for self-respect, the need
for strength, competence, mastery, self-confidence, independence, and freedom.
The latter one ranks higher because it rests more on inner competence won

[34]
through experience. Deprivation of these needs can lead to an inferiority complex,
weakness, and helplessness.

Satisfaction of the self-esteem needs leads to feelings of self-confidence,

worth, strength, capability, and adequacy, of being useful and necessary in the
world. But thwarting of these needs produces feelings of inferiority, of weakness,
and of helplessness.

5. Need to Know and Understand : The fifth level of Maslow’s pyramid

represents an individuals’ need to know and understand. According to Maslow’s
(1970) hierarchy, this motivation cannot occur until the deficiency needs have been
met to the individual’s satisfaction.

Requiring knowledge and systematizing the universe have been considered

as, in part, techniques for the achievement of basic safety in the world, or for the
intelligent man, expressions of self-actualization. The facts that people acquire, if
they are isolated or atomistic, inevitably get theorized about, and either analyzed or
organized or both. This process has been phrased as they reach for meaning. Thus,
it can be said that a desire to understand is to systematize, to organize, to analyze,
to look for relations and meanings, to construct a system of values. These desires
too form themselves into a small hierarchy in which the desire to know is
proponent over the desire to understand and all the characteristics of a hierarchy
seem to hold for this one as well.

6. Aesthetic Need : In some individuals there is a truly basic aesthetic need.

They get sick (in special ways) from ugliness, and are cured by beautiful
surroundings, they crave actively and their cravings can be satisfied only by beauty.
It is seen almost universally in healthy children. Some evidence of such an impulse
is round in every culture and in every age far back as the cavemen.

Much overlapping with conative and cognitive needs makes it impossible to

separate them sharply. The needs for order, for symmetry, for closure, for

[35]
competition of the act, for system, and for structure may be indiscriminately
assigned to either cognitive, conative, or aesthetic, or even to neurotic needs.

7. The Need for Self-Actualization : Even, if all above needs are satisfied, one
may still often (if not always) expects that a new discontent and restlessness will
soon develop, unless the individual is doing what he, individually, is fitted for. A
musician must make music, an artist must paint, a poet must write, if he is to be
ultimately at peace with himself. What a man can be, he must be. He must be true to
his own nature. This need is called self-actualization and refers to man’s desire for
self-fulfillment, namely, to the tendency for him to become actualized in what he is
potential. This tendency might be phrased as the desire to become more and more
what one idiosyncratically is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming.

The growth of self-actualization (Maslow, 1962) refers to the need for

personal growth that is present throughout a person’s life. For Maslow (1962), a
person is always “becoming” and never remains static in these terms. In self -
actualization a person comes to find a meaning to life that is important to him.

Although all people are, theoretically, capable of self-actualizing, most of

them will not do so, or only to a limited degree. Maslow (1962) was particularly
interested in the characteristics of people whom he considered to have achieved
their potential as persons. By studying people he considered self-actualized
(including Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein), Maslow (1962) identified 15
characteristics of self-actualized persons.

1. They perceive reality efficiently and can tolerate uncertainty;

2. accept themselves and others for what they are;

3. spontaneous in thought and action;

4. problem-centered (not self-centered);

5. unusual sense of humor;

6. able to look at life objectively;

[36]
7. highly creative;

8. resistant to enculturation, but not purposely unconventional;

9. concerned for the welfare of humanity;

10. capable of deep appreciation of basic life-experiences;

11. establish deep satisfying interpersonal relationships with a few people;

12. peak experiences;

13. need for privacy;

14. democratic attitudes; and

15. strong moral/ethical standards.

These needs will vary greatly from person to person. In one individual it may
take the form of the desire to be an ideal mother, in another it may be expressed
athletically, and in still another it may be expressed in painting pictures or in
inventions. At this level, individual differences are greatest.

Although people achieve self-actualization in their own unique way, they

tend to share certain characteristics. However, self-actualization is a matter of
degree. There are no perfect human beings (Maslow, 1970). It is not necessary to
display all 15 characteristics to become self-actualized, and not only self-actualized
people will display them. Maslow (1970) did not equate self-actualization with
perfection. Self-actualization merely involves achieving one’s potential. Thus,
someone can be silly, wasteful, vain, and impolite, and still self-actualize.

There are some behaviours which lead to self-actualization. These are:

a) experiencing life like a child, with full absorption and concentration;

b) trying new things instead of sticking to safe paths;

c) listening to one’s feelings in evaluating experiences instead of the voice of

tradition, authority, or the majority;

d) avoiding pretense (game playing) and being honest;

[37]
e) being prepared to be unpopular if one’s views do not coincide with those of
the majority;

f) taking responsibility and working hard; and

g) trying to identify one’s defenses and having the courage to give them up.

8. Self-Transcendence Need : Inherent in the nature of humans is the desire to

improve and better themselves. This process of going beyond current limitations is
often referred to as “self-transcendence”. Self- transcendence can apply to any
aspect of one’s being. The physical self-transcendence is running faster, the mental
self- transcendence is going beyond one’s purely egoistic thinking.

However, at the heart of self-transcendence is a spiritual concept that

people are growing into a more illumining nature and gaining a wider perspective of
their true self.

Self-transcendence is not competing with others. Self- transcendence is a

personal journey of self-discovery. To practice self-transcendence people need
personal effort, and willingness to change. However, self-transcendence needs to
involve an awareness that their success doesn’t just involve their “Little I”, but also
the universal self (or bigger “I”).

Spiritual seekers have experienced self-transcendence as the grace that

allows them to be aware of the infinite consciousness of inner delight. In this
spiritual self-transcendence the different religions and spiritual practices converge
on the common teaching of going beyond the limitations of the ego and being
aware of one’s higher source. This higher self is called by many different names, but
ultimately is beyond any metaphysical concept.

The practice of self-transcendence is not limited to those who are overtly

religious. Any human being who strives for greater perfection and a higher
perspective is practicing a form of self-transcendence, and it is this self-
transcendence that gives people joy.

[38]
 Ward (2005) makes the observation that self-transcendence is a path seeking
to come in between the asceticism of self-denial and the potential hedonism of self-
fulfillment. Ward (2005) says of self-transcendence a: “non-egoist delight in being”.

Self-transcendence involves a giving up of oneself (ego) in order to attain

true satisfaction. All the great religious traditions of the world to some extent share
this belief of transcending the ego. To quote Jesus Christ: “He who loses himself will
find himself”. Ellermann & Reed (2001) observed an inverse relationship between
self-transcendence and depression, a factor which is known to decrease happiness.
Likewise, in a Taiwanes sample, Huang (2000) found significant relationship
between self-transcendence and personal growth, positive relations with others,
purpose in life and life satisfaction.

Maslow’s (1971) basic position is that as one becomes more self-actualized

and self-transcendent, one becomes more wise i.e., develops wisdom and
automatically knows what to do in a wide variety of situations. Daniels (2001)
suggested that Maslow’s ultimate conclusion that the highest levels of self-
actualization are transcendent in their nature may be one of his most important
contributions to the study of human behaviour and motivation.

Norwood (1999) proposed that Maslow’s hierarchy can be used to describe

the kinds of information individuals seek at different levels of development. For
example, individuals at the lowest level seek coping information in order to meet
their basic needs. Information that is not directly connected to helping a person meet
his or her needs in a very short time span is simply left unattended. Individuals at the
safety need level need helping information. They seek to be assisted in seeing how
they can be safe and secure. Enlightening information is sought by individuals seeking
to meet their belongingness needs or relationship development. Empowering
information is sought by individuals at the esteem level. They are looking for
information on how their egos can be developed. Finally, people in the growth levels
of cognitive, aesthetic, and self-actualization seek edifying information. While

[39]
Norwood (1999) does not specifically address the level of transcendence, it can be
said that at this stage individuals would seek information on how to connect to
something beyond themselves or to how others could be edified.

The few major studies that have been completed seem to support the
proposals of James (1892/1962) and Mathes (1981) that there are three levels of
human needs. James (1892/1962) hypothesized three levels of material
(physiological, safety), social (belongingness, esteem), and spiritual needs. Mathes
(1981) proposed three levels i.e., physiological, belongingness, and self-actualization;
he considered security and self-esteem as unwarranted. Alderfer (1972) developed a
comparable hierarchy with his ERG (existence, relatedness, and growth) theory. His
approach modified Maslow’s theory based on the work of Allport (1960, 1961) who
incorporated concepts from systems theory into his work on personality. He
proposed three levels of hierarchy of human needs. The first one is existence need
which includes all of the various forms of material and psychological desires.
However, when divided among people one person’s gain is another’s loss if resources
are limited. The second need in hierarchy is relatedness which involves relations with
significant others. People dominated by this need are satisfied by mutually sharing
thoughts and feelings. Acceptance, confirmation, understanding, and influence are its
elements. The highest-order need in Alderfer’s (1972) model is growth need which
impels a person to make creative or productive effects on himself and his
environment. This need is satisfied through using capabilities in engaging problems;
and creates a greater sense of wholeness and fullness as a human being.

Maslow (1970) recognized that not all personalities followed his proposed
model. While a variety of personality dimensions might be considered as related to
motivational needs, one of the most often cited is that of introversion and
extroversion. Reorganizing Maslow’s (1970) hierarchy based on the work of
Alderfer (1972) and considering the introversion-extroversion dimension of
personality results in three levels, each with an introverted and extroverted

[40]
component. This organization suggests that there may be two aspects of each level
that differentiate how people relate to each set of needs with different
personalities relating more to one dimension than to the other. For example, an
introvert at the level of other (relatedness) might be more concerned with his or
her own perceptions of being included in a group, whereas an extrovert at that
same level would pay more attention to how others value that membership.

At this point there is little agreement about the identification of basic human
needs and how they are ordered. For example, Ryan & Deci (2001) also suggested
three needs, although they are not necessarily arranged hierarchically: the need for
autonomy, the need for competency, and the need for relatedness. Nohria et al.
(2001) provide evidence from a sociobiology theory of motivation that human have
four basic needs: (1) acquire objects and experiences; (2) bond with others in long-
term relationships of mutual care and commitment; (3) learn and make sense of the
world and of ourselves; and (4) to defend ourselves, our loved ones, beliefs and
resources from harm. The Institute of Management Excellence (2001) suggests that
there are nine basic needs: (1) security, (2) adventure, (3) freedom, (4) exchange,
(5) power, (6) expansion, (7) acceptance, (8) community, and (9) expression.

It is clear that bonding and relatedness are components of every theorist.

Franken (2007) suggests this lack of accord may be a result of different philosophies
of researchers rather than differences among human beings. In addition, he reviews
research that shows a person’s explanatory or attributional style will modify the list
of basic needs. Therefore, it seems appropriate to ask people what they want and
how their needs could be met rather than relying on an unsupported theory.

A natural outcome of this theory of need hierarchy is that since happiness is

such a state of an individual which inculcates at the fertile ground of growth needs
i.e., cognitive, aesthetic, self-actualization, and self-transcendence, an individual
dominated by these growth needs, can be expected to be high in happiness. People
dominated by cognitive need behave in systematic and organized manners. They

[41]
prefer to analyze the problematic stress situations. They prefer to look for relations
and meanings and constructs a system of values which in turn becomes the
important source of happiness people enjoy.

GENDER AND HAPPINESS

Gender refers to every thing else associated with one’s sex including the role
behavior, preferences and other attributes that define what it means to be a male or
a female in a given culture. Until research provides unambiguous answers, one can
simply assume that many of these attributes probably are learned while others may
very well be based in whole or part on biological determinants. From the evolution of
human race the difference between males and females is persisting and will persist
till there is life on earth. In all aspects of human behaviour, origin and development
of gender differences have been explained in various perspectives.

Men and women are, on average, equally likely to report feeling happy and
satisfied with their lives as a whole. Michalos (1991) studied 18000 college students
representing 39 different countries and found no significant gender differences.
Even studies that do report gender differences are small in magnitude. Haring et al.
(1984) concluded that men showed a slight tendency to report higher levels of well-
being than women. On other hand, Wood et al. (1989) reported a similar, slight
tendency toward more happiness, but for women rather than men. Fujita et al.
(1991) showed that gender accounted for less than 1% of the difference in people’s
reported levels of happiness. In other words, knowing a person’s gender won’t tell
much about his or her happiness.

Regarding gender differences the international literature – with the

exception of Eastern Europe (Hayo & Seifert, 2003) – finds that women are happier
than men (Frey & Stutzer, 2002; Blanchflower & Oswald, 2004; and van Praag &
Ferrer-i-Carbonell, 2008). However, in most of these studies the size of the gender

[42]
effect is small or negligible (Nolen-Hoeksema, 1987; Feingold, 1994; Smith & Reise,
1998; and Costa et al., 2001).

In contrast to the international literature, most of the Japan-related studies

find rather big happiness gaps between men and women (Sano & Ohtake, 2007;
Urakawa & Matsuura, 2007a; Kusago, 2008; Tsuji, 2011; and Ohtake, 2012).
Deviating results are reported by Yamane et al. (2008) who, similar to the
international literature, find only a small coefficient of the gender variable. Further,
in the study of Oshio et al. (2011) the gender coefficient was not found significant.
Tiefenbach & Kohlbacher (2013b), however, find a coefficient of 0.45 that lends
further evidence to both, the universal finding that women are happier than men
and to the country specific result that the gender gap in happiness is rather big in
Japan compared to other countries.

Tiefenbach & Kohlbacher (2013b), reported the findings of National Survey

on Lifestyle Preferences in Japan that women in Japan were significantly happier
than men which supported their earlier findings (Tiefenbach & Kohlbacher, 2013a).
These results indicate that women were not only happier, but also more satisfied
with their lives.

Yet there are significant differences in the emotional lives of men and
women, as affirmed by everyday experiences. The fact of over all similarity in
happiness and the differences in emotional experiences creates an apparent
paradox of gender, similar to the paradox of aging.

In the mode of negative emotions women are much more likely to experience
negative emotions and internalizing disorders such as depression and anxiety than
men (Kessler et al., 1994; Nolen-Hoeksema, 1995; and Nolen-Hoeksema & Rusting,
1999). They also showed that gender differences in depression and anxiety disorders
typically appeared between ages of 11 to 15 years. No such early developmental
onset was found for boys, which might bring high happiness level to the boys rather

[43]
than the girls. Hall (1984), Brody & Halls (1993), and Feingold (1994) also concluded
that women reported experiencing more sadness, fear, anxiety, shame, and guilty
than men, and being away from real happiness.

Differences in physical aggression are also being the reason of happiness.

Everywhere in the world, it seems males are more physically aggressive than
females. But in certain circumstances and social norms each gender expresses
anger and aggression. Bettencourt & Miller (1996) found men to be more
aggressive in unprovoked or neutral condition, but men and women were equally
aggressive when provoked so, they were relatively happier or feel happiness in
equal quantity when they were in anger mode but in time of neutral mode the scale
of happiness got changed.

Positive mood and behavior is also having the relation with happiness in
gender patterns. In general women report experiencing more happiness, and more
intense positive emotions than men. Nolen-Hoeksema & Rusting (1999) found
women expressing joy, happiness, and love to others. Lefrance et al. (2003)
observed that women smiled more skillfully than men.

Fabes & Martin (1991) and Grossman & Wood (1993) concluded that women
were believed to experience more intense emotions than men and to express more
love, sadness and fear. Men were seen as less expressive, with the notable
exception of anger and aggression.

The general finding of higher levels of female happiness is supported by

recent research by Veira-Lima (2011), based on the world values survey. Veira-Lima
(2011) found that women were happier than men in general, the gap between male
and female happiness was larger in countries with lower levels of development and
less favourable gender rights. But on other hand, it has been found that women
experience more stress and worries at all ages than men.

[44]