Go for a run, walk in nature, meditate, and you’re guaranteed a happier life. Or, at least, that’s what dozens of articles in wellness magazines say, as well as studies echoed by newspapers, radio and television. However, a new review of hundreds of studies on happiness questions the robustness of some of these strategies.
The five methods most cited in the media as ways to increase happiness are the expression of gratitude, the improvement of sociability, the practice of exercise, meditation or mindfulness and increased exposure to nature. However, the systematic review published this week in the prestigious journal Nature Human Behavioraffirms that solid investigations are still necessary before affirming its efficacy with certainty, since most of the investigations analyzed in this regard lack solid scientific evidence according to current criteria.
The statement, not without controversy, occurs as a result of the “replication crisis” in psychology. This situation began a little over 10 years ago, when a large scientific project revealed that by repeating several of the most relevant psychological studies of recent times, the results were not repeated. The problem, it was determined, was methodological flexibility. So scientists decided to re-evaluate lots of old studies. In addition, practices have been improved to ensure that new studies are held up under increased scrutiny.
Hence this new study, carried out by Dunigan Folk and Elizabeth Dunn, from the Department of Psychology at the University of British Columbia, in Vancouver (Canada). According to their research, which reviewed the published scientific literature on these practices, its efficacy in increasing happiness is uncertain.
This is due, according to the authors, to the fact that most of the research lacked sufficient statistical power to detect significant or previously unrecorded benefits. In other words, the characteristics of the work (hypothesis, methodology, size and characteristics of the sample, etc.) had not been made known to the scientific community before starting it, so that they could not modify it halfway.
From an initial screen of 1,035 relevant studies, found only 57 that met the current rigorous criteria. 95% of jobs didn’t include enough people to be trusted by today’s standards. In fact, they found only two eligible studies on gratitude, another two that assessed social interactions but none for meditation, physical activity, and exposure to nature.
Immediate effects on happiness, but not in the long term
It all started, Dunn explains, with a journalist’s question: “These things we hear in the media As really important to happiness, like meditation and nature, how rigorous is the research to back up those kinds of claims?” The psychologist then realized that she didn’t know. What did they discover, after their study? “That some of the strategies that have been widely recommended to the public as ways to improve happiness are not supported by very rigorous evidence.”
For example in the case of exercise, Dunn, and Folk reviewed five studies that “found evidence that people feel happier after a single bout of exercise…but only in comparison to rather boring activities, such as sitting quietly or watching a documentary about bookbinding,” the researchers write in the article. In all, 12 pieces of research “suggest that a single bout of exercise can improve mood. Yet nearly all exercise programs in the long term they did not produce any benefit in happiness.”
“It’s important to note that we’re not saying this is all a sham. There are good reasons why these strategies work. It’s just that there isn’t a lot of rigorous testing to show that they actually work,” Dunn says for ScienceNews. “If something works for you, great. I’m not saying you should stop. It’s important to stress that if, for example, you you have an anxiety disorder and your therapist recommends you meditatewe’re not saying to ignore this advice.”
What it says, he says, is that “for the average person trying to be a little happier, the evidence may not be there yet.” It is also a message for researchers and for society: “We need to better understand these issues that have been widely adopted by the public and widely disseminated by the media. We can’t build our castles in the sky; You have to lay foundations.”
One of the dangers that these resultsAccording to Dunn, it has to do with when people feel they have failed. “They may think, ‘Well, nature and meditation make everyone happier, but they don’t work for me. I guess nothing makes me happier.’ So it’s important not to exaggerate the strength of the evidence.”
What tricks for happiness are more valid?
Do any strategies seem to work to make people happier? Gratitude, they express, comes out of the purge quite well, and also chatting with strangers and acting more outgoing. “We have another paper in the works where we look at the best studies on happiness, which meet the modern standard. From there, there’s also pretty strong evidence that spend money on others fosters happiness.”
Authors unrelated to the study, such as Peter Malinowski, Professor of Health Psychology at Liverpool John Moores University (United Kingdom), told the Science Media Center that “this article is not so much about strategies for happiness but rather a reflection on how research practices have changed.” And he points out that “we cannot conclude that all other works published before these new norms were established, are useless. In fact, for many research questions there are meta-analyses that suggest the efficacy of such approaches (…)”.
Bruce Hood, Professor of Developmental Psychology at the University of Bristol Society (UK), says that “this is a much-needed review” that “uses rigorous statistical techniques and criteria to evaluate studies that claim to show positive benefits for happiness.” Unfortunately, he says, “almost all were poorly performed,” which “does not mean that there is no evidence to support these interventions.” Therefore, “until we have a substantial core of well-designed investigations, we must treat these recommendations as tentative and not as firmly established“.
Discussion about this post