1. Effects of best possible self, strengths and gratitude interventions on SWB 10 th Annual Australian Quality of Life Conference, Melbourne, 20 th November 2008 Elizabeth M. Clancy and Dianne A. Vella-Brodrick Monash University, Australia

2. Agenda  Background  Aims & hypotheses  Research design  Results  Findings  Further research questions

3. Background – Positive Psychology  Subjective well-being and measurement  Predictors of SWB  SWB and personality (Keyes, Schmotkin & Ryff, 2002)  Orientation to happiness (Peterson, Park & Seligman, 2005)  Architecture of sustainable change (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon & Schkade, 2005)  Self-concordant motivation (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999)  Interventions developed to increase positive affect –Best Possible Self (King, 2001) –Gratitudes (Emmons & McCullough, ?) –Strengths (Peterson and Seligman, 2004)  Broaden and build theory (Fredrickson)

4. Research design  Participants –68 adults, 77.9% female, Mean age 40.06 years  Measures –Ten Item Personality Inventory –Orientations to happiness –PANAS – state and trait –Satisfaction with Life Scale –Motivation  Procedure –Questionnaires administered through online survey tool

6.  Return rate –38%

7. MeasuresScale # items α coefficient Subscales Personality (TIPI) 100.72 “Big 5” Personality traits Orientation to Happiness 18.82/.72/.82 Pleasure, Engagement, Meaning PANAS – 2 versions, state and trait 180.82/0.87 Positive & negative affect Satisfaction with Life 50.87Nil Motivation (7 pt. Likert scale) 1N/AN/A

8. Interventions  Best Possible Self (BPS) –Multiple administrations  Gratitudes  Strengths (VIA)  Life details

9. Hypotheses 1. That completing a best-possible self exercise is expected to produce an increase in SWB from baseline measurements. 2. That completing a gratitudes or strengths exercise is expected to deliver an additional increase in SWB during the study, when compared with a life details placebo exercise. 3. Changes in motivation are expected to moderate the effectiveness of any of the interventions performed, reflecting the “personal fit” of the exercise for the individual. 4. A further aim of the study was to explore the influence of personality and orientations to happiness on the effectiveness of the best-possible self exercise.

10. Results Hypothesis 1 not supported with no overall change across the whole sample. Significant differences for gender

11. Results – intervention groups

12. SWL: Interaction between group and gender: Females SWL: Interaction between group and gender: Males Results – Gender and intervention

13. Motivation changes across study and groups Results – Motivation

14. Discussion  Overall findings  Personality  Trait linkages confirmed but no significant differences with regard to groups  Orientations to happiness  No significant differences  Motivation

15. Further research  Larger sample size  More prolonged study  Gender  Personality  Orientations to happiness  Other interventions

16.  Lots of ways to  C’Mon Get Happy