Canadian Positive Psychology Association

What is Positive Psychology?


The term “positive psychology” was first used by the humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow in his influential 1954 book entitled Motivation and Personality. The phrase didn’t really catch on at the time, although humanistic psychologists wrote, and continue to write, about positive topics such as how people can be fully functioning and self-actualizing. The term “positive psychology” was reintroduced in 1998 by Martin Seligman, then President of the American Psychological Association (Seligman, 1999), who defined it as “the scientific study of positive experiences and positive individual traits, and the institutions that facilitate their development” (Duckworth et al., 2005, p. 630). In this sense, we can consider that positive psychology originated in theoretical and clinical work in the mid-20th century and experienced a renaissance in empirical work at the end of the century.

Positive psychology focuses on individual strengths, well-being, and optimal human functioning (Duckworth et al., 2005; Linley, Joseph, Harrington & Wood, 2003). Instead of the traditional focus in psychology on how to help people with psychological problems alleviate their suffering, positive psychology considers how people can flourish under relatively normal conditions, and how to promote lives that are most worth living (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The ultimate goal of positive psychology was summed up by Seligman in his Presidential address when he suggested that positive psychology might produce “an understanding and a scientifically informed practice of the pursuit of the best things in life and of family and civic virtue” (Seligman, 1999, p. 562).

Two points about positive psychology bear highlighting. First, positive psychology is a science. This is what distinguishes positive psychology from pop psychology and simplistic advice such as the suggestion to “Think positively!” that is often found in self-help books. Such advice often has no scientific basis and can actually be counterproductive. Second, a focus on “positive” experiences doesn’t imply that “negative” experiences are unimportant in positive psychology. Negative experiences are integral to life. They help us grow and understand better how to live well. The importance of the negative side of life has always been recognized in positive psychology. In his Presidential address Seligman (Seligman, 1999) noted that we need to learn more about how positive outcomes “can develop out of painful life events” (p. 561).

            It’s important to recognize that many seemingly “positive” phenomena can lead to undesirable outcomes and thus fail to promote the best things in life. For example, self-help books often preach the value of self-affirmations such as thinking to yourself “I’m a lovable, worthwhile person”. However, research demonstrates that self-affirmations can actually backfire. When people with low self-esteem reflect on self-affirmations their mood becomes worse, not better (Wood, Perunovic, & Lee, 2009).  As another example, forgiveness is generally regarded as a desirable quality, and many popular books advocate trying to become more forgiving in our relationships. But again, uncritically trying to be forgiving can be destructive. For instance, women in abusive relationships who are more forgiving are more likely to return to their abusive partners and are more likely to experience increased psychological and physical aggression (McNulty & Fincham, 2011).

On the other hand, phenomena that appear “negative” on the surface may, in fact, produce positive outcomes. For example, most people would prefer to be optimistic instead of pessimistic because pessimism is regarded as a negative quality. However, research shows that people who have a defensively pessimistic thinking style sometimes perform better than people who have an optimistic thinking style (Spencer & Norem, 1996). Particularly for anxious people, it seems that pessimism can sometimes be a desirable quality.

Happiness is often considered a core concept in positive psychology, and for many people is an obviously desirable state synonymous with the “good life”. But even happiness warrants critical scrutiny. One aspect of happiness is positive emotions. Research demonstrates that when we’re in positive moods we rely more heavily on mental shortcuts and are less attentive to details (Schwarz, 2000). So, it’s possible, for example, that happy politicians, business leaders, and everyday folks might sometimes make less effective decisions than those in more somber moods. Indeed, research demonstrates that happiness is sometimes associated with poor decision making (e.g., Zarinpoush, Cooper, & Moylan, 2000). Also, although experiencing the positive emotions that characterize happiness may seem desirable, people who prefer to experience both unpleasant emotions such as anger in addition to pleasant emotions may be happier overall (Tamir & Ford, 2012). We should also consider whether it’s possible to be too happy? Research shows that people who score moderately high on a measure of happiness (e.g., 8 out of 10) attain higher levels of education, make more money, and are more engaged in politics than those who score a perfect score of 10 out of 10 (Oishi, Diener, & Lucas, 2007). Thus, the role of happiness in the good life, and the route to its attainment, warrants qualification and investigation. Questions about issues like these highlight the critical perspective adopted by positive psychologists, and underscore the difference between positive psychology and simplistic positive thinking.

            In the end, positive psychology can be understood as the scientific study of the good life. The counter-intuitive results of recent psychology studies, such as those noted above, make it clear why unreflective positive thinking is insufficient and potentially counterproductive in promoting the good life, and why a science of positive psychology is necessary if the good life is to be properly understood and achieved.








Linley, P. A., Joseph, S., Harrington, S., & Wood, A. M. (2003). Positive psychology: past, present, and (possible) future. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 3-16.


Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper.


McNulty, J. K. & Fincham, F. D. (2012). Beyond positive psychology: Toward a contextual view of psychological processes and well-being. American Psychologist, 67, 101-110.


Oishi, S., Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2007). The optimum level of well-being: Can people be too happy? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 346- 360.


Schwarz, N. (2000). Emotion, cognition and decision making. Cognition and Emotion, 14, 433-440.


Seligman, M. E. P. (1999). The president’s address. American Psychologist, 54, 559-562.




Spencer, S. M., & Norem, J. K. (1996). Reflection and distraction: Defensive pessimism, strategic optimism, and performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 354-365.


Tamir, M., & Ford, B. Q. (2012). Should people pursue feelings that feel good of feelings that do good?  Emotional preferences and well-being. Emotion, 12, 1061-1070.


Wood, J. V., Perunovic, W. Q. E., & Lee, J. W. (2009). Positive self-statements: Power for some, peril for others. Psychological Science, 20, 860-866.


Zarinpoush, F., Cooper, M., & Moylan, S. (2000). The effects of happiness and sadness on moral reasoning. Journal of Moral Education, 29, 397-412.


A Youtube video giving a nice summary of what positive psychology is about and highlighting some of the key areas





Negative Reports of Positive Psychology Show Ignorance Isn't Bliss

(for access to original article online, follow link above)

Posted: 05 Oct 2012 02:40 PM AEST by Adam Barksy and Michael Zyphur on theconversation.edu.au








The pursuit of money does not make us happy. Madeline Puckette













Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software