Analysis and Review of Positive Psychology - Essay Example

Positive Psychology Name Institution Positive Psychology Introduction As a term, positive psychology refers to a comprehensive study of positive character traits, emotions and enabling institutions (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Empirical studies in positive psychology seek to supplement rather than substitute the available knowledge relating to human weakness, suffering and disorders and seek to produce a better balanced and scientific pool of scientific findings that will facilitate the better understanding of people (Seligman et al., 2005). Positive emotions are important in the day to day lives of human beings and are therefore necessary in order to have a comprehensive psychology. This paper discusses positive psychology and its role in mental health. Positive psychology concerns itself with what constitutes a good life and what makes it really worth living. One main way of learning how a fulfilling life can be achieved is through seeking a balanced time perspective. This refers to being able to change temporal focus depending on what the prevailing behavioral setting demands (Boniwell & Zimbardo, 2003). According to Seligman et al. (2005), the attainment of happiness has been the objective of scholars for many centuries. Since the times of Aristotle, everyone has sought to know how to become happy, yet before the outset of positive psychology, the guiding question adopted by clinical psychologists has been how to reduce suffering. Psychology and psychiatry might have gone a long way in answering the question regarding suffering but even if they manage to fully answer it, psychology’s objective will not have been fully achieved. Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi (2000) add that for a half a century after psychiatry and psychology started being healing disciplines, they became a clear science of mental issues. There was the production of effective taxonomy and valid measurement of every major concept for instance anger schizophrenia and depression. Study methodologies have been developed as well as both psychological and pharmacological interventions which have made mental disorders either curable or treatable. Positive psychology studies positive subjective experiences of the individual’s traits together with positive institutions in order to enhance quality of life and get rid of negative effects or pathologies in which life appears meaningless and barren. From the literature, psychology appears to have mostly dealt with individual shortcomings while overlooking potential. Positive psychology is more about individual potential. It is not aimed at fixing the problems that individuals have, but instead researches on the things that can make a person’s life more worth living. According to Seligman et al. (2005), its proponents argue that psychology as a comprehensive study needs to incorporate understandings about happiness, suffering, the interaction between the two and the validation of interventions which can help to both raise the levels of human happiness while relieving their suffering simultaneously. Seligman et al. (2005)’s article offers a good idea as to the role of positive emotions, and therefore justifies positive psychology. From it, one might conclude that emotions enable the development of important resources and skills. The reason why many people may end up highly satisfied with life in spite of difficulties might be because of a certain amount of human resilience that exists in people, although it is rarely acknowledged. The measuring of positive states of the human mind might however not be effective. This is because happiness as a value is often subjective, and will take the form of whatever an individual views it to be. If understanding of happiness depends on the person conducting a study, self-report measures will be the only correct measures but still this kind of approach is not adequate because although an individual is likely to be the best source of information relating to her state of happiness at any given moment, they are unlikely to be accurate in reporting about past situations during which they were happy. The focus on such negatives or pathologies has in the past been exclusive and dominant in psychology. As a result, research models tend to lack the positive aspects that make a person feel that life is worth. Examples of the positive aspects include courage, optimism, perseverance, creativity and hope, all of which tend to be either overlooked or said to be the result of negative impulses (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The idea of balancing the positives with negatives when analyzing a condition seems to be a good idea. This is because as a human being, one usually tries to measure the amount of give and take which is found in day to day relationships. Whether it is in business, social or family interactions, one is likely to gauge how much positive reciprocity exists. Linley et al. (2006) suggest that it may be necessary to have positive psychology mainly due to the effect of the negative bias in traditional psychology. For instance, clinical psychologists tend to focus most of their attention to diagnosing and treating pathologies, and also in seeking remedies to conditions while neglecting the nature of a person’s psychological health. Practitioners in social cognitive psychology devote their attention to the delusions, biases, errors and illusions that may arise in a person. Those dealing with economic and evolutionary psychology on their part tend to assume the sovereignty of selfishness. For instance, Sigmund Freud dwelt more on the animalistic id while contemporary theorists in terror management focus more on the fear of death. When a respondent in a study reflects on his life and decides he has become a better person, psychologists will usually consider it a temporal bias, self-serving delusion or a means of emotion-regulation. Lazarus (2003) however suggests that according to some critics, the positive psychology movement is at risk of ending up Just like any other fad that comes in psychology and disappears in time and might reappear in another form later because its issues though important, were not resolved. It is not wrong to call for the study of positive emotions provided that it is accepted that emotion is capable of having both negative and positive implications depending on its context. It is also too simplistic to believe that people can easily be led towards the understanding of the role that emotion plays in a person’s health and well-being. It is also necessary to ensure that a person’s emotional state is carefully measured and the context of measurement noted. In spite of the criticisms that may be raised against the new discipline, the explanations raise the question of why positive emotions are really important. Although this is something that most people know intuitively, it is not a common issue in texts. Positive psychology is driven by the belief that normal human functioning is not only attributable to purely problem-focused or negative frames of reference because a majority of people achieve good things in their lives (Linley et al., 2006). Positive psychology is an attempt to motivate psychologists to take up a more appreciative and open perspective in relation to human motives, potentials and capacities. This is difficult in the traditional psychological reductionist epistemology which trains one to consider positivity as a suspicious feature, the product of denial, wishful thinking or hucksterism (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Such training is fine because everyone is capable of being vulnerable to their own wishes and delusions. However, if the skepticism is taken too far, it might produce its own negativity bias which will prevent the proper understanding of reality. The skeptical and negative nature of traditional psychology as suggested might be true. For instance, when a stranger assists another person, a psychologist will try to find the selfish purpose that may have motivated the act, without acknowledging that altruism also exists. Negative bias can be found hidden almost everywhere within the traditional approach to psychology. This is unproductive, therefore the need for positive psychology. From the article, one can conclude that it is possible for the positive approach to Psychology being realistic Psychology. This is because there are various forms of interpretations and facts which end up making positive approaches equally likely to be accurate as any other approach. At the same time, it might be possible to say that positive aspects are likely to be more adaptive because they help to reveal an optimist's vision hence success. According to Linley et al. (2006), in positive psychology’s understanding, happiness is assumed to be a scientifically unwieldy word which comprises of three aspects. These are living a pleasant life, being engaged and leading a meaningful life. Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi (2000) also adds that the facilities and capabilities in traditional psychology can be used in measuring, understanding and building on the individual characteristics which are capable of making life more worth living. Through positive psychology, science will therefore be able to prevent some mental and physical illnesses. The psychologists will on their part know ways of enhancing individual qualities which will enable people to not only survive and endure life, but also to prosper. Positive psychologists will however still need to come up with better assessment tools that are domain-specific and behavior-based. The information gained from the texts is valuable because it provides an insight into the new field of psychology. However, it tends to reduce it to simply a way of studying human behavior. It is difficult to identify any way in which it is put in practice. If taken the way that the authors put it, one gets the idea that positive psychology is never used in assisting people to deal with their problems, but is rather an application in research that is yet to gain acceptance. Conclusion In conclusion, positive psychology is all about the scientific assessment of a person’s human virtues and strengths. It goes back to the average person and examines what is right, what works and what is undergoing improvement. It inquires on the true nature of a well-functioning person who is able to successfully apply his learned skills and evolved adaptations. It is therefore simply Psychology as just like other social and natural sciences, it seeks to describe the natural structure and functioning of the person. Considering the knowledge derived from the articles, it would be a good idea for psychologists to focus more of their attention on positive aspects in human nature. This is because through viewing both the good and bad aspects of human beings, they will be able to derive a more balanced understanding of individuals. References Boniwell, I. and Zimbardo, P. (2003).Time to Find the Right Balance. The Psychologist, Vol. 16 (3): 129-131  Lazarus, R. (2003). Does the Positive Psychology Movement Have Legs? Psychological Inquiry, Vol. 14(2): 93-109  Linley, P., Joseph, S., Harrington, S and Wood, A. (2006). Positive Psychology: Past, Present, and (Possible) Future.  Journal of Positive Psychology. Vol. 1: 3-16  Seligman, M. E. P., &Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, Vol. 55 (1): 5-14  Seligman, M., Steen, T., Park, N. and Peterson, C. (2005). Positive Psychology Progress: Empirical Validation of Interventions.  American Psychologist. Vol. 60 (5): 410-421 Read More