There has been some internet chatter recently about the determinants of happiness and well-being, reminding me of blogosphere responses to a paper in last month's issue of Psychological Science.
As a new parent, this study was of particular interest. Psychologists Eibach and Mock demonstrated that parents glorify the pleasures of raising children after they are reminded of the costs associated with kids. In other words, if you ask parents to think about how much they spent on their kids last year they are more likely to say that their children are their greatest sources of joy. This is a beautiful demonstration of cognitive dissonance. As you watch college tuition continue to steadily rise you need to explain to yourself why you are funneling so much money into that lump of flesh across the breakfast table texting and tweeting her life away. It must be because you love her so much. Your attitudes shift to justify your behavior.
The implication of the Eibach and Mock study, according to Wilkinson and Cloud, is that parents are in a sense deluding themselves - their true misery guarded by the stammering rationalizations "But, but, but ... The good moments are great! But, but, but ... Kids make life more meaningful."
Besides the possibility that moment to moment feeling states are not the only way to define and empirically test happiness, the more interesting point to consider is the following: so what?
Embedded in these interpretations of the Eibach and Mock study is a belief that whatever happiness parents delude themselves into feeling is somehow less real, less authentic, than other types of positivity. Dan Gilbert, whose lab has been researching the predictors of happiness for quite some time, and coincidentally, received much attention for this graph from his book Stumbling on Happiness, suggests otherwise. The happiness we arrive at through higher order cognitive processes involved in dissonance reduction is no less rewarding, no less authentic, than that born from other psychological mechanisms. This idea has received recent support. We know that other types of motivations (like the desire to fit in) can change the reward value of stimuli, so then why not the motivation to justify a monetary cost?
I'm comfortable acknowledging that much of the happiness I feel when I see my daughter smile is born from my need to rationalize the distress I feel when I consider how much I've spent on diapers this year or when I see her screaming into my face at 3am. Effort justification is an old idea in social psychology. But this is indeed happiness. When parents say the good moments are great and that kids make life more meaningful, the strength of their belief makes it so.
It's also important to keep in mind that dissonance reduction shifts attitudes, and thus subjective well-being and happiness, for all. Those without children are equally motivated and likely to convince themselves of the joys of childlessness (perhaps indexed by the zeal with which one writes about attitude-consistent research). But, but, but.... we get to have uninterrupted dinners! But, but, but.... we went to the movies last night!
And the more they are reminded of the potential costs associated with not having children, the more they will bask in their childless glory. The strength of their belief will make it so.
In the end, it might be best to just ignore the stake we all have in the argument and simply enjoy the psychological fruits of a brain so sophisticated it has the power to manufacture happiness in nearly any context.
