This paper investigates self-efficacy and gender as predictors of an individuals’ ability to maintain their perceived happiness level after a sad event. A total of XXX individuals participated in the study, XX males and XX females, including. Self-efficacy was measured using the General Self-Efficacy Scale, created by (Luszczynska, Scholz, & Schwarzer, 2005). Happiness was measured using the Oxford Happiness questionnaire (Argyle, & Hills, 2002). Self-efficacy was correlated with the Oxford Happiness questionnaire after a sad event (r =, p < .). Gender was found to be significantly different from perceived happiness level after a sad event (F(,) = ., p = .). The linear regression results indicated that there is a main effect of self-efficacy …show more content…
This suggests that self-efficacy is a factor in maintaining ones’ perceived happiness. Moderation. The results suggests. Regulation strategy.
Literature Review
Happiness is an emotional feeling that most individuals are looking to grasp onto and maintain even though unhappy or even depressive events may happen. While pursuing happiness may cause individuals in some cultures to experience higher levels of well-being. Recent research suggest the more motived an individual is in the pursuit of happiness the more likely they are to experience negative outcomes such as depressive symptoms and loneliness (Ford et. al., pg. 1054). According to Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1997), forethought is a major regulator for motivation and actions of all humans, with the largest influence on behavior being self-efficacy, which is an individual’s belief they have the ability to perform specific actions that are required to attain their desired outcome. Self-efficacy has been defined by Albert Bandura (1997), as an individual’s belief in their ability to behave appropriately in order to attain a specific goal. Therefore, the ability to control one’s own motivations, behaviors, and social environment is a reflection of
…show more content…
The survey touched on the topics of self-efficacy and happiness, and attempted to answer the question: can a self-efficacy regulate a person’s happiness in certain situations? In regards to self-efficacy and happiness, it is hypothesize that those who possess a higher level of self-efficacy will report a higher level of happiness, before and after a sad story/event. It is also believe that gender and hours worked will have a moderating effect on the individuals happiness, in that women will report lower levels of self-efficacy and happiness, while men will report higher level of self-efficacy and happiness. Additionally, it is believed that the number of hours worked will cause the participants perceived happiness to be more susceptible to a sad
People push being happy on society as a total must in life; sadness is not an option. However, the research that has conducted to the study of happiness speaks otherwise. In this essay Sharon Begley's article "Happiness: Enough Already" critiques and analyzes societies need to be happy and the motivational affects it has on life. Begley believes that individuals do not always have to be happy, and being sad is okay and even good for us. She brings in the research of other professionals to build her claim that extreme constant happiness is not good for people. I strongly agree that we need to experience sadness to build motivation in life and character all around.
Ryan, Richard M., and Edward L. Deci. "On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of
Many people normally call the moment of satisfaction and joy happiness, but they cannot properly define what happiness is and how to pursue it. Happiness is not measureable. Happiness can be shared with others, but cannot trade. Once people are in a stage of being happy, they enjoy their work, achievements and even feel better than others; however, how are they sure that they experience happiness? Is crying an emotional expression of enjoying happiness? In the article “Ignorance of Bliss,” Steve Salerno, a freelance writer, discusses about the value of happiness and explains to people about the feeling of being happy. He interprets his arguments and provides examples to enhance his ethos, but his ideas are not sufficient enough to persuade
In the essay Why Happiness, Why Now? Sara Ahmed talks about how one’s goal in life is to find happiness. Ahmed begins her essay with skepticism and her disbeliefs in happiness. She shows her interest in how happiness is linked to a person’s life choices. Ahmed also tries to dig deeper, and instead of asking an unanswerable question, “what is Happiness?” she asks questions about the role of happiness in one’s life.
Social cognitive theory is different from social learning theory because it takes into account cognitive processes including thinking, memory, language, and evaluating consequences. According to social cognitive theory, individuals play a part in their development (Malone, 2002). Cognitive patterns play a very large role in depression (Furman & Bender, 2003). For example, people don’t have a motivation to move forward in difficult times if they don’t believe they are able to do so. Self- efficacy is an important part of personal agency, and a main aspect in social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2001). A person’s perceived abilities and confidence play a part in what he or she does in his or her life. Cognition becomes a motivator or a hindrance, according to social cognitive theory. A person’s perceived self- efficacy helps determine what a person chooses to do, the amount of effort they put into it, and how long they can persist if there are barriers or failures that occur. How a person sees failure is also influential (Bandura, 20...
The studies given as examples and discussion focuses on teenagers and young adults, but includes anyone is struggling to find happiness. Evidence to Support Thesis: Point 1: The level of well-being is emphasized as more people continue to lose track of what makes them happy. Shawn Anchor is reminding people to capture the essence of simple contentment and asking his audience to think about what they value. Anchor’s book provides seven principles that involve having an open mind to becoming happier. Anchor includes other research studies as evidence to his claims throughout the book.
In the book, The How of Happiness, author and researcher Sonja Lyubomirsky sets her book apart from other self-awareness books by being the first to utilize empirical studies. She uses data gained through scientific method to provide support for her hypothesis. This hypothesis consists mainly of the idea that we have the ability to overcome genetic predisposition and circumstantial barriers to happiness by how we think and what we do. She emphasizes that being happier benefits ourselves, our family and our community. “The How of Happiness is science, and the happiness-increasing strategies that [she] and other social psychologists have developed are its key supporting players” (3).
Happiness plays an important and necessary role in the lives of people around the world. In America, happiness has been engrained in our national consciousness since Thomas Jefferson penned these famous words in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Jefferson). Since then, Americans have been engaged in that act: pursuing happiness. The problem however, as Ray Bradbury demonstrates in his novel Fahrenheit 451, is that those things which make us happy initially may eventually lead to our downfall. By examining Guy Montag, the protagonist in Fahrenheit 451, and the world he lives in we can gain valuable insights to direct us in our own pursuit of happiness. From Montag and other characters we will learn how physical, emotional, and spiritual happiness can drastically affect our lives. We must ask ourselves what our lives, words, and actions are worth. We should hope that our words are not meaningless, “as wind in dried grass” (Eliot).
Prager, D. (1997). Happiness is a serious problem: A human nature repair manual. NY: HarperCollins Publishers
In the textbook titled Personality Psychology Foundations and Findings written by Marianne Miserandino she discusses the nature of “happy” people which was outlined in who is happy in the personality of everyday life. According to Marianne Miserandino, she stated that: Happy people, in particular, demonstrate a number of habits that help people cope with adversity; happy people are more successful than unhappy people when it comes to income, career, and health (Miserandino 391). In the “Happy” documentary the happiness researchers also believed that people who are happy could cope well with adversity and people who are happy tend to be more successful than people who are unhappy. The difference between the “who is happy” outline written by
Self-regulation is a theory of human behavior involving cognitive, affective, motivational, and behavioral components and it refers to self generated thoughts, feelings and actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals (Boekaerts, Pintrich & Zeidner, 2005). Self-regulation is a continuing process that occurs both consciously and unconsciously that affect the ability to control responses (Strauman, Kolden, Stromquist, Davis, Kwapil, Heerey & Schneider, 2001). It is a skill that has overarching effects on an individual’s ability to tolerate unmet wants or needs, handle disappointments and failures, and work towards success. Hence, self-regulation refers to the
“The Art of Happiness: A Handbook for Living” is a collaboration by His Holiness the Dalai Lama XIV and Howard C. Cutler, M.D., who identify many possible components that could lead to a happy and satisfying life. Their approach combines and integrates the thoughts of East and West; Buddhist principles and practices on one hand and Western science and psychology on the other. Many everyday difficulties are highlighted in this book, and Dalai Lama and Dr. Cutler attempts to help the readers find appropriate solutions in order to find a balanced and lasting happiness. Dalai Lama’s understanding of the factors that ultimately lead to happiness is based on a lifetime of methodically observing his own mind, exploring the nature of the human condition, and investigating these things within a framework first established by The
Happiness is how something is viewed as opposed to a physical thing. However, happiness is not only a perspective but also a choice. Success and happiness are frequently linked to contentment but happiness should not be dependent on success. In spite of not succeeding in my chosen sport of horse riding the enjoyment it provided for me far outweighed any d...
No matter what the world believes personal fulfillment means, the only thing that matters is what the idea means to you. Achieving this goal is neither, bad, nor good, because this preconceived idea of personal fulfillment is false. I believe personal fulfillment is construed, planned and accomplished by you, the individual. Therefore, you as an individual, along with the influences of society, can come to a safe conclusion on how you will achieve personal fulfillment. A safe conclusion would be one you determine that will only benefit you in the future, not a decision that may steer you away from achieving your goal. The world portrays personal fulfillment as a specific lifestyle that one must live. Personal fulfillment is just that, personal. By closely examining your life, observing what society expects of you, and making the right decisions, you will achieve your idea of personal fulfillment.
The concept of self-efficacy is grounded in Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory. Bandura (1994) defines perceived self-efficacy as “people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce efforts” (p. 71). In essence, one having strong self-efficacy experience increase in motivation, accomplishment, and personal well-being ( Bandura, 1994). Those with a low sense of self-efficacy, on the other hand, often suffer stress and depression; unbelieving of their capabilities and often succumbed to failure (Bandura, 1994).