Fake It Til You Make It: The Overhyped World of Happiness

Happiness—it’s apparently elusive for a lot of people, given that the happiness industry is worth more than $11 billion.1 And, at least in the United States, the pursuit of happiness hasn’t produced much in the way of payoffs, given that happiness has largely fallen (though only mildly so) between 2008 and 2022, at least according to the World Happiness Report (WHR, 2023).2 There seems to be a bit of a disconnect between the worth of the industry and its effectiveness.

Yet, there is no shortage of self-help books, websites, and even scientific studies claiming that an approach or tool can improve people’s happiness. While the evidence-supporting tools that are promoted by self-help books and websites are often more case-based (one of the sources of myths discussed by Grawitch & Ballard, 2019), we should expect the evidence underlying scientifically studied interventions to be more valid.

That conclusion was recently put to the test in a systematic review of preregistered studies conducted by Folk and Dunn (2024). They chose to focus specifically on pre-registered studies to reduce the likelihood that results were obtained by p-hacking.3 Their review covered three types of interventions: those focused on making specific additions to one’s life (e.g., practicing gratitude, meditating), those focused on taking things away from one’s life (e.g., reducing unpleasant time use, reducing social media use), and those focused more on a population (i.e., government financial support, workplace interventions).

What Did They Find?

While their reporting of study results was extensive, here are five noteworthy findings from their review:

Few of the interventions, regardless of category, showed consistently strong effects. Any effects observed were typically small to moderate at best and were wildly inconsistent in terms of whether any effects were observed.

Most of the interventions that demonstrated some effectiveness did so over the short term, with little evidence of (or any real focus on) long-term benefits. While the ability to show benefits right away or soon after an intervention is sufficient to warrant claims of effectiveness, if such benefits dissipate quickly, how much benefit would they really provide?

The most consistently strong effects (though only across three studies) occurred for increasing sociability. However, practicing gratitude, spending money on others, and acting happy all showed some consistent small to moderate benefits, though most were of the short-lived variety.

The most consistently weak/ineffective interventions involved reducing social media/smartphone use. While such interventions sound intuitive, they may have little to no effect (as was also observed for meditation).

Few of the interventions had been extensively evaluated via pre-registered studies. The most studied interventions were helping others (including spending money on others), acting happy, and provision of financial resources by governments.

What Are the Implications of the Review?

There are two main implications we can draw from Folk and Dunn’s systematic review. The first is that, in general, there’s little evidence that people can reliably improve their long-term happiness—at least via a programmed intervention. While such interventions can lead to some short-term benefits, there is little reason to believe such interventions would have a lasting impact. A big reason for such pessimism when it comes to long-term happiness improvement is that the majority of people tend to return to their baseline levels of happiness when experiencing big life events, such as divorce, bereavement, or marriage (Mancini et al., 2011). In the Mancini et al. study, even those who show marked decreases or increases directly after the event ended up eventually returning closer to their baseline level of happiness most of the time. Mancini et al.’s study is simply one of many studies that suggest people tend to be rather adaptable when it comes to changing life circumstances (also called the hedonic treadmill).

The second implication is that sociability may be a reliable way to improve one’s happiness, though for how long is uncertain. Although this seems a bit antithetical when considered in the context of the first implication, it may have less to do with sociability improving happiness, per se, and more to do with sociability being relevant for building and maintaining a social support network. Having high-quality social relationships is the most consistent predictor of happiness, but it has also been strongly linked to people’s stress management capabilities and their experience of loneliness (Zhang & Dong, 2022). Therefore, having a quality social support network is important for several facets of well-being, and sociability is a way to cultivate and maintain such a network.

While strengthening one’s social network can offer benefits for well-being, it is also important to recognize that the pursuit of happiness as a goal in and of itself often brings about paradoxical outcomes, like discontentment. As I mentioned in a previous post, we often don’t know what will make us happy, and, so, pursuing happiness generally leads to disappointment. As Pinsof (2023) argued, the belief that happiness can be obtained by direct pursuit is a myth. This is not to suggest that having a strong social support network, helping others, or changing your diet are somehow bad for you. They aren’t. Any of them (as well as others discussed in Folk and Dunn’s review) can have beneficial consequences for you and those around you. Just don’t expect them to lead to happiness.