Pie Fight

Group glee

Via LanguageLog:

[A]s we poked around on Google Scholar, we stumbled over Lawrence W. Sherman, "An Ecological Study of Glee in Small Groups of Preschool Children", Child Development, 46(1) 53-61 1975.

Happiness and welfare are two different, albeit often overlapping, concepts

Via Ezra, an article on happiness and welfare. Money may not buy happiness, but it sure as hell buys welfare.

Does money buy happiness? The rapidly expanding literature on what determines “subjective well-being” appears to suggest a negative answer to this timeless question. Studies consistently find, for example, that when the incomes of everyone in a community grow over time, conventional measures of well-being show little change.

   

Many critics of economic growth interpret this finding to imply that continued economic growth should no longer be a policy goal in developed countries. They argue that if money buys happiness, it is relative, not absolute, income that matters. As incomes grow, people quickly adapt to their new circumstances, showing no enduring gains in measured happiness. Growth makes the poor happier in low-income countries, critics concede, but not in developed countries, where those at the bottom continue to experience relative deprivation.

All true. But these statements do not imply that economic growth no longer matters in wealthy countries. The reason, in a nutshell, is that happiness and welfare, though related, are very different things. Growth enables us to expand medical research and other activities that clearly enhance human welfare but have little effect on measured happiness levels.

[...]

Critics of economic growth cite its threat to the planet’s survival. Yet it is not growth per se that threatens, but rather certain kinds of growth. Driving more S.U.V.’s causes harm, but taking more piano lessons does not. Any country with a government not beholden to corporate interests could easily curb environmentally harmful activities through taxation and regulation, redirecting spending toward things that really matter. Across developed countries, higher growth rates are actually associated with cleaner environments, not dirtier ones. The United States is the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases not because of its wealth but in spite of it.

The pursuit of happiness

Tastes even better than GDP!

Kiss her, you fool

Via Norm:

The first ever kiss, the complete summary of kissing and the goodbye kiss:

A study conducted during the 1980's found that men who kiss their wives before leaving for work live longer, get into fewer car accidents, and have a higher income than married men who don't.

Rest for the wicked

Via Oxblog, Churchill on napping. Not sure how much of this too believe, but it certainly makes me all the less enamoured of long work days and tired evenings.

CHURCHILL ON THE VIRTUES OF NAPPING: This from my former student, Jon Silver, a consummate gentleman and my host in Jerusalem. It is transcribed from a conversation Churchill had with the American inventor, Gfoerer, who had made a dictation machine for him to permit his secretaries to go home at night.

Churchill: What is your day in America like (looking Mr Gfroerer straight in the eye)? What time do you get to your office and when do you stop working?

Gfroerer: I'm at my desk every morning at 8 and leave at 530. At noon I have a short break for lunch. We do that five days a week, and sometimes I go around to the office on Saturday mornings to read the mail.

Churchill: My dear man, you don't mean it. That is the most perfect prescription for a short life I've ever heard.

Graebner recalled how Gfroerer, 'a little frightened and somewhat staggered by Churchill's sudden probing into his private life, then confessed that his wife also did not approve of his hours at all, and would certainly be delighted to hear the views of Mr Churchill.' The conversation continued:

Gfroerer: Mrs Gfroerer hates to get up at 645 and have breakfast so early. Then she doesn't see me again until 6 in the evening. We have dinner early, and by 10 I'm so tired that I fall into bed and am asleep in two minutes. I know I've got to slow down. That's what Mrs Gfroerer is always telling me.

Churchill: You must sleep some time between lunch and dinner, and no half-way measures. Take off your clothes and get into bed. That's what I always do. Don't think you will be doing less work because you sleep during the day. That's a foolish notion held by people who have no imagination. You will be able to accomplish more. You get two days in one - well, at least one and a half, I'm sure. When the war started, I had to sleep during the day because that was the only way I could cope with my responsibilities. Later, when I became Prime Minister, my burdens were, of course, even greater. Often I was obliged to work far into the night. I had to see reports take decisions and issue instructions that could not wait until the next day. And at night I'd also dictate minutes requesting information which my staff could assemble for me in the morning - and place before me when I woke up.

Churchill relit his cigar, poured himself a little more brandy, passed the bottle to Gfroerer and continued:

But a man should sleep during the day for another reason. Sleep enables you to be at your best in the evening when you join your wife, family and friends for dinner. That is the time to be at your best - a good dinner, with good wines (champagne is very good), then some brandy - that is the great moment of the day. Man is ruler then - perhaps only for fifteen minutes, but for that time at least he is master - and the ladies must not leave the table too soon.

Gfroerer: I must slow down. My wife has been telling me that for years, but something is always happening at the office. Mrs Gfroerer will agree with everything you've said when I tell her.

Churchill: Do you always get up for breakfast?

Gfroerer: But of course.

Churchill: Your wife too?

Gfroerer: Why, yes.

Churchill: My, my! My wife and I tried two or three times in the last forty years to have breakfast together, but it didn't work. Breakfast should be had in bed, alone. Not downstairs, after one has dressed.

His eyes twinkling, Churchill added: 'I don't think our married life would have been nearly so happy if we both had dressed and come down for breakfast after all these years.'

In priase of New Year's resolutions

A very interesting post by a very thoughtful woman on how and why New Year's resolutions make her life better.

bout ten years ago, my sister and I were sitting in a restaurant at about this time of year, contemplating the fact that while each of us was basically very happy with our life, both of us felt that there was room for improvement. We decided to make New Year's resolutions together, resolutions that would not be a list of aspirational gestures but a serious attempt to consider our lives as a whole and deploy what intellectual resources we could muster on the question: what concrete steps, deliberately taken, would cause them to improve? What ruts were we in, and how could we get out of them? What interesting new habits of mind would be likely to do us good, and what, exactly, could we do to develop them? Each of us came up with rather long lists of steps to take, and every year since then I have had a list of something like thirty resolutions which I undertake.

...

every year I resolve to do something new every day. It is, of course, important to be clear on what counts as a new thing. When my sister and I first made this resolution, it made for amusing comparisons between our circles of friends. The philosophers I know tended to think that this was trivial: just count things like, 'I drew breath on Jan. 1 2005' as a new thing, and you're set forever. My sister's friends, by contrast, tended to think of 'new things' as 'huge new things', like going to Antarctica, and wondered how she could possibly have made such an enormous resolution. But we take a middle ground: 'new things' include, for instance, taking a new way home, trying a new flavor of soda, and the like.

The point of this resolution is just to make sure that whenever I am not in some situation in which novelty comes naturally (e.g., in another country), I am on the lookout for ways of doing things that I have not done before, and that when I have a choice between something I've done before and something I haven't, I'm less likely to go with the familiar. Because I have this resolution (and because it does lead to moments when I think, oh no, it's 8:30 p.m. and I have not done a new thing, groan), I tend to keep my eye out for ways of satisfying it, and thus I am always asking myself: is there some different way of doing this? Some other thing I might try? Which buildings on campus have I not yet set foot in? Which kinds of cheese have I never tried? Which neighborhoods in my city are completely unknown to me? Why not try this different bike path? And so forth. And this makes my life better, both by introducing all sorts of new things into it (some of the cheeses I will never try again, but some were wonderful discoveries), and by instilling a particular cast of mind that I value.

Football for mental health

A study by the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health finds that football is good for mental health - even if your team is Mansfielf Town.

One of the key findings was that the terraces are a socially acceptable place to "act out". And while some members of my political persuasion may believe that there should be no need to ever exhibit "anti-social" behaviour, I'd argue that there is - particularly for young males.

Maybe if more middle and upper class types became sports fans, they'd  have less need for therapy.

The findings revealed that belonging to a club was considered to be important         for one's own mental health as it offers a sense of identity, belonging,         security and warmth.

      

The results also show that fans consider stadium terraces to be an environment         where a cathartic release of tension is socially acceptable. Fans commented         that shouting and dramatic hand and body gestures facilitated the release         of emotion and pent-up aggression. Mr Pringle says "the key feature         in health promotional terms is the overwhelming view of fans that the         'carnivalesque' behaviours stay in the football ground where such behaviours         are viewed as acceptable and socially sanctioned."

      

Some of the behaviours described by supporters as beneficial and done         in the 'spirit of carnival' may challenge liberal beliefs and be viewed         as antisocial and offensive. Mr Pringle points out that this type of behaviour         may in fact be the successful vehicle by which some men translate their         frustration and stress.

      

Mr Pringle concludes by saying "if we accept that for people in         general, and in particular young men, the opportunity to externalise tension         and discharge emotion is an important component in maintaining health,         then it may well be that attending live events such as football matches         offers a socially safe environment in which this can happen."

Thrill me, chill me

The Guardian has an article on scientists who are trying to understand why we seek pleasure. Sounds obvious, of course, but there's usually something lying underneath the surface.

Gee, that was fun

Too sleepy to blog this effectively, but it's a well-designed study looking at how happy (or not) people are after engaging in typical daily activities. The results sound very interesting:

The researchers [Norbert Schwartz, Daniel Kahneman, Alan Krueger, David Schkade, and Arthur Stone] assessed how people felt during 28 types of activities and found that intimate relations were the most enjoyable, while commuting was the least enjoyable.

More surprisingly, taking care of their children was also among the less enjoyable activities, although people generally report that their children are the greatest source of joy in their lives...

In addition to intimate relations, socializing, relaxing, praying or meditating, eating, exercising, and watching TV were among the most enjoyable activities. Commuting was the least enjoyable activity, with working, doing housework, using the computer for e-mail or Internet, and taking care of children rounding out the bottom of the list.

Interactions with friends and relatives were rated as the most enjoyable, followed by activities with spouses or significant others, children, clients or customers, co-workers and bosses. At the bottom of the list: activities done alone.

..."When people are asked how much they enjoy spending time with their kids they think of all the nice things---reading them a story, going to the zoo," said University of Michigan psychologist Norbert Schwarz, a co-author of the Science article. "But they don't take the other times into account, the times when they are trying to do something else and find the kids distracting. When we sample all the times that parents spend with their children, the picture is less positive than parents expect. On the other hand, we also find that people enjoy spending time with their relatives much more than they usually assume."

General reports of what people enjoy may also differ from descriptions of how people actually feel in a specific situation because many people hesitate to report socially inappropriate feelings. This is less of a problem when they report on specific episodes. "Saying that you generally don't enjoy spending time with your kids is terrible," Schwarz said, "but admitting that they were a pain last night is quite acceptable." The new Day Reconstruction Method provides a better picture of people's daily experiences by improving accurate recall of how they felt in specific situations...

...general life circumstances---such as how secure people think their jobs are, or whether they are single or married---had a relatively small impact on their feelings throughout the day. These factors were closely linked with how satisfied people said they were with their lives in general, but had little influence on how positive they felt during specific activities.

"It's not that life circumstances are irrelevant to well-being," notes Schwarz. "On the contrary, we found that people experience large variations in feelings during the course of a normal day. This variation highlights the importance of optimizing the allocation of time across situations and activities. If you want to improve your well-being, make sure that you allocate your time wisely."

Unfortunately, that's not easy. When the researchers examined the amount of time spent on various activities, they found that people spent the bulk of their waking time---11.5 hours---engaged in the activities they enjoyed the least: work, housework and commuting.

Booze on, mon frere

Health-wise, it's better to drink a bit than not at all, and it's best to drink a bit most every day. Those who concentrate most of their drinking in a few sessions show pooere heart health than those who spread it out, ala francais. The poorest health, however, is reserved for thosee who don't drink at all.

Maybe this is god's way of offereing a tradeofffor the fact that physically good-looking people rate higher in every significnat barometer of good living: happiness, health, longevity, etc. After all, we may not all be good-looking, but we can all get drunk.