- Email: [email protected]
Aversion to happiness and the experience of happiness: The moderating roles of personality
Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Aversion to happiness and the experience of happiness: The moderating roles of personality Aaron Adibe Agbo a,⁎, Christopher Ndubisi Ngwu b a b
Department of Psychology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria Department of Social Work, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 20 September 2016 Received in revised form 28 January 2017 Accepted 2 February 2017 Available online 17 February 2017 Keywords: Fear of happiness Happiness Personality Moderation
a b s t r a c t The present study examined the possible moderating roles of personality on the link between the fear of happiness and the experience of happiness, with happiness defined as the frequency of positive and negative affect. Respondents completed measures of affect, fear of happiness, and the big-five personality inventory. Result revealed substantial moderating effects of personality, but the pattern differed across positive and negative affect. Whereas higher levels of agreeableness and neuroticism potentiated the effect of fear of happiness on positive affect, higher levels of extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness to experience weakened the effect. On the other hand, except for higher levels of extraversion that also undermined the influence of fear of happiness on negative affect, fear of happiness and negative affect were positively related at all levels of the personality dimensions. These findings highlight the need to incorporate personality into the study and theoretical articulations of the operations of the fear of happiness. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Findings have shown that happiness is positively related to several desirable outcomes, such as success, long life, peace, democracy, economic progress, and prosocial behaviours among others (Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005; Oishi & Schimmack, 2010). Consequently, people are now encouraged to pursue happiness whenever and however possible (Gruber, Mauss, & Tamir, 2011). However, emerging line of evidence shows that the pursuit of happiness can equally be counterproductive (Ford, Mauss, & Gruber, 2015; Mauss, Tamir, Anderson, & Savino, 2011). As a result, people tend to avoid the pursuit of happiness under conditions they think may lead to aversive outcomes. This phenomenon is currently referred to as “aversion to” or “fear of” happiness (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014; Joshanloo et al., 2013), and has been largely attributed to culture (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014). Although the influence of culture on happiness is well documented, studies have also shown that personality substantially influences variations in happiness both directly and indirectly (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998; Steel, Schmidt, & Shultz, 2008). Hence, our aim here is to explore the possibility that personality moderates the relationship between fear of happiness and the experience of happiness. To this end, we first review the concept of fear of happiness especially because the concept is relative new. Next, we define happiness as employed here. Thereafter, we ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.A. Agbo), [email protected] (C.N. Ngwu).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.010 0191-8869/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
discuss how different personality dimensions, anchoring on the bigfive model, are likely to moderate the link between the fear of happiness and the experience of happiness. 1.1. Aversion to happiness Aversion to happiness represents the idea that “happiness is not always good” (Gruber et al., 2011, p. 223). It involves “an overarching belief about the extent to which it is rational to pursue or avoid happiness for oneself or ones' society, with different reasons to avoid different personal relations to happiness cumulatively contributing to the strength of this belief” (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014, p. 720). It is associated with the idea that there are wrong degrees of happiness, wrong time for happiness, wrong ways to pursue happiness, and wrong types of happiness (Gruber et al., 2011), and bad things are likely to happen to one and relevant others when happiness is pursued along these wrong ways (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014). There are now empirical evidences in support of this phenomenon. For instance, placing high value on happiness is inversely related to happiness under happy occasions (Mauss et al., 2011), and has been implicated in depressive symptoms (Ford, Shallcross, Mauss, Floerke, & Gruber, 2014) and bipolar disorders (Ford et al., 2015). Frequent use of positive emotion words, which ordinarily would have be taken as a sign of positive functioning, appears to be positively related to contemplation of one's own death and heightened mortality salience (Kashdan et al., 2014). Besides these empirical evidences, fear of happiness appears to exist under different guises across cultures. For instance, the expression norm
228
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
for positive affect associated with victory among the Igbos of Eastern Nigeria is moderation especially when it involves fellow Igbos. They believe that intense celebration belittles those who lost or did not have the opportunity to compete. For the Igbos, such action shows lack of “concern for others”. Hence, people who violate this norm risk being labelled antisocial or “wicked”. Consequently, the expression of happiness under such conditions is often moderated. Our aim here is to explore the possibility that personality conditions the extent to which such norms can influence individuals' experience of happiness.
1.2. Happiness defined Scholars often distinguish between two different, but related, types of happiness. On one hand is the hedonic happiness that is usually defined and measured in terms of (in)frequent feelings of positive and negative affect (Diener, Sandvik, & Pavot, 1991). On the other hand is the eudaimonic happiness, which involves the diverse strands of views on personal progress and growth, such as self-actualisation, goal attainment, and value realisation (Huta & Waterman, 2014). Here, we define happiness according to the hedonic approach. Scholars, including eudaimonic researchers, acknowledge the robustness of affect as an indicator of happiness (Raibley, 2012). For instance, Raibley (2012) argued that eudaimonic happiness can lead to the experience of hedonic happiness, and the experienced hedonic happiness has the capacity to inform further pursuit of the associated eudaimonic dimension. Also, the idea that the fear of happiness is strongly grounded in culture (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014) coupled with the fact that affective experiences are grounded in culture (Markus & Kitayama, 1991) makes affect particularly relevant here. It is therefore reasonable to envisage a pronounced relationship between fear of happiness and affect.
1.3. Fear of happiness, personality and the experience of happiness The relationship between happiness and personality can be deconstructed into two paths. First, some personality dimensions overlap conceptually with happiness (Soto, 2015). Second, personality grounds the link between other variables and happiness (Schimmack, Radhakrishnan, Oishi, Dzokoto, & Ahadi, 2002). Whereas we draw from both lines of relationships, our major focus is on the later relationship. We employed the big-five personality structure, which has been used extensively in the field of happiness (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998). Next, we explore how each dimension of the big˗five moderates the relationship between the fear of happiness and the experience of happiness.
1.3.1. Extraversion Extraversion denotes the tendency to be energetic, active, and enthusiastic (Costa & McCrae, 1992). It has both interpersonal and temperamental facets (McCrae & Costa, 2003). The interpersonal aspect includes being sociable and affectionate, whereas the temperamental side involves the tendency to consistently feel positive. People who score high on extraversion are often cheerful, drawn to excitement, admire interpersonal relationship, and are thrill seekers, whereas people who score low tends to be withdrawn, quiet, and independent (John & Srivastava, 1999). It is deducible from the foregoing that the elements of extraversion are antithetical to the rudiments of fear of happiness. In addition, extraverts often exhibit behaviours that are likely to undermine the operations of fear of happiness, such as the tendency to always create amiable environments (DeYoung, Peterson, & Higgins, 2002). It appears therefore that extraverts are inherently equipped to inhibit exogenous hindrances to happiness. Hence, we hypothesize that higher levels of extraversion will undermine the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H1).
1.3.2. Agreeableness Agreeableness represents the tendency to be accommodative, altruistic, and supportive (McCrae & John, 1992). It is sometimes described as the humane aspect of personality (Digman, 1990). People who score high on this trait tilt towards charities and good causes (McCrae & Costa, 2003). Hence, they are predisposed to savouring happiness associated with such social acts. However, given the core elements of this trait and the proposal that fear of happiness is culturally required, higher levels of agreeableness is more likely to boost the influence of fear of happiness. The tendency for agreeable people to be law-abiding and conform to group norms as well maintain group cohesion (DeYoung et al., 2002; Joshanloo, Rastegar, & Bakhshi, 2012; Parks-Leduc, Feldman, & Bardi, 2015) are grounds on which fear of happiness, as a cultural norm, is expected to thrive. Hence, we hypothesize that higher levels of agreeableness will enhance the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H2).
1.3.3. Neuroticism Neuroticism assesses the consistency to experience negative emotions. Higher levels of this dimension represent significant instability in mood, affect, and emotion. People characterised by this trait are usually anxious, depressed, impulsive, and hostile (Costa & McCrae, 1992). They express high levels of fear, always worrying, and generally moody (John & Srivastava, 1999). Neuroticism is conceptually and instrumentally related to happiness (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998). Conceptually, it shares similar latent valence with negative affect (Anglim & Grant, 2014). Instrumentally, it encourages the adoption of maladaptive strategies that inhibits the experience of happiness (Hotard, McFatter, McWhirter, & Stegall, 1989). It is therefore more likely to boost the undermining effect of fear of happiness. Hence, we hypothesize that higher levels of neuroticism will boost the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H3).
1.3.4. Conscientiousness Conscientiousness represents the propensity to follow orders, act after thorough thinking, and to exhibit higher levels of self control such as delay of gratifications (John & Srivastava, 1999). Conscientious people tend to be highly organised, prioritize tasks, and adhere to plans (John & Srivastava, 1999). It has been shown to be positively related to happiness, especially happiness accruing from social acts (Anglim & Grant, 2014). However, the social and normative nature of fear of happiness, which are consistent with core characteristics of conscientiousness, such as the tendencies to conform to norms, obey orders, adhere to rules, and self control (Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, & Knafo, 2002) suggest that higher levels of conscientiousness are likely to boost the effect of fear of happiness. We therefore hypothesize that higher levels of conscientiousness will boost the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H4).
1.3.5. Openness to experience Openness to experience reflects the tendencies to explore new ideas and to take risks (Costa & McCrae, 1992). People who are open to experience are often curious and ready to welcome challenges and new occurrences (Costa & McCrae, 1992). A recent meta-analysis shows that this trait is positively related to happiness (Steel et al., 2008). Apparently, the features of this trait, as listed above, are antagonistic to fear of happiness. For instance, the tendencies to take risks and explore new ideas are inconsistent with the notion of fear, suggesting that the happiness of people who are open to experience is less likely to be undermined by fear. Thus, we hypothesize that higher levels of openness to experience will reduce the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H5).
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
2. Method 2.1. Participants Participants were 124 (52.1%) male and 114 female (47.9%) undergraduates, who were taking part in a faculty course at a Nigerian university. They were aged between 16 years and 35 years (M = 22.17, SD = 2.98). Majority were Christians (n = 234, 98.3%) from the Igbo speaking people (n = 219, 92.4%) of Nigeria. The remaining 19 respondents were from other ethnic groups in the country, including Hausa/Fulani, Yoruba, and Igala tribes. 2.2. Instruments and procedure
229
examined the interaction effects at three levels of each moderator – the mean, +1SD below and above the mean. These three levels represent the low, moderate, and higher levels of the moderators. Analysis was conducted for each of the moderators (i.e., personality dimensions), while holding fear of happiness constant as the focal variable. For each analysis, the remaining predictors were included as covariates.
3. Results 3.1. Descriptive and correlation statistics The descriptive and correlation statistics for the study variables are shown in Table 1.
Happiness: We assessed happiness with seven (7) positive emotions (PA – positive affect) and eight (8) negative emotions (NA – negative affect). Based on the suggestion that happiness is best measured with affects that are consistent with the culture of the participants, we sampled affects that embody communalism because Nigeria is often classified as a communalistic culture. The PA was measured with joyful, excited, enthusiastic, pleased, happy, friendly, and outgoing (ɑ = 0.79), whereas NA was assessed with distressed, ashamed, afraid, sad, guilt, sorrowful, frustration, and angry (ɑ = 0.76). Respondents rated how frequent they feel each emotion on a 7-point response format, ranging from not at all (1) to always (7). Personality: Personality was measured with a short form of the bigfive inventory (Gosling, Rentfrow, & Swann, 2003). The scale has 10 items. Each of the five dimensions is measured with two items. The scale prompts respondents with a lead statement, “I see myself as”, which is then followed by the items (e.g. __extraverted, enthusiastic). Participants responded by writing the number representing their desired response on the short line preceding each item. Options were chosen from a 7-point response format, ranging from disagree strongly (1) to agree strongly (7). Fear of happiness: We assessed fear of happiness with the universal fear of happiness scale (UFHS, Joshanloo et al., 2013). The scale describes five cardinal reasons why people are averse to happiness (e.g., I prefer not to be too joyful, because usually joy is followed by sadness). Respondents rated their level of agreement with each item on a 7-point response format, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). We obtained a Cronbach's alpha of 0.72. Participants completed the questionnaire as part of their class activities. They were informed that anyone who did not want to participate was free to opt out. No one opted out. No material reward was offered for participation. 2.3. Analytic technique We analysed the data with MODPROBE version 2.00 (Hayes & Matthes, 2009). MODPROBE tests the direct and moderated effects of the focal and moderator variables on the outcome variable. We
3.2. Positive happiness (frequent experience of positive affect) Consistent with H1, fear of happiness exerted significant effect on the experience of positive affect only at the lower (B = −0.11 (SE = 0.05), t = − 0.2.15, p = 0.03, 95%CI = − 0.22; − 0.01) and moderate (B = − 0.11 (SE = 0.05), t = − 0.2.50, p = 0.01, 95%CI = − 0.20; − 0.02) levels of extraversion, but not at higher levels (B = − 0.11 (SE = 0.06), t = −0.1.76, p = 0.08, 95%CI = −0.24; 0.01). Similarly, result was consistent with H2, result showed that fear of happiness undermined positive affect at higher (B = − 0.24 (SE = 0.07), t = − 0.3.37, p = 0.00, 95%CI = − 0.37; − 0.11) and moderate (B = − 0.15 (SE = 0.05), t = − 3.34, p = 0.00, 95%CI = − 0.24; − 0.06), but not at the lower (B = − 0.06 (SE = 0.06), t = − 0.99, p = 0.32, 95%CI = −0.19; 0.06) levels of agreeableness. Result also provided support for H3. Fear of happiness failed to undermine positive affect at lower levels of neuroticism (B = −0.07 (SE = 0.05), t = −1.37, p = 0.17, 95%CI = −0.18; 0.03), but not at higher (B = −0.16 (SE = 0.06), t = − 2.77, p = 0.01, 95%CI = − 0.28; − 0.05) and moderate levels (B = −0.12 (SE = 0.04), t = −2.65, p = 0.01, 95%CI = −0.21; − 0.03). Support was also found for H5. Fear of happiness was only able to weaken the experience of positive affect at lower (B = −0.15 (SE = 0.06), t = −7.77, p = 0.01, 95%CI = −0.26; −0.04) and moderate (B = − 0.10 (SE = 0.05), t = − 2.32, p = 0.02, 95%CI = − 0.19; − 0.02) levels of openness to experience, but not at higher levels (B = −0.05 (SE = 0.07), t = −0.84, p = 0.40, 95%CI = −0.18; 0.07). However, result contradicted H4. Instead of higher levels of conscientiousness boosting the effect of fear of happiness, as hypothesized, fear of happiness was significantly related to positive affect at lower (B = − 0.15 (SE = 0.06), t = − 2.61, p = 0.01, 95%CI = − 0.27; − 0.04) and moderate levels of conscientiousness (B = − 0.11 (SE = 0.04), t = −2.48, p = 0.00, 95%CI = −0.20; −0.02), but not at higher levels (B = −0.07 (SE = 0.06), t = −1.10, p = 0.27, 95%CI = −0.19; 0.05). Other coefficients associated with each personality dimension as a covariate in the different models and the F-tests are shown in Table 2.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients for the study variables. Variables
M(SD)
1
2
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
– 22.17(2.98) 5.16(1.17) 2.95(1.15) 4.44(1.20) 2.42(1.22) 5.57(1.19) 5.41(0.87) 2.80(1.00) 2.27(1.21)
– −0.33⁎ −0.01 −0.04 −0.03 −0.15⁎
–
Gender Age Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Openness to experience Positive affect Negative affect Fear of happiness
Note: n = 238. ⁎ p b 0.05.
−0.10 0.10 0.01 −0.06
0.14⁎ −0.06 0.22⁎
−0.13⁎ 0.12 0.08 −0.21⁎ −0.03
3
– −0.22⁎ 0.24⁎ −0.33⁎ 0.21⁎ 0.41⁎ −0.27⁎ −0.22⁎
4
– −0.03 0.17⁎
−0.22⁎ −0.05 0.31⁎ 0.05
5
6
7
8
9
10
– −0.06 0.02 0.22⁎ −0.22⁎ −0.01
– −0.36⁎ −0.35⁎ 0.20⁎ 0.19⁎
– 0.31⁎ −0.25⁎ −0.20⁎
– −0.25⁎ −0.26⁎
– 0.31⁎
–
230
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
Table 2 Regression coefficients associated with each personality dimension at the interaction model of the other dimensions for positive affect. Extraversion B(SE) Agreeableness Extraversion Openness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Fear of happiness Dimension × FoH
Agreeableness t
0.05(0.05) 1.12 0.22(0.05) 4.44⁎ 0.08(0.05) 1.73 0.09(0.04) 2.07⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.75 −0.11(0.05) −2.50⁎ 0.00(0.03) 0.04 R2 = 0.24, F = 10.17⁎
B(SE)
Neuroticism t
0.06(0.05) 0.54 0.22(0.05) 2.20⁎ 0.10(0.05) 2.03⁎ 0.10(0.04) 2.20⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.68 −0.12(0.04) −2.68⁎ −0.08(0.04) −2.00⁎ R2 = 0.19, F = 8.57⁎
B(SE)
Conscientiousness t
0.06(0.05) 1.23 0.22(0.05) 4.62⁎ 0.08(0.05) 1.23 0.09(0.04) 1.99⁎ −0.10(0.05) −2.04⁎ −0.12(0.04) −2.65⁎ 0.04(0.03) 1.28 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.48⁎
B(SE)
Openness to experience t
0.05(0.05) 1.08 0.22(0.05) 4.50⁎ 0.08(0.05) 1.79 0.08(0.04) 1.94⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.78 −0.11(0.04) −2.48⁎ 0.03(0.03) 1.04 R2 = 0.24, F = 10.17⁎
B(SE)
t
0.04(0.05) 0.88 0.21(0.05) 4.40⁎ 0.07(0.050) 1.52 0.09(0.04) 2.16⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.77 −0.10(0.05) −2.32⁎ 0.04(0.03) 1.22 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.45⁎
Note: FoH = fear of happiness, n = 238. ⁎ p b 0.05.
3.3. Negative happiness (frequent experience of negative affect) Result showed that higher levels of extraversion also inhibited the influence of fear of happiness on negative affect (B = 0.12 (SE = 0.07), t = 1.62, p = 0.11, 95%CI = − 0.03; 0.26), but not at lower (B = 0.29 (SE = 0.06), t = 4.82, p = 0.00, 95%CI = 0.17; 0.41) and moderate (B = 0.21 (SE = 0.05), t = 3.97, p = 0.00, 95%CI = 0.10; 0.31) levels. A different and interesting pattern emerged for other dimensions. Result showed that fear of happiness was positively and substantially associated with negative affect at all the three levels of agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience. The coefficients associated with each personality dimension as a covariate in the different models and the F-tests are shown in Table 3.
4. Discussion The pattern of result presents some interesting vistas. Personality did not exert similar moderating effect for the two dimensions of affect. Whereas higher levels of extraversion, openness to experience, and conscientiousness undermined the effect of fear of happiness on positive affect, higher levels of agreeableness and neuroticism potentiated the effect. On the other hand, except for extraversion, fear of happiness was positively associated with negative affect at all the three levels of the other four personality dimensions. This differentiated effect may not be unconnected with the cultural norms for positive and negative affect. Whereas the expression norm for positive affect in communalistic cultures, such as Nigeria, requires moderation to avoid offending others, which, perhaps, explains why pride has negative valence in communalistic cultures, the experience of certain negative emotions, such as shame and guilt, are encouraged and are socially expected because they embody the core theme of communalism, which are interdependence, social connectedness, and conformity to social and cultural standards of behaviour (Kitayama, Mesquita, & Karasawa, 2006; Tangney & Tracy, 2012). With such cognitive architecture, people fear to express positive side of happiness – positive affect – and not the
negative side. It could therefore be said that in communalistic cultures fear of happiness is a cultural mechanism for moderating positive affect and not negative affect. Hence, personality is recruited as a protective shield for positive affect against fear of happiness, but not for negative affect. However, extraversion appears as an exception. Its moderating effect was similar across positive and negative affect. Higher levels of extraversion mitigated the effect of fear of happiness on both positive and negative affect. The inherent nature of extraversion may hold the key to this undifferentiated effect. Extraversion stimulates the creation of amiable contexts and situations that yield happiness and, at the same time, inhibits the occurrences of negative emotions. By this, extraversion performs dual role. As such, higher levels of it are not only likely to weaken the effect of fear of happiness on positive affect, but are equally likely to inhibit the potentiating effect of fear of happiness on negative affects. Contrary to the hypothesis that higher levels of conscientiousness would boost the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness, higher levels of the trait exerted an undermining effect. One possible explanation for this effect is locatable in the valence of fear of happiness vis-à-vis the elements of conscientiousness. Fear of happiness, as earlier noted, has a negative valence, apparently rooted in the emotion of fear. Although conscientiousness is associated with conformity and obedience to tradition, which are values likely to potentiate the operation of fear of happiness given the cultural rooting of the phenomenon, the behaviours of conscientious people are not based on fear but are based on their inherent tendencies to be orderly and cautious. Fear is not consistent with most attributes of conscientiousness, such as the tendency to act only after thorough thinking. Thus, the experience of positive affect by highly conscientious people is less likely to be influenced by fear of happiness. In summary, the present study shows that the relationship between fear of happiness and the experience of happiness is not only conditioned by culture, but is also influenced significantly by variations in personality. Hence, it highlights the need to incorporate personality as an important factor in both empirical modelling and theorising about fear of happiness. However, the present study has some limitations
Table 3 Regression coefficients associated with each personality dimension at the interaction model of the other dimensions for negative affect. Extraversion B(SE) Agreeableness Extraversion Openness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Fear of happiness Dimension × FoH
Agreeableness t
0.23(0.05) 4.39⁎ −0.06(0.06) −1.10 −0.08(0.05) −1.53 −0.16(0.05) −3.13⁎ −0.05(0.05) −0.93 0.21(0.05) 3.97⁎ −0.07(0.04) −2.07⁎ R2 = 0.26, F = 10.99⁎
Note: FoH = fear of happiness, n = 238. ⁎ p b 0.05.
B(SE)
Neuroticism t
0.22(0.05) 4.10⁎ −0.08(0.06) −1.44 −0.09(0.05) −1.69 −0.16(0.05) −3.13⁎ −0.04(0.05) −0.78 −0.23(0.05) 4.44⁎ 0.05(0.04) 1.08 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.40⁎
B(SE)
t
0.23(0.05) 4.39⁎ −0.07(0.06) −1.25 −0.09(0.05) −1.67 −0.16(0.05) −3.23⁎ −0.07(0.06) −1.33 0.21(0.05) 4.22⁎ 0.08(03) 2.36⁎ R2 = 0.26, F = 11.24⁎
Conscientiousness
Openness to experience
B(SE)
B(SE)
t
0.22(0.05) 4.24⁎ −0.08(0.06) −1.43 −0.09(0.05) −1.59 −0.15(0.05) −2.92⁎ −0.04(0.05) −0.71 0.22(0.05) 4.31⁎ −0.04(0.04) −0.99 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.37⁎
t
0.22(0.05) 4.15⁎ −0.08(0.06) −1.42 −0.08(0.05) −1.48 −0.15(0.05) −3.07⁎ −0.04(0.05) −0.73 0.22(0.05) 4.26⁎ −0.01(0.04) −0.24 R2 = 0.24, F = 10.19⁎
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
that raise caveats over the findings. One of the limitations concerns the measure of personality used. Although the scale is recommended for use in settings where lengthy scales are undesirable, which was the case in the present study because respondents completed the questionnaire during class hours, the scale does not serve as a sufficient replacement of the original form. It is limited in several ways, such as the possibility of low reliability as a result of fewer items for each dimension. In addition, participants were largely younger adults whose experience of affect is distinguishable from that of older populations. Thus, the present study is precursory. More robust and inclusive studies are required to validate findings and possibly reveal other ways that personality may be related to the fear of happiness. References Anglim, J., & Grant, S. L. (2014). Incremental criterion prediction of personality facets over factors: Obtaining unbiased estimates and confidence intervals. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 148–157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.10.005. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The five-factor model of personality and its relevance to personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6, 343–359. DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229. DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533–552. Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (1991). Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 119–139). Oxford, UK: Pergamon. Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190. 002221. Ford, B. Q., Shallcross, A. J., Mauss, I. B., Floerke, V. A., & Gruber, J. (2014). Desperately seeking happiness: Valuing happiness is associated with symptoms and diagnosis of depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 33, 890–905. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1521/jscp.2014.33.10.890. Ford, B. Q., Mauss, I. B., & Gruber, J. (2015). Valuing happiness is associated with bipolar disorder. Emotion, 15, 211–222. Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1. Gruber, J., Mauss, I. B., & Tamir, M. (2011). A dark side of happiness? How, when, and why happiness is not always good. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 222–233. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/emo0000048. Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 924–936. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.3.924. Hotard, S. R., McFatter, R. M., McWhirter, R. M., & Stegall, M. E. (1989). Interactive effects of extraversion, neuroticism, and social relationships on subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 321–331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-3514.57.2.321. Huta, V., & Waterman, A. S. (2014). Eudaimonia and its distinction from hedonia: Developing a classification and terminology for understanding conceptual and operational definitions. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 1425–1456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10902-013-9485-0.
231
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102–138) (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Joshanloo, M., & Weijers, D. (2014). Aversion to happiness across cultures: A review of where and why people are averse to happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 717–735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9489-9. Joshanloo, M., Rastegar, P., & Bakhshi, A. (2012). The Big Five personality domains as predictors of social wellbeing in Iranian university students. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 639–660. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407512443432. Joshanloo, M., Lepshokova, Z. K., Panyusheva, T., Natalia, A., Poon, W. C., et al. (2013). Cross-cultural validation of the fear of happiness scale across 14 national groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45, 246–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0022022113505357. Kashdan, T. B., DeWall, C. N., Schurtz, D. R., Deckman, T., Lykins, E. L., Evans, D. R., ... Brown, K. W. (2014). More than words: Contemplating death enhances positive emotional word use. Personality and Individual Differences, 71, 171–175. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.paid.2014.07.035. Kitayama, S., Mesquita, B., & Karasawa, M. (2006). Cultural affordances and emotional experience: Socially engaging and disengaging emotions in Japan and the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 890–903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-3514.91.5.890. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-295X.98.2.224. Mauss, I. B., Tamir, M., Anderson, C. L., & Savino, N. S. (2011). Can seeking happiness make people unhappy? Paradoxical effects of valuing happiness. Emotion, 11, 807–815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022010. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494. 1992.tb00970.x. Oishi, S., & Schimmack, U. (2010). Residential mobility, well-being, and mortality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 980–994. Parks-Leduc, L., Feldman, G., & Bardi, A. (2015). Personality traits and personal values a meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 3–29. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/1088868314538548. Raibley, J. R. (2012). Happiness is not well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13, 1105–1129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9309-z. Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The big five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 789–801. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0146167202289008. Schimmack, U., Radhakrishnan, P., Oishi, S., Dzokoto, V., & Ahadi, S. (2002). Culture, personality, and subjective well-being: Integrating process models of life satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 582–593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037// 0022-3514.82.4.582. Soto, C. J. (2015). Is happiness good for your personality? Concurrent and prospective relations of the big five with subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 83, 45–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12081. Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138–161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-2909.134.1.138. Tangney, J. P., & Tracy, J. L. (2012). Self-conscious emotions. In M. Leary, & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 446–478) (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Aversion to happiness and the experience of happiness: The moderating roles of personality Aaron Adibe Agbo a,⁎, Christopher Ndubisi Ngwu b a b
Department of Psychology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria Department of Social Work, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu State, Nigeria
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 20 September 2016 Received in revised form 28 January 2017 Accepted 2 February 2017 Available online 17 February 2017 Keywords: Fear of happiness Happiness Personality Moderation
a b s t r a c t The present study examined the possible moderating roles of personality on the link between the fear of happiness and the experience of happiness, with happiness defined as the frequency of positive and negative affect. Respondents completed measures of affect, fear of happiness, and the big-five personality inventory. Result revealed substantial moderating effects of personality, but the pattern differed across positive and negative affect. Whereas higher levels of agreeableness and neuroticism potentiated the effect of fear of happiness on positive affect, higher levels of extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness to experience weakened the effect. On the other hand, except for higher levels of extraversion that also undermined the influence of fear of happiness on negative affect, fear of happiness and negative affect were positively related at all levels of the personality dimensions. These findings highlight the need to incorporate personality into the study and theoretical articulations of the operations of the fear of happiness. © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Findings have shown that happiness is positively related to several desirable outcomes, such as success, long life, peace, democracy, economic progress, and prosocial behaviours among others (Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005; Oishi & Schimmack, 2010). Consequently, people are now encouraged to pursue happiness whenever and however possible (Gruber, Mauss, & Tamir, 2011). However, emerging line of evidence shows that the pursuit of happiness can equally be counterproductive (Ford, Mauss, & Gruber, 2015; Mauss, Tamir, Anderson, & Savino, 2011). As a result, people tend to avoid the pursuit of happiness under conditions they think may lead to aversive outcomes. This phenomenon is currently referred to as “aversion to” or “fear of” happiness (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014; Joshanloo et al., 2013), and has been largely attributed to culture (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014). Although the influence of culture on happiness is well documented, studies have also shown that personality substantially influences variations in happiness both directly and indirectly (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998; Steel, Schmidt, & Shultz, 2008). Hence, our aim here is to explore the possibility that personality moderates the relationship between fear of happiness and the experience of happiness. To this end, we first review the concept of fear of happiness especially because the concept is relative new. Next, we define happiness as employed here. Thereafter, we ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A.A. Agbo), [email protected] (C.N. Ngwu).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.010 0191-8869/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
discuss how different personality dimensions, anchoring on the bigfive model, are likely to moderate the link between the fear of happiness and the experience of happiness. 1.1. Aversion to happiness Aversion to happiness represents the idea that “happiness is not always good” (Gruber et al., 2011, p. 223). It involves “an overarching belief about the extent to which it is rational to pursue or avoid happiness for oneself or ones' society, with different reasons to avoid different personal relations to happiness cumulatively contributing to the strength of this belief” (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014, p. 720). It is associated with the idea that there are wrong degrees of happiness, wrong time for happiness, wrong ways to pursue happiness, and wrong types of happiness (Gruber et al., 2011), and bad things are likely to happen to one and relevant others when happiness is pursued along these wrong ways (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014). There are now empirical evidences in support of this phenomenon. For instance, placing high value on happiness is inversely related to happiness under happy occasions (Mauss et al., 2011), and has been implicated in depressive symptoms (Ford, Shallcross, Mauss, Floerke, & Gruber, 2014) and bipolar disorders (Ford et al., 2015). Frequent use of positive emotion words, which ordinarily would have be taken as a sign of positive functioning, appears to be positively related to contemplation of one's own death and heightened mortality salience (Kashdan et al., 2014). Besides these empirical evidences, fear of happiness appears to exist under different guises across cultures. For instance, the expression norm
228
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
for positive affect associated with victory among the Igbos of Eastern Nigeria is moderation especially when it involves fellow Igbos. They believe that intense celebration belittles those who lost or did not have the opportunity to compete. For the Igbos, such action shows lack of “concern for others”. Hence, people who violate this norm risk being labelled antisocial or “wicked”. Consequently, the expression of happiness under such conditions is often moderated. Our aim here is to explore the possibility that personality conditions the extent to which such norms can influence individuals' experience of happiness.
1.2. Happiness defined Scholars often distinguish between two different, but related, types of happiness. On one hand is the hedonic happiness that is usually defined and measured in terms of (in)frequent feelings of positive and negative affect (Diener, Sandvik, & Pavot, 1991). On the other hand is the eudaimonic happiness, which involves the diverse strands of views on personal progress and growth, such as self-actualisation, goal attainment, and value realisation (Huta & Waterman, 2014). Here, we define happiness according to the hedonic approach. Scholars, including eudaimonic researchers, acknowledge the robustness of affect as an indicator of happiness (Raibley, 2012). For instance, Raibley (2012) argued that eudaimonic happiness can lead to the experience of hedonic happiness, and the experienced hedonic happiness has the capacity to inform further pursuit of the associated eudaimonic dimension. Also, the idea that the fear of happiness is strongly grounded in culture (Joshanloo & Weijers, 2014) coupled with the fact that affective experiences are grounded in culture (Markus & Kitayama, 1991) makes affect particularly relevant here. It is therefore reasonable to envisage a pronounced relationship between fear of happiness and affect.
1.3. Fear of happiness, personality and the experience of happiness The relationship between happiness and personality can be deconstructed into two paths. First, some personality dimensions overlap conceptually with happiness (Soto, 2015). Second, personality grounds the link between other variables and happiness (Schimmack, Radhakrishnan, Oishi, Dzokoto, & Ahadi, 2002). Whereas we draw from both lines of relationships, our major focus is on the later relationship. We employed the big-five personality structure, which has been used extensively in the field of happiness (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998). Next, we explore how each dimension of the big˗five moderates the relationship between the fear of happiness and the experience of happiness.
1.3.1. Extraversion Extraversion denotes the tendency to be energetic, active, and enthusiastic (Costa & McCrae, 1992). It has both interpersonal and temperamental facets (McCrae & Costa, 2003). The interpersonal aspect includes being sociable and affectionate, whereas the temperamental side involves the tendency to consistently feel positive. People who score high on extraversion are often cheerful, drawn to excitement, admire interpersonal relationship, and are thrill seekers, whereas people who score low tends to be withdrawn, quiet, and independent (John & Srivastava, 1999). It is deducible from the foregoing that the elements of extraversion are antithetical to the rudiments of fear of happiness. In addition, extraverts often exhibit behaviours that are likely to undermine the operations of fear of happiness, such as the tendency to always create amiable environments (DeYoung, Peterson, & Higgins, 2002). It appears therefore that extraverts are inherently equipped to inhibit exogenous hindrances to happiness. Hence, we hypothesize that higher levels of extraversion will undermine the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H1).
1.3.2. Agreeableness Agreeableness represents the tendency to be accommodative, altruistic, and supportive (McCrae & John, 1992). It is sometimes described as the humane aspect of personality (Digman, 1990). People who score high on this trait tilt towards charities and good causes (McCrae & Costa, 2003). Hence, they are predisposed to savouring happiness associated with such social acts. However, given the core elements of this trait and the proposal that fear of happiness is culturally required, higher levels of agreeableness is more likely to boost the influence of fear of happiness. The tendency for agreeable people to be law-abiding and conform to group norms as well maintain group cohesion (DeYoung et al., 2002; Joshanloo, Rastegar, & Bakhshi, 2012; Parks-Leduc, Feldman, & Bardi, 2015) are grounds on which fear of happiness, as a cultural norm, is expected to thrive. Hence, we hypothesize that higher levels of agreeableness will enhance the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H2).
1.3.3. Neuroticism Neuroticism assesses the consistency to experience negative emotions. Higher levels of this dimension represent significant instability in mood, affect, and emotion. People characterised by this trait are usually anxious, depressed, impulsive, and hostile (Costa & McCrae, 1992). They express high levels of fear, always worrying, and generally moody (John & Srivastava, 1999). Neuroticism is conceptually and instrumentally related to happiness (DeNeve & Cooper, 1998). Conceptually, it shares similar latent valence with negative affect (Anglim & Grant, 2014). Instrumentally, it encourages the adoption of maladaptive strategies that inhibits the experience of happiness (Hotard, McFatter, McWhirter, & Stegall, 1989). It is therefore more likely to boost the undermining effect of fear of happiness. Hence, we hypothesize that higher levels of neuroticism will boost the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H3).
1.3.4. Conscientiousness Conscientiousness represents the propensity to follow orders, act after thorough thinking, and to exhibit higher levels of self control such as delay of gratifications (John & Srivastava, 1999). Conscientious people tend to be highly organised, prioritize tasks, and adhere to plans (John & Srivastava, 1999). It has been shown to be positively related to happiness, especially happiness accruing from social acts (Anglim & Grant, 2014). However, the social and normative nature of fear of happiness, which are consistent with core characteristics of conscientiousness, such as the tendencies to conform to norms, obey orders, adhere to rules, and self control (Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, & Knafo, 2002) suggest that higher levels of conscientiousness are likely to boost the effect of fear of happiness. We therefore hypothesize that higher levels of conscientiousness will boost the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H4).
1.3.5. Openness to experience Openness to experience reflects the tendencies to explore new ideas and to take risks (Costa & McCrae, 1992). People who are open to experience are often curious and ready to welcome challenges and new occurrences (Costa & McCrae, 1992). A recent meta-analysis shows that this trait is positively related to happiness (Steel et al., 2008). Apparently, the features of this trait, as listed above, are antagonistic to fear of happiness. For instance, the tendencies to take risks and explore new ideas are inconsistent with the notion of fear, suggesting that the happiness of people who are open to experience is less likely to be undermined by fear. Thus, we hypothesize that higher levels of openness to experience will reduce the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness (H5).
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
2. Method 2.1. Participants Participants were 124 (52.1%) male and 114 female (47.9%) undergraduates, who were taking part in a faculty course at a Nigerian university. They were aged between 16 years and 35 years (M = 22.17, SD = 2.98). Majority were Christians (n = 234, 98.3%) from the Igbo speaking people (n = 219, 92.4%) of Nigeria. The remaining 19 respondents were from other ethnic groups in the country, including Hausa/Fulani, Yoruba, and Igala tribes. 2.2. Instruments and procedure
229
examined the interaction effects at three levels of each moderator – the mean, +1SD below and above the mean. These three levels represent the low, moderate, and higher levels of the moderators. Analysis was conducted for each of the moderators (i.e., personality dimensions), while holding fear of happiness constant as the focal variable. For each analysis, the remaining predictors were included as covariates.
3. Results 3.1. Descriptive and correlation statistics The descriptive and correlation statistics for the study variables are shown in Table 1.
Happiness: We assessed happiness with seven (7) positive emotions (PA – positive affect) and eight (8) negative emotions (NA – negative affect). Based on the suggestion that happiness is best measured with affects that are consistent with the culture of the participants, we sampled affects that embody communalism because Nigeria is often classified as a communalistic culture. The PA was measured with joyful, excited, enthusiastic, pleased, happy, friendly, and outgoing (ɑ = 0.79), whereas NA was assessed with distressed, ashamed, afraid, sad, guilt, sorrowful, frustration, and angry (ɑ = 0.76). Respondents rated how frequent they feel each emotion on a 7-point response format, ranging from not at all (1) to always (7). Personality: Personality was measured with a short form of the bigfive inventory (Gosling, Rentfrow, & Swann, 2003). The scale has 10 items. Each of the five dimensions is measured with two items. The scale prompts respondents with a lead statement, “I see myself as”, which is then followed by the items (e.g. __extraverted, enthusiastic). Participants responded by writing the number representing their desired response on the short line preceding each item. Options were chosen from a 7-point response format, ranging from disagree strongly (1) to agree strongly (7). Fear of happiness: We assessed fear of happiness with the universal fear of happiness scale (UFHS, Joshanloo et al., 2013). The scale describes five cardinal reasons why people are averse to happiness (e.g., I prefer not to be too joyful, because usually joy is followed by sadness). Respondents rated their level of agreement with each item on a 7-point response format, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7). We obtained a Cronbach's alpha of 0.72. Participants completed the questionnaire as part of their class activities. They were informed that anyone who did not want to participate was free to opt out. No one opted out. No material reward was offered for participation. 2.3. Analytic technique We analysed the data with MODPROBE version 2.00 (Hayes & Matthes, 2009). MODPROBE tests the direct and moderated effects of the focal and moderator variables on the outcome variable. We
3.2. Positive happiness (frequent experience of positive affect) Consistent with H1, fear of happiness exerted significant effect on the experience of positive affect only at the lower (B = −0.11 (SE = 0.05), t = − 0.2.15, p = 0.03, 95%CI = − 0.22; − 0.01) and moderate (B = − 0.11 (SE = 0.05), t = − 0.2.50, p = 0.01, 95%CI = − 0.20; − 0.02) levels of extraversion, but not at higher levels (B = − 0.11 (SE = 0.06), t = −0.1.76, p = 0.08, 95%CI = −0.24; 0.01). Similarly, result was consistent with H2, result showed that fear of happiness undermined positive affect at higher (B = − 0.24 (SE = 0.07), t = − 0.3.37, p = 0.00, 95%CI = − 0.37; − 0.11) and moderate (B = − 0.15 (SE = 0.05), t = − 3.34, p = 0.00, 95%CI = − 0.24; − 0.06), but not at the lower (B = − 0.06 (SE = 0.06), t = − 0.99, p = 0.32, 95%CI = −0.19; 0.06) levels of agreeableness. Result also provided support for H3. Fear of happiness failed to undermine positive affect at lower levels of neuroticism (B = −0.07 (SE = 0.05), t = −1.37, p = 0.17, 95%CI = −0.18; 0.03), but not at higher (B = −0.16 (SE = 0.06), t = − 2.77, p = 0.01, 95%CI = − 0.28; − 0.05) and moderate levels (B = −0.12 (SE = 0.04), t = −2.65, p = 0.01, 95%CI = −0.21; − 0.03). Support was also found for H5. Fear of happiness was only able to weaken the experience of positive affect at lower (B = −0.15 (SE = 0.06), t = −7.77, p = 0.01, 95%CI = −0.26; −0.04) and moderate (B = − 0.10 (SE = 0.05), t = − 2.32, p = 0.02, 95%CI = − 0.19; − 0.02) levels of openness to experience, but not at higher levels (B = −0.05 (SE = 0.07), t = −0.84, p = 0.40, 95%CI = −0.18; 0.07). However, result contradicted H4. Instead of higher levels of conscientiousness boosting the effect of fear of happiness, as hypothesized, fear of happiness was significantly related to positive affect at lower (B = − 0.15 (SE = 0.06), t = − 2.61, p = 0.01, 95%CI = − 0.27; − 0.04) and moderate levels of conscientiousness (B = − 0.11 (SE = 0.04), t = −2.48, p = 0.00, 95%CI = −0.20; −0.02), but not at higher levels (B = −0.07 (SE = 0.06), t = −1.10, p = 0.27, 95%CI = −0.19; 0.05). Other coefficients associated with each personality dimension as a covariate in the different models and the F-tests are shown in Table 2.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients for the study variables. Variables
M(SD)
1
2
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
– 22.17(2.98) 5.16(1.17) 2.95(1.15) 4.44(1.20) 2.42(1.22) 5.57(1.19) 5.41(0.87) 2.80(1.00) 2.27(1.21)
– −0.33⁎ −0.01 −0.04 −0.03 −0.15⁎
–
Gender Age Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Openness to experience Positive affect Negative affect Fear of happiness
Note: n = 238. ⁎ p b 0.05.
−0.10 0.10 0.01 −0.06
0.14⁎ −0.06 0.22⁎
−0.13⁎ 0.12 0.08 −0.21⁎ −0.03
3
– −0.22⁎ 0.24⁎ −0.33⁎ 0.21⁎ 0.41⁎ −0.27⁎ −0.22⁎
4
– −0.03 0.17⁎
−0.22⁎ −0.05 0.31⁎ 0.05
5
6
7
8
9
10
– −0.06 0.02 0.22⁎ −0.22⁎ −0.01
– −0.36⁎ −0.35⁎ 0.20⁎ 0.19⁎
– 0.31⁎ −0.25⁎ −0.20⁎
– −0.25⁎ −0.26⁎
– 0.31⁎
–
230
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
Table 2 Regression coefficients associated with each personality dimension at the interaction model of the other dimensions for positive affect. Extraversion B(SE) Agreeableness Extraversion Openness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Fear of happiness Dimension × FoH
Agreeableness t
0.05(0.05) 1.12 0.22(0.05) 4.44⁎ 0.08(0.05) 1.73 0.09(0.04) 2.07⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.75 −0.11(0.05) −2.50⁎ 0.00(0.03) 0.04 R2 = 0.24, F = 10.17⁎
B(SE)
Neuroticism t
0.06(0.05) 0.54 0.22(0.05) 2.20⁎ 0.10(0.05) 2.03⁎ 0.10(0.04) 2.20⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.68 −0.12(0.04) −2.68⁎ −0.08(0.04) −2.00⁎ R2 = 0.19, F = 8.57⁎
B(SE)
Conscientiousness t
0.06(0.05) 1.23 0.22(0.05) 4.62⁎ 0.08(0.05) 1.23 0.09(0.04) 1.99⁎ −0.10(0.05) −2.04⁎ −0.12(0.04) −2.65⁎ 0.04(0.03) 1.28 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.48⁎
B(SE)
Openness to experience t
0.05(0.05) 1.08 0.22(0.05) 4.50⁎ 0.08(0.05) 1.79 0.08(0.04) 1.94⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.78 −0.11(0.04) −2.48⁎ 0.03(0.03) 1.04 R2 = 0.24, F = 10.17⁎
B(SE)
t
0.04(0.05) 0.88 0.21(0.05) 4.40⁎ 0.07(0.050) 1.52 0.09(0.04) 2.16⁎ −0.08(0.05) −1.77 −0.10(0.05) −2.32⁎ 0.04(0.03) 1.22 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.45⁎
Note: FoH = fear of happiness, n = 238. ⁎ p b 0.05.
3.3. Negative happiness (frequent experience of negative affect) Result showed that higher levels of extraversion also inhibited the influence of fear of happiness on negative affect (B = 0.12 (SE = 0.07), t = 1.62, p = 0.11, 95%CI = − 0.03; 0.26), but not at lower (B = 0.29 (SE = 0.06), t = 4.82, p = 0.00, 95%CI = 0.17; 0.41) and moderate (B = 0.21 (SE = 0.05), t = 3.97, p = 0.00, 95%CI = 0.10; 0.31) levels. A different and interesting pattern emerged for other dimensions. Result showed that fear of happiness was positively and substantially associated with negative affect at all the three levels of agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience. The coefficients associated with each personality dimension as a covariate in the different models and the F-tests are shown in Table 3.
4. Discussion The pattern of result presents some interesting vistas. Personality did not exert similar moderating effect for the two dimensions of affect. Whereas higher levels of extraversion, openness to experience, and conscientiousness undermined the effect of fear of happiness on positive affect, higher levels of agreeableness and neuroticism potentiated the effect. On the other hand, except for extraversion, fear of happiness was positively associated with negative affect at all the three levels of the other four personality dimensions. This differentiated effect may not be unconnected with the cultural norms for positive and negative affect. Whereas the expression norm for positive affect in communalistic cultures, such as Nigeria, requires moderation to avoid offending others, which, perhaps, explains why pride has negative valence in communalistic cultures, the experience of certain negative emotions, such as shame and guilt, are encouraged and are socially expected because they embody the core theme of communalism, which are interdependence, social connectedness, and conformity to social and cultural standards of behaviour (Kitayama, Mesquita, & Karasawa, 2006; Tangney & Tracy, 2012). With such cognitive architecture, people fear to express positive side of happiness – positive affect – and not the
negative side. It could therefore be said that in communalistic cultures fear of happiness is a cultural mechanism for moderating positive affect and not negative affect. Hence, personality is recruited as a protective shield for positive affect against fear of happiness, but not for negative affect. However, extraversion appears as an exception. Its moderating effect was similar across positive and negative affect. Higher levels of extraversion mitigated the effect of fear of happiness on both positive and negative affect. The inherent nature of extraversion may hold the key to this undifferentiated effect. Extraversion stimulates the creation of amiable contexts and situations that yield happiness and, at the same time, inhibits the occurrences of negative emotions. By this, extraversion performs dual role. As such, higher levels of it are not only likely to weaken the effect of fear of happiness on positive affect, but are equally likely to inhibit the potentiating effect of fear of happiness on negative affects. Contrary to the hypothesis that higher levels of conscientiousness would boost the influence of fear of happiness on the experience of happiness, higher levels of the trait exerted an undermining effect. One possible explanation for this effect is locatable in the valence of fear of happiness vis-à-vis the elements of conscientiousness. Fear of happiness, as earlier noted, has a negative valence, apparently rooted in the emotion of fear. Although conscientiousness is associated with conformity and obedience to tradition, which are values likely to potentiate the operation of fear of happiness given the cultural rooting of the phenomenon, the behaviours of conscientious people are not based on fear but are based on their inherent tendencies to be orderly and cautious. Fear is not consistent with most attributes of conscientiousness, such as the tendency to act only after thorough thinking. Thus, the experience of positive affect by highly conscientious people is less likely to be influenced by fear of happiness. In summary, the present study shows that the relationship between fear of happiness and the experience of happiness is not only conditioned by culture, but is also influenced significantly by variations in personality. Hence, it highlights the need to incorporate personality as an important factor in both empirical modelling and theorising about fear of happiness. However, the present study has some limitations
Table 3 Regression coefficients associated with each personality dimension at the interaction model of the other dimensions for negative affect. Extraversion B(SE) Agreeableness Extraversion Openness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Fear of happiness Dimension × FoH
Agreeableness t
0.23(0.05) 4.39⁎ −0.06(0.06) −1.10 −0.08(0.05) −1.53 −0.16(0.05) −3.13⁎ −0.05(0.05) −0.93 0.21(0.05) 3.97⁎ −0.07(0.04) −2.07⁎ R2 = 0.26, F = 10.99⁎
Note: FoH = fear of happiness, n = 238. ⁎ p b 0.05.
B(SE)
Neuroticism t
0.22(0.05) 4.10⁎ −0.08(0.06) −1.44 −0.09(0.05) −1.69 −0.16(0.05) −3.13⁎ −0.04(0.05) −0.78 −0.23(0.05) 4.44⁎ 0.05(0.04) 1.08 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.40⁎
B(SE)
t
0.23(0.05) 4.39⁎ −0.07(0.06) −1.25 −0.09(0.05) −1.67 −0.16(0.05) −3.23⁎ −0.07(0.06) −1.33 0.21(0.05) 4.22⁎ 0.08(03) 2.36⁎ R2 = 0.26, F = 11.24⁎
Conscientiousness
Openness to experience
B(SE)
B(SE)
t
0.22(0.05) 4.24⁎ −0.08(0.06) −1.43 −0.09(0.05) −1.59 −0.15(0.05) −2.92⁎ −0.04(0.05) −0.71 0.22(0.05) 4.31⁎ −0.04(0.04) −0.99 R2 = 0.25, F = 10.37⁎
t
0.22(0.05) 4.15⁎ −0.08(0.06) −1.42 −0.08(0.05) −1.48 −0.15(0.05) −3.07⁎ −0.04(0.05) −0.73 0.22(0.05) 4.26⁎ −0.01(0.04) −0.24 R2 = 0.24, F = 10.19⁎
A.A. Agbo, C.N. Ngwu / Personality and Individual Differences 111 (2017) 227–231
that raise caveats over the findings. One of the limitations concerns the measure of personality used. Although the scale is recommended for use in settings where lengthy scales are undesirable, which was the case in the present study because respondents completed the questionnaire during class hours, the scale does not serve as a sufficient replacement of the original form. It is limited in several ways, such as the possibility of low reliability as a result of fewer items for each dimension. In addition, participants were largely younger adults whose experience of affect is distinguishable from that of older populations. Thus, the present study is precursory. More robust and inclusive studies are required to validate findings and possibly reveal other ways that personality may be related to the fear of happiness. References Anglim, J., & Grant, S. L. (2014). Incremental criterion prediction of personality facets over factors: Obtaining unbiased estimates and confidence intervals. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 148–157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.10.005. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The five-factor model of personality and its relevance to personality disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 6, 343–359. DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229. DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533–552. Diener, E., Sandvik, E., & Pavot, W. (1991). Happiness is the frequency, not the intensity, of positive versus negative affect. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 119–139). Oxford, UK: Pergamon. Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190. 002221. Ford, B. Q., Shallcross, A. J., Mauss, I. B., Floerke, V. A., & Gruber, J. (2014). Desperately seeking happiness: Valuing happiness is associated with symptoms and diagnosis of depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 33, 890–905. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1521/jscp.2014.33.10.890. Ford, B. Q., Mauss, I. B., & Gruber, J. (2015). Valuing happiness is associated with bipolar disorder. Emotion, 15, 211–222. Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504–528. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1. Gruber, J., Mauss, I. B., & Tamir, M. (2011). A dark side of happiness? How, when, and why happiness is not always good. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 222–233. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1037/emo0000048. Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 924–936. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.3.924. Hotard, S. R., McFatter, R. M., McWhirter, R. M., & Stegall, M. E. (1989). Interactive effects of extraversion, neuroticism, and social relationships on subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 321–331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-3514.57.2.321. Huta, V., & Waterman, A. S. (2014). Eudaimonia and its distinction from hedonia: Developing a classification and terminology for understanding conceptual and operational definitions. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 1425–1456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10902-013-9485-0.
231
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102–138) (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. Joshanloo, M., & Weijers, D. (2014). Aversion to happiness across cultures: A review of where and why people are averse to happiness. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15, 717–735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9489-9. Joshanloo, M., Rastegar, P., & Bakhshi, A. (2012). The Big Five personality domains as predictors of social wellbeing in Iranian university students. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 639–660. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407512443432. Joshanloo, M., Lepshokova, Z. K., Panyusheva, T., Natalia, A., Poon, W. C., et al. (2013). Cross-cultural validation of the fear of happiness scale across 14 national groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45, 246–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0022022113505357. Kashdan, T. B., DeWall, C. N., Schurtz, D. R., Deckman, T., Lykins, E. L., Evans, D. R., ... Brown, K. W. (2014). More than words: Contemplating death enhances positive emotional word use. Personality and Individual Differences, 71, 171–175. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.paid.2014.07.035. Kitayama, S., Mesquita, B., & Karasawa, M. (2006). Cultural affordances and emotional experience: Socially engaging and disengaging emotions in Japan and the United States. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 890–903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-3514.91.5.890. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-295X.98.2.224. Mauss, I. B., Tamir, M., Anderson, C. L., & Savino, N. S. (2011). Can seeking happiness make people unhappy? Paradoxical effects of valuing happiness. Emotion, 11, 807–815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022010. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60, 175–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494. 1992.tb00970.x. Oishi, S., & Schimmack, U. (2010). Residential mobility, well-being, and mortality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 980–994. Parks-Leduc, L., Feldman, G., & Bardi, A. (2015). Personality traits and personal values a meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 3–29. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/1088868314538548. Raibley, J. R. (2012). Happiness is not well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13, 1105–1129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9309-z. Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The big five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 789–801. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0146167202289008. Schimmack, U., Radhakrishnan, P., Oishi, S., Dzokoto, V., & Ahadi, S. (2002). Culture, personality, and subjective well-being: Integrating process models of life satisfaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 582–593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037// 0022-3514.82.4.582. Soto, C. J. (2015). Is happiness good for your personality? Concurrent and prospective relations of the big five with subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 83, 45–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12081. Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138–161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ 0033-2909.134.1.138. Tangney, J. P., & Tracy, J. L. (2012). Self-conscious emotions. In M. Leary, & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 446–478) (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.