Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These values seem fundamental enough to be inalienable rights. You're on your own with the life and liberty part, but we can examine what psychological scientists know about what makes people happy, and what people think will make them happy.

When you think about setting goals for yourself, here is a crucial psychological finding to keep in mind: People are really bad at predicting what will make them happy and what will make them miserable, and at estimating how long those feelings will last (Wilson & Gilbert, 2005). In one study, college students were asked how happy or unhappy they imagined they would feel after being randomly assigned to live in a dorm they thought was “desirable” or “undesirable” (Dunn, Wilson, & Gilbert, 2003). The students predicted that their dorm assignments would have a huge impact on their overall level of happiness and that being assigned to an undesirable dorm would essentially wreck their satisfaction for the whole year. In fact, as you can see from Figure12.1, 1 year later, both groups had nearly identical levels of happiness no matter where they were living.

Figure 12.1

The Misprediction of Emotion

Perhaps the undesirable dorms turned out to be unexpectedly pleasant, with cool people living in them? No. The students had focused on the wrong factors when forecasting their future feelings of happiness in the houses; they had placed far more importance on what the house looked like and on its location than on its inhabitants. But in fact, it's people who make a place fun or unpleasant to live in, and all of the dorms had likable people in them. Because the students could not foresee this, or how much they would like their new roommates, they mispredicted their future happiness.

This result has been replicated in many different contexts: The good is rarely as good as we imagine it will be, and the bad is rarely as terrible. The reason is that people adjust quickly to happy changes—new relationships, a promotion, even winning the lottery—and fail to anticipate that they will cope with bad experiences just as quickly. They will make sense of unexpected events, cope with tragedies, and make excuses for loved ones who hurt them. Yet people make many decisions based on false assumptions about how they will feel in the future. Many spend more money than they can afford on a car or house because they think that this is what will make them truly happy.

What, then, does make people happy? In all the domains of human motivation that we have examined, a key conclusion emerges: People who are motivated by the intrinsic satisfaction of an activity are happier and more satisfied than those motivated solely by extrinsic rewards (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Kasser & Ryan, 2001). We also saw how intrinsic motivation in any domain will rise or fall depending on the goals we choose and the way we think of them. Goals, in turn, are determined by our values about what is important in life: freedom, religion, equality, wealth, fame, wisdom, serenity, sexual passion, the desire to improve the world, or anything else. Psychological research cannot tell us which values to choose, but it does help illuminate the consequences of our choices.

In the United States, many people are more motivated to make money than to find activities they enjoy. They imagine that greater wealth will bring greater happiness, yet after they are at a level that provides basic comfort and security, more isn't necessarily better. They adjust quickly to the greater wealth and then think they need even more of it to be happier (Dunn, Gilbert, & Wilson, 2011; Gilbert, 2006). Having great wealth even seems to impair people's ability to savor and enjoy small pleasures—sunny days, cold beers, and chocolate (Quoidbach et al., 2015). In addition, regardless of whether they live in the United States (an affluent nation) or Russia (a struggling nation), people who are primarily motivated to get rich have poorer psychological adjustment and lower well-being than do people whose primary values are self-acceptance, affiliation with others, or wanting to make the world a better place (Ryan et al., 1999). This is especially true when the reasons for striving for money are, again, extrinsic (e.g., you do it to impress others and show off your possessions) rather than intrinsic (e.g., you do it so you can afford to do the volunteer work you love) (Carver & Baird, 1998; Srivastava, Locke, & Bartol, 2001). In contrast, having positive, intrinsically enjoyable experiences makes most people happier than having things: Doing, in other words, is more satisfying than buying (Carter & Gilovich, 2012; Headey, 2008). Watch the video Affective Forecasting for more insights into how successful humans are at predicting what will make them happy . . . or miserable.

Whichever values and goals you choose, if they are in conflict, the discrepancy can produce emotional stress and unhappiness. Two motives conflict when the satisfaction of one leads to the inability to act on the other—that is, when you want to have your cake and eat it, too. The three major kinds of motivational conflicts are these (Lewin, 1948):

1. Approach–approach conflicts occur when you are equally attracted to two or more possible activities or goals: You would like to be a veterinarian and a rock singer; you would like to go out Tuesday night with friends and study like mad for an exam Wednesday.

2. Avoidance–avoidance conflicts require you to choose between the lesser of two evils because you dislike both alternatives. Novice parachute jumpers must choose between the fear of jumping and the fear of losing face if they don't jump.

3. Approach–avoidance conflicts occur when a single activity or goal has both a positive and a negative aspect. In culturally diverse nations, differing cultural values produce many approach–avoidance conflicts, as students have told us. A Chicano student says he wants to become a lawyer, but his parents, valuing family closeness, worry that if he goes to law school, he will become independent and feel superior to his working-class family. A black student from a poor neighborhood, in college on scholarship, is torn between wanting to leave his background behind him forever and returning to help his home community. And a white student wants to be a marine biologist, but her friends tell her that only nerdy guys and dweebs go into science.

Years ago, humanist psychologist Abraham Maslow (1970) envisioned people's motives as forming a pyramid. At the bottom level were basic survival needs for food, sleep, and water; at the next level were security needs, for shelter and safety; at the third level were social needs, for belonging and affection; at the fourth level were esteem needs, for self-respect and the respect of others; and at the top, when all other needs had been met, were those for self-actualization and self-transcendence. Maslow's theory became immensely popular, and motivational speakers still often refer to it, using colorful pictures of the pyramid. But the theory, which was based mostly on Maslow's observations of people he personally decided were “self-actualized,” has had little empirical support (Sheldon, 2011; Sheldon et al., 2001). The main reason is that people have simultaneous needs for comfort and safety and for love, intimacy, and competence. Higher needs may even supersede lower ones. History is full of examples of people who would rather die of torture or starvation than sacrifice their convictions, or who would rather explore, risk, or create new art than be safe and secure.

As we have seen in this chapter, many motives spur us to action, but psychological well-being depends on finding activities and choosing goals that are intrinsically satisfying and consistent with our core values, and on developing the self-efficacy to achieve them. The motives and goals that inspire us, and the choices we make in their pursuit, are what give our lives passion, color, and meaning. Choose them wisely.