The Hedonic Treadmill

What would you do if you won the lottery? Would you spend some on a fantastic vacation? Would you invest it? Would you be happy?

For most people, the answer to the last question would be a resounding yes. However, sudden changes in happiness that individuals may experience have not been proven to be durable or long-lasting. According to a concept called the hedonic treadmill says that “people stay at about the same level of happiness regardless of what happens to them.” In a study by Brickman et. al, two groups of people were observed over time: those that won the lottery and those that were suddenly paralyzed. They were interested in seeing what the long-term effects of these objective events in a person’s life might be. Interestingly, after a year both groups seemed to have regressed to their former level of happiness- if they were happy before, they were happy a year later, and if they were unhappy before the event, they were generally unhappy a year later. Like a person on a treadmill, large steps (changes) may be taken, but the individual always ends up back where they started, at their set point.

One article points out how the hedonic treadmill can lead to increased expenditures, because “habit converts luxurious enjoyments into dull and daily necessities,” and people spend money to buy new sources of excitement. This, the author implies, is the basis for the well-known idea that money can’t buy happiness. She encourages individuals to prevent extra expenditures by reminding them: “instead of running forward on the never-ending treadmill, we can rediscover things we already have.”

A different article seems focused on combating the negative view that hedonic treadmill theory “implies that individual and societal efforts to increase happiness are doomed to failure.” Diener, Lucas, and Scollon then propose five revisions to the theory that offers more hope for those attempting to decrease human misery. The five points include that individual’s set point is not hedonically neutral, that set points differ between individuals, that a single person can have more than one happiness set point, that set points may change in certain cases, and that people differ in their reactions to events. The authors hope these slight modifications will offer a more hopeful view of methods to increase happiness.

I begin to wonder, knowing that we have a tendency to regress to our hedonic set points, is it possible to combat this effect? Obviously, an individual can’t stay ecstatically happy for months on end, but I would be hard-pressed to believe that significant events have no capability of fostering a permanent change in happiness level.

“Saving money by circumventing the hedonic treadmill.” http://www.mrsmicah.com/2008/02/25/saving-money-by-circumventing-the-hedonic-treadmill/

Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. Diener, Ed; Lucas, Richard E.;

Scollon, Christie Napa. American Psychologist. Vol 61(4), May-Jun 2006, 305-314.

Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.