Editing Positive psychology (section)

==Criticism and limitations==
Many aspects of positive psychology have been criticized.

It has been suggested that positive psychology lacks proper theorizing and conceptual thinking, problematic as far as measurements and methodologies were concerned, seen as a pseudoscience that lacks evidence and had poor replication, lacks novelty and self-isolated itself for mainstream psychology, was a decontextualized neoliberalist ideology that caused harm and was a capitalistic venture. 

=== Reality distortion ===

==== Positive illusions ====
In 1988, psychologists [[Shelley E. Taylor]] and Jonathan D. Brown co-authored a ''[[Psychological Bulletin]]'' article that coined the phrase [[positive illusions]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Taylor |first1=Shelley E. |last2=Brown |first2=Jonathon D. |title=Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. |journal=Psychological Bulletin |date=1988 |volume=103 |issue=2 |pages=193–210 |doi=10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.193 |pmid=3283814 }}</ref> Positive illusions are the [[cognitive processes]] people engage in when they [[Self aggrandizing|self-aggrandize]] or [[Self-enhancement|self-enhance]]. They are unrealistically positive or self-affirming attitudes that individuals hold about themselves, their position, or their environment. They are attitudes of extreme optimism that endure in the face of facts and real conditions.

Taylor and Brown suggest that positive illusions protect people from negative feedback that they might receive, and this, in turn, preserves their [[psychological adaptation]] and subjective well-being. However, later research found that positive illusions and related attitudes lead to psychological [[Maladaptation|maladaptive]] conditions such as poorer social relationships, expressions of [[narcissism]], and negative workplace outcomes,<ref>{{Cite news|first=Nancy|last=Luksch|date=2010-02-27|title=Positive Illusions and Positive Psychology: Do Positive Illusions Foster Mental Health?|url=http://positivepsychology.org.uk/positive-illusions/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170331204615/http://positivepsychology.org.uk/positive-illusions/|archive-date=2017-03-31|access-date=2020-11-29|website=PositivePsychology.org.uk|language=en-US}}</ref> thus reducing the positive effects that positive illusions have on subjective well-being, overall happiness, and life satisfaction.

[[Kirk J. Schneider|Kirk Schneider]], editor of the ''[[Journal of Humanistic Psychology]]'', pointed to research showing high positivity correlates with positive illusion, which distorts reality. High positivity or [[flourishing]] could make one incapable of psychological growth, unable to self-reflect, and prone to holding racial biases. By contrast, negativity, sometimes evidenced in mild to moderate depression, is correlated with less distortion of reality. Therefore, Schneider argues, negativity might play an important role: engaging in conflict and acknowledging appropriate negativity, including certain negative emotions like guilt, might better promote flourishing. Schneider wrote: "perhaps genuine happiness is not something you aim at, but is... a by-product of a life well lived—and a life well lived does not settle on the programmed or neatly calibrated."<ref>{{Cite news|first=Kirk J.|last=Schneider|date=2010-11-29|title=Toward a Humanistic Positive Psychology: Why Can't We Just Get Along?|url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/awakening-awe/201011/toward-humanistic-positive-psychology-why-cant-we-just-get-along|access-date=2020-11-29|website=Psychology Today|language=en-US}}</ref>

==== Role of negativity ====
[[Barbara S. Held]], a professor at [[Bowdoin College]], argues that positive psychology has faults: negative side effects, negativity within the positive psychology movement, and the division in the field of psychology caused by differing opinions of psychologists on positive psychology. She notes the movement's lack of consistency regarding the role of negativity. She also raises issues with the simplistic approach taken by some psychologists in the application of positive psychology. A "one size fits all" approach is arguably not beneficial; she suggests a need for individual differences to be incorporated into its application.<ref name="Held2004">{{cite journal |last1=Held |first1=Barbara S. |title=The Negative Side of Positive Psychology |journal=Journal of Humanistic Psychology |date=January 2004 |volume=44 |issue=1 |pages=9–46 |doi=10.1177/0022167803259645 }}</ref> By teaching young people that being confident and optimistic leads to success, when they are unsuccessful they may believe this is because they are insecure or pessimistic. This could lead them to believe that any negative internal thought or feeling they may experience is damaging to their happiness and should be steered clear of completely.<ref name="Ciarrochi 2016">{{Cite journal |last1=Ciarrochi |first1=Joseph |last2=Atkins |first2=Paul W. B. |last3=Hayes |first3=Louise L. |last4=Sahdra |first4=Baljinder K. |last5=Parker |first5=Philip |year=2016 |title=Contextual Positive Psychology: Policy Recommendations for Implementing Positive Psychology into Schools |journal=Frontiers in Psychology |language=English |volume=7 |page=1561 |doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01561 |pmc=5056194 |pmid=27777564 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Held prefers the Second Wave Positive Psychology message of embracing the dialectic nature of positive and negative, and questions the need to call it "positive" psychology.{{r|Held2004}}

==== Toxic positivity ====
{{Further|Toxic positivity}}
[[File:20230516 Toxic positivity - Google Trends search term history.svg|thumb| upright=1.25 | Though the concept of unrealistic optimism had already been explored by psychologists at least as early as 1980, the term ''toxic positivity'' appeared in J. Halberstam's 2011 ''[[The Queer Art of Failure]]''<ref name="AppliedCorpusLinquistics_20220125">{{cite journal |last1=Lecompte-Van Poucke |first1=Margo |title='You got this!': A critical discourse analysis of toxic positivity as a discursive construct on Facebook |journal=Applied Corpus Linguistics |date=April 2022 |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=100015 |doi=10.1016/j.acorp.2022.100015 }}</ref> ("...to poke holes in the toxic positivity of contemporary life"). Beginning in about 2019, the term ''toxic positivity'' became the subject of a greater number of Internet searches.]]
One critical response to positive psychology concerns "toxic positivity".<ref>{{multiref2|{{Cite book |last=Halberstam |first=Jack |date=2011 |title=The Queer Art of Failure |publisher=Duke University Press |isbn=978-0-8223-5045-3}}{{pn|date=December 2024}}|{{cite journal |last1=Wright |first1=Colin |title=Happiness Studies and Wellbeing: A Lacanian Critique of Contemporary Conceptualisations of the Cure |journal=Culture Unbound |date=October 2014 |volume=6 |issue=4 |pages=791–813 |doi=10.3384/cu.2000.1525.146791 |doi-access=free }}
}}</ref> Toxic positivity is when people do not fully acknowledge, process, or manage the entire spectrum of human emotion, including anger and sadness.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lukin |first=Konstantin |title=Toxic Positivity: Don't Always Look on the Bright Side |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-man-cave/201908/toxic-positivity-dont-always-look-the-bright-side |access-date=2020-11-29 |website=Psychology Today |language=en-US}}</ref> This genre of criticism argues that positive psychology places too much importance on "upbeat thinking, while shunting challenging and difficult experiences to the side."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Smith |first=Jen Rose |date=17 September 2020 |title=When does a good attitude become toxic positivity? |url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/17/health/toxic-positivity-mental-health-wellness/index.html |access-date=2020-11-29 |website=CNN}}</ref> People who engage in a constant chase for positive experiences or states of high subjective well-being may inadvertently [[stigmatizing|stigmatize]] negative emotional conditions such as [[depression (mood)|depression]], or may suppress natural emotional responses, such as [[sadness]], [[regret]], or [[Psychological stress|stress]]. Furthermore, by not allowing negative emotional states to be experienced, or by suppressing and hiding negative emotional responses, people may experience harmful physical, [[cardiovascular]], and [[Respiratory system|respiratory]] consequences.<ref>{{multiref2|{{Cite web|first=Zawn|last=Villines|editor-last=Johnson|editor-first=Jacquelyn|title=What to know about toxic positivity|url=https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/toxic-positivity|website=Medical News Today|date=31 March 2021}}|{{Cite journal|last1=Gross|first1=J. J.|last2=Levenson|first2=R. W.|year=1997|title=Hiding feelings: the acute effects of inhibiting negative and positive emotion|journal=Journal of Abnormal Psychology|volume=106|issue=1|pages=95–103|doi=10.1037/0021-843x.106.1.95|pmid=9103721}}|{{Cite journal|last1=Campbell-Sills|first1=Laura|last2=Barlow|first2=David H.|last3=Brown|first3=Timothy A.|last4=Hofmann|first4=Stefan G.|year=2006|title=Effects of suppression and acceptance on emotional responses of individuals with anxiety and mood disorders|journal=Behaviour Research and Therapy|language=en|volume=44|issue=9|pages=1251–1263|doi=10.1016/j.brat.2005.10.001|pmid=16300723}}
}}</ref> Opponents of toxic positivity advocate accepting and fully experiencing negative emotional states.

=== Methodological and philosophical critiques ===

[[Richard Lazarus]] critiqued positive psychology's methodological and philosophical components. He holds that giving more detail and insight into the positive is not bad, but not at the expense of the negative, because the two (positive and negative) are inseparable. Among his critiques:

# Positive psychology's use of correlational and cross-sectional research designs to indicate causality between the movement's ideas and healthy lives may hide other factors and time differences that account for observed differences.
# Emotions cannot be categorized [[Dichotomy|dichotomously]] into positive and negative; emotions are subjective and rich in social/relational meaning. Emotions are fluid, meaning that the context they appear in changes over time. Lazarus states that "all emotions have the potential of being either one or the other, or both, on different occasions, and even on the same occasion when an emotion is experienced by different persons"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lazarus |first1=Richard S. |title=Does the Positive Psychology Movement Have Legs? |journal=Psychological Inquiry |date=April 2003 |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=93–109 |doi=10.1207/S15327965PLI1402_02 |jstor=1449813 }}</ref> 
# Individual differences are neglected in most social science research. Many research designs focus on the statistical significance of the groups while overlooking differences among people.
# Social science researchers' tend to not adequately define and measure emotions. Most assessments are quick checklists and do not provide adequate debriefing. Many researchers do not differentiate between fluid emotional states and relatively stable personality traits.

Lazarus holds that positive psychology claims to be new and innovative but the majority of research on stress and coping theory makes many of the same claims as positive psychology. The movement attempts to uplift and reinforce the positive aspects of one's life, but everyone in life experiences stress and hardship. Coping through these events should not be regarded as adapting to failures but as successfully navigating stress, but the movement doesn't hold that perspective.

Another critique of positive psychology is that it has been developed from a Eurocentric worldview. [[Intersectionality]] has become a methodological concern regarding studies within Positive Psychology.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sanders |first1=Christopher A. |last2=Rose |first2=Hope |last3=Booker |first3=Jordan A. |last4=King |first4=Laura A. |title=Claiming the role of positive psychology in the fight against prejudice |journal=The Journal of Positive Psychology |date=2 January 2023 |volume=18 |issue=1 |pages=61–74 |doi=10.1080/17439760.2021.2012342 }}</ref>

A literature review conducted in 2022 noted several criticisms of the area, including lack of conceptual thinking, problematic measurements, poor replication of results, self-isolation from mainstream psychology, decontextualization, and being used for capitalism.<ref>{{cite journal|journal=The Journal of Positive Psychology|year=2023|title=The critiques and criticisms of positive psychology: A systematic review|last1=van Zyl|first1=L. E.|last2=Gaffaney|first2=J.|last3=van der Vaart|first3=L.|last4=Dik|first4=B. J.|last5=Donaldson|first5=S.I.|volume=19 |issue=2 |pages=206–235 |doi=10.1080/17439760.2023.2178956|doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Narrow focus ===
In 2003, Ian Sample noted that "Positive psychologists also stand accused of burying their heads in the sand and ignoring that depressed, even merely unhappy people, have real problems that need dealing with."<ref name="Sample">{{Cite web |last=Sample |first=Ian |date=2003-11-19 |title=How to be happy |url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2003/nov/19/1 |access-date=2021-06-21 |website=The Guardian |language=en}}</ref> He quoted Steven Wolin, a [[clinical psychiatrist]] at [[George Washington University]], as saying that the study of positive psychology is just a reiteration of older ways of thinking, and that there is not much scientific research to support the efficacy of this method.

Psychological researcher Shelly Gable retorts that positive psychology is just bringing a balance to a side of psychology that is glaringly understudied. She points to imbalances favoring research into negative psychological well-being in [[cognitive psychology]], [[health psychology]], and [[social psychology]].{{r|Sample}}

Psychologist Jack Martin maintains that positive psychology is not unique in its optimistic approach to emotional well-being, stating that other forms of psychology, such as counseling and [[educational psychology]], are also interested in positive human fulfillment.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Martin |first1=Jack |title=Self Research in Educational Psychology: A Cautionary Tale of Positive Psychology in Action |journal=The Journal of Psychology |date=July 2006 |volume=140 |issue=4 |pages=307–316 |doi=10.3200/JRLP.140.4.307-316 |pmid=16967738 }}</ref> He says while positive psychology pushes for schools to be more student-centered and able to foster positive self-images in children, a lack of focus on self-control may prevent children from making full contributions to society. If positive psychology is not implemented correctly, it can cause more harm than good. This is the case, for example, when interventions in school are coercive (in the sense of being imposed on everyone without regard for the child's reason for negativity) and fail to take each student's context into account.<ref name="Ciarrochi 2016" />

=== Applications and misapplications ===

==== The US Army's Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program ====
[[File:Csf..jpg|thumb|In contract with Seligman's Positive Psychology Center at the University of Pennsylvania, the United States Army began the [[Comprehensive Soldier Fitness]] program in order to address psychological issues among soldiers.]]
The [[Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness|Comprehensive Soldier Fitness]] (CSF) program was established in 2008 by then-[[Chief of Staff of the United States Army]], [[General (United States)|General]] [[George W. Casey, Jr.]], in an effort to address increasing rates of drug abuse, family violence, [[Post-traumatic stress disorder|PTSD]], and suicide among soldiers. The Army contracted with Seligman's Positive Psychology Center at the [[University of Pennsylvania]] to supply a program based on the center's Penn Resiliency Program, which was designed for 10- to 14-year-old children.<ref name="Singal">{{cite web|last=Singal|first=Jesse|title=Positive Psychology Goes to War|date=2021-06-07|access-date=July 25, 2021|url=https://www.chronicle.com/article/positive-psychology-goes-to-war|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Although Seligman proposed starting with a small-scale pilot-test, General Casey insisted on immediately rolling out the CSF to the entire Army.<ref>{{cite book|last=Seligman|first=Martin E. P.|title=Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being|publisher=Simon & Schuster|year=2012|page=163|isbn=9781439190753}}</ref> Interviewed for the journal ''Monitor on Psychology'' of the [[American Psychological Association]], Seligman said that "This is the largest study—1.1 million soldiers—psychology has ever been involved in."<ref>{{cite web|last=Novotney|first=Amy|title=Strong in mind and body|date=December 2009|access-date=July 25, 2021|url=https://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/12/army-program}}</ref> According to journalist Jesse Singal, "It would become one of the largest mental-health interventions geared at a single population in the history of humanity, and possibly the most expensive."<ref name="Singal" />

Some psychologists criticized the CSF for various reasons. Nicholas J.L. Brown wrote: "The idea that techniques that have demonstrated, at best, marginal effects in reducing depressive symptoms in school-age children could also prevent the onset of a condition that is associated with some of the most extreme situations with which humans can be confronted is a remarkable one that does not seem to be backed up by empirical evidence."<ref name="Brown">{{cite journal|last=Brown|first=Nicholas J. L.|title=A critical examination of the US Army's Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program|journal=The Winnower|volume=2|year=2014|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264224551}}</ref>
[[Stephen Soldz]] of the [[Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis]] cited Seligman's acknowledgment that the CSF is a gigantic study rather than a program based on proven techniques, and questioned the ethics of requiring soldiers to participate in research without informed consent.<ref name="Soldz">{{cite journal|last=Soldz|first=Stephen|date=2011-03-24|title=The Dark Side of 'Comprehensive Soldier Fitness'|journal=[[The American Psychologist]]|volume=66|issue=7|pages=643–44; discussion 646–47|doi=10.1037/a0025272|pmid=21967209}}</ref> Soldz also criticized the CSF training for trying to build up-beat attitudes toward combat: "Might soldiers who have been trained to resiliently view combat as a growth opportunity be more likely to ignore or under-estimate real dangers, thereby placing themselves, their comrades, or civilians at heightened risk of harm?"<ref name="Soldz"/>

In 2021 the [[Chronicle of Higher Education]] carried a debate between Singal and Seligman about whether, with the CSF well into its second decade, there was any solid evidence of its effectiveness. Singal cited studies that, he said, failed to find any measurable benefits from such positive psychology techniques, and he criticized the Army's own reports as methodologically unsound and lacking peer review.<ref name="Singal"/><ref>{{cite web|last=Singal|first=Jesse|title=Magical Thinking on Positive Psychology: The field's founder can't see past his own hype|date=2021-07-22|access-date=July 25, 2021|url=https://www.chronicle.com/article/magical-thinking-on-positive-psychology|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Seligman said that Singal had misinterpreted the studies and ignored the Army's positive feedback from soldiers, one of whom told Seligman that "if I had had this training years ago, it would have saved my marriage."<ref>{{cite web|last=Seligman|first=Martin E. P.|title=Effectiveness of Positive Psychology: Setting the record straight|date=2021-07-14|access-date=July 25, 2021|url=https://www.chronicle.com/article/effectiveness-of-positive-psychology|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

=== Equality gaps and underrepresentation  ===

==== Demographic diversity ====
Positive psychology has historically been critiqued for its lack of demographic diversity, both in terms of its research populations and its theoretical frameworks. Much of the early research in positive psychology was conducted predominantly with Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) populations, leading to concerns about the generalizability of its findings across different demographic groups.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Henrich |first1=Joseph |last2=Heine |first2=Steven J. |last3=Norenzayan |first3=Ara |title=The weirdest people in the world? |journal=Behavioral and Brain Sciences |date=June 2010 |volume=33 |issue=2–3 |pages=61–83 |doi=10.1017/S0140525X0999152X |pmid=20550733 |url=https://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~henrich/pdfs/WeirdPeople.pdf }}</ref> Recent studies have highlighted the need for more inclusive research that encompasses a broader range of cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds to ensure that positive psychology interventions are applicable and effective for diverse populations.

==== Cultural sensitivity  ====
The concept of cultural sensitivity is crucial for positive psychology, yet it has faced criticism for insufficient consideration of cultural contexts. Positive psychology's principles, such as subjective well-being and character strengths, may not universally apply or be valued equally across all cultures. For instance, in collectivist cultures, individuals prioritize collective well-being over individual happiness, and thus, frameworks like the PERMA model may need adaptation to reflect these values. Additionally, there is a call for more cross-cultural research to validate the applicability of positive psychology interventions globally and to integrate culturally relevant practices and perspectives.<ref name="Lomas 60–77">{{cite journal |last1=Lomas |first1=Tim |title=Positive cross-cultural psychology: Exploring similarity and difference in constructions and experiences of wellbeing |journal=International Journal of Wellbeing |date=17 December 2015 |volume=5 |issue=4 |pages=60–77 |doi=10.5502/ijw.v5i4.437 }}</ref>

==== Accessibility  ====
Accessibility issues are a significant concern within positive psychology. Interventions and practices derived from positive psychology may not be equally accessible to all populations, particularly those from marginalized or lower socioeconomic backgrounds. There is evidence that socioeconomic factors can impact the effectiveness and availability of positive psychology interventions, potentially exacerbating existing inequalities.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kern |first1=Margaret L. |last2=Waters |first2=Lea E. |last3=Adler |first3=Alejandro |last4=White |first4=Mathew A. |title=A multidimensional approach to measuring well-being in students: Application of the PERMA framework |journal=The Journal of Positive Psychology |date=4 May 2015 |volume=10 |issue=3 |pages=262–271 |doi=10.1080/17439760.2014.936962 |pmc=4337659 |pmid=25745508 }}</ref> To address these gaps, there is a growing emphasis on developing and implementing positive psychology practices that are affordable and accessible to diverse communities, including those with limited resources.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Diener |first1=Ed |last2=Seligman |first2=Martin E.P. |title=Beyond Money: Toward an Economy of Well-Being |journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |date=July 2004 |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=1–31 |doi=10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00501001.x |pmid=26158992 }}</ref>