See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/233304144

Positive Psychology: Past, Present, and (Possible) Future

Article  in  The Journal of Positive Psychology · January 2006

DOI: 10.1080/17439760500372796

CITATIONS READS

585 26,495

4 authors:

P. Alex Linley Stephen Joseph

73 PUBLICATIONS   12,417 CITATIONS   
University of Nottingham
391 PUBLICATIONS   25,901 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Sue Harrington Alex Mathew Wood

The Acupuncture Academy The London School of Economics and Political Science
13 PUBLICATIONS   1,242 CITATIONS    160 PUBLICATIONS   10,945 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Coaching Psychology View project

Posttraumatic Growth after Spinal Cord Injury View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Stephen Joseph on 19 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Journal of Positive Psychology, January 2006; 1(1): 3–16

Positive psychology: Past, present, and (possible) future

P. ALEX LINLEY1, STEPHEN JOSEPH2, SUSAN HARRINGTON1, & ALEX M. WOOD2

1
University of Leicester, UK and 2University of Warwick, UK

Abstract
What is positive psychology? Where has it come from? Where is it going? These are the questions we address in this article.
In defining positive psychology, we distinguish between the meta-psychological level, where the aim of positive psychology is
to redress the imbalance in psychology research and practice, and the pragmatic level, which is concerned with what positive
psychologists do, in terms of their research, practice, and areas of interest. These distinctions in how we understand positive
psychology are then used to shape conceptions of possible futures for positive psychology. In conclusion, we identify several
pertinent issues for the consideration of positive psychology as it moves forward. These include the need to synthesize the
positive and negative, build on its historical antecedents, integrate across levels of analysis, build constituency with powerful
stakeholders, and be aware of the implications of description versus prescription.

Keywords: Positive psychology definition; research; practice; applications; future

Introduction psychology, and provide what we see as some of the

key guiding principles for the further growth and
What is positive psychology? Where has it come
development of the movement.
from? Where is it now? Where is it going? These
are fundamental questions for this first issue of
The Journal of Positive Psychology. It is no small task to
A caveat before we begin
try and answer them, but equally no small
opportunity. Throughout this article, we will (almost inevitably)
In this article, we are aiming to achieve several talk about ‘‘positive psychology’’, and sometimes
objectives. First, we will give a brief history of the about ‘‘positive psychologists.’’ As the experienced
positive psychology movement. Second, we will reader may know already, and as the reader new to
provide a definition of positive psychology. Various positive psychology will learn below, these are
definitions have been put forward to date, and thorny issues. It may be that in years to come there
we review them here, developing from them an is no such thing as positive psychology, or that
integrative position that defines the movement on people may be concerned with the topics of
several levels, thereby, we hope, providing a more positive psychology but do not define themselves
detailed understanding as we move forward. Third, as positive psychologists (indeed, this is often the
we will assess where positive psychology now stands. case today). In many ways this would be a mark of
In some respects, as we go on to show, it might be the movement’s success. Also, we use the terms
argued that positive psychology stands at a cross- positive and negative as shorthand for describing
roads in its development. As such, we consider some the two poles of the human condition. By doing so,
of the issues and decisions that will likely influence its we do not mean in any way to imply or support
future. Fourth, we go on to offer possible scenarios the dichotomization of human experience into
for the future of positive psychology, at least as we positive and negative; in contrast, we view them
surmise them. While speculative, we hope that these as falling along a continuum. While these labels are
scenarios will allow those who identify themselves not ideal because of their value-laden connotations,
with the positive psychology movement to give a we have adopted them reluctantly, but with an eye
careful consideration to how they want the movement focused very much on the need for these caveats,
to develop, and why. To this end, we conclude with as we will go on to show more fully in the sections
several pertinent points for consideration for positive that follow.

Correspondence: P. Alex Linley, PhD, School of Psychology, Henry Wellcome Building, University of Leicester,
Lancaster Road, Leicester LE1 9HN, UK. E-mail: PAL8@le.ac.uk
ISSN 1743-9760 print/ISSN 1743-9779 online/06/010003–14 ß 2006 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/17439760500372796
4 P. A. Linley et al.

A brief history of positive psychology Committee (Csikszentmihalyi, Diener, Jamieson,

Peterson, and Vaillant) and the leaders of numerous
The advent of positive psychology as we know it
positive psychology research centres, research pods,
today can be traced back to Martin E. P. Seligman’s
and grant holders (see Seligman, 2005). Other
1998 Presidential Address to the American
notable figures include C. R. (Rick) Snyder, who
Psychological Association (Seligman, 1999).
edited the special issue of the Journal of social and
Following a serendipitous holiday meeting between
clinical psychology (2000) and the influential
Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi in winter 1997
Handbook of positive psychology (2002); Chris
(Csikszentmihalyi, 2003), and an epiphanic
Peterson, who headed up the Values-in-Action
moment when gardening with his daughter Nikki
project that led to the VIA classification of strengths
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), Seligman
and virtues (Peterson & Seligman, 2004); and the
realized that psychology had largely neglected the winners of the prestigious Templeton Positive
latter two of its three pre-World War II missions: Psychology Prizes: Barbara Fredrickson (2000) for
curing mental illness, helping all people to lead more her work on positive emotions; Jon Haidt (2001) for
productive and fulfilling lives, and identifying and his work on the positive moral emotion of elevation;
nurturing high talent. The advent of the Veterans and Suzanne Segerstrom (2002) for her work on the
Administration (in 1946) and the National Institute beneficial effects of optimism on physical health. A
of Mental Health (in 1947) had largely rendered further critical factor in the success of many of
psychology a healing discipline based upon a disease these initiatives was the financial support that made
model and illness ideology (see also, Maddux, 2002; them possible, provided by such donors as the
Maddux, Snyder, & Lopez, 2004). With this realiza- Templeton Foundation, The Gallup Organization,
tion, Seligman resolved to use his APA presidency to the Mayerson Foundation, the Annenberg
initiate a shift in psychology’s focus toward a more Foundation Trust at Sunnylands, and the Atlantic
positive psychology (Seligman, 1999). Philanthropies, among others. And given the
Seligman’s presidential initiative was catalysed by a research imbalance between psychopathology and
series of meetings in Akumal, Mexico, of scholars disease, relative to human strengths and well-being,
who could inform the conceptualization and early positive psychology also offered excellent opportu-
development of positive psychology, and the estab- nities for rapid scientific advances, simply because
lishment of the Positive Psychology Steering many topics had been largely ignored (Gable &
Committee (Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Ed Diener, Haidt, 2005).
Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Chris Peterson, and George Thus, the development of positive psychology was
Vaillant). From this followed the Positive Psychology clearly shaped and energized by the considerable
Network, later to become the Positive Psychology efforts of Seligman and the other major players in the
Center at the University of Pennsylvania, the first field. Their deliberate sociology of science approach,
Positive Psychology Summit in Washington, DC, recognizing and building on the structural forces that
and a special issue of the American psychologist on shape the discipline of psychology, cemented positive
positive psychology to mark the new millennium psychology’s place through bringing in major
(see Appendix). research funding, providing considerable research
Further, in the 7 years since Seligman’s presiden- leadership, engaging the wider public media, and
tial address, there have been numerous positive attracting some of the brightest early career scientists
psychology books, journal special issues (see through the provision of training institutes, research
Appendix), and the establishment of regional positive collaborations with senior scientists, and funding
psychology networks that span the globe (see support for their work.
Seligman, 2005, for a full review of positive However, it is also eminently clear from a cursory
psychology activities). Now, in 2006, we have the examination of the research literature that positive
first dedicated positive psychology journal, The psychology did not begin in 1997, or 1998, or 1999,
Journal of Positive Psychology. These are remarkable or 2000 (see also McCullough & Snyder, 2000). In
achievements for any psychology movement in such fact, positive psychology has always been with us,
a short space of time. Many readers may well but as a holistic and integrated body of knowledge,
be wondering why, and below we offer some it has passed unrecognized and uncelebrated, and
thoughts in response to this question. one of the major achievements of the positive
As the leading advocate of positive psychology, psychology movement to date has been to consoli-
Seligman has been exceptionally successful at date, lift up, and celebrate what we do know about
catalysing and uniting the efforts of the many what makes life worth living, as well as carefully
distinguished scientists who have become some of delineating the areas where we need to do more.
the key players in the positive psychology movement. Research into positive psychology topics has gone
These include the Positive Psychology Steering on for decades, and might even be traced back to the
 Past, present, future 5

origins of psychology itself, for example, in William psychology is perceived of as a panacea for many
James’ writings on ‘‘healthy mindedness’’ (James, modern ills. It is not. But, by providing a different
1902). In broad terms, positive psychology has interpretative lens, it offers a different worldview and
common interests with parts of humanistic psychol- thereby novel answers to some questions that have
ogy, and its emphasis on the fully functioning person been around for a long time, and shines the light of
(Rogers, 1961), and self-actualization and the study scientific inquiry into previously dark and neglected
of healthy individuals (Maslow, 1968). Indeed, we corners.
note that more than 50 years ago, Maslow lamented Consider, for example, the following definitions
psychology’s preoccupation with disorder and of positive psychology, all taken from authoritative
dysfunction: positive psychological sources:
The science of psychology has been far more successful The field of positive psychology at the subjective level
on the negative than on the positive side. It has is about valued subjective experiences: well-being,
revealed to us much about man’s shortcomings, his contentment, and satisfaction (in the past); hope and
illness, his sins, but little about his potentialities, his optimism (for the future); and flow and happiness
virtues, his achievable aspirations, or his full psycho- (in the present). At the individual level, it is about
logical height. It is as if psychology has voluntarily positive individual traits: the capacity for love and
restricted itself to only half its rightful jurisdiction, and vocation, courage, interpersonal skill, aesthetic sensi-
that, the darker, meaner half (Maslow, 1954, p. 354). bility, perseverance, forgiveness, originality, future
mindedness, spirituality, high talent, and wisdom. At
Initially at least, positive psychology may not have
the group level, it is about the civic virtues and the
paid sufficient tribute to its historical antecedents,
institutions that move individuals toward better
leading to some criticisms (e.g., Taylor, 2001;
citizenship: responsibility, nurturance, altruism,
Tennen & Affleck, 2003). However, there is now
civility, moderation, tolerance, and work ethic
a growing recognition that positive psychology can
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p. 5).
learn useful lessons from earlier research and
What is positive psychology? It is nothing more
theorizing, and we hope that the animosity that has
than the scientific study of ordinary human strengths
sometimes characterized previous exchanges will be
and virtues. Positive psychology revisits ‘‘the average
replaced with increasing respect and collaboration
person,’’ with an interest in finding out what works,
(e.g., Joseph & Worsley, 2005), not least so that
what is right, and what is improving . . . positive
positive psychology can prosper through integration,
psychology is simply psychology (Sheldon & King,
rather than whither through isolation.
2001, p. 216).
In the next section, we try to answer the question
Positive psychology is the study of the conditions
‘‘what is positive psychology?’’ As will become clear
and processes that contribute to the flourishing or
from our answer, positive psychology can be under-
optimal functioning of people, groups, and institutions
stood and interpreted on many different levels and,
(Gable & Haidt, 2005, p. 104).
as we hope to show, the level at which one under-
Positive psychology is about scientifically informed
stands positive psychology has profound implications
perspectives on what makes life worth living. It focuses
for its possible futures.
on aspects of the human condition that lead to
happiness, fulfilment, and flourishing (The Journal of
What is positive psychology? Positive Psychology, 2005).
In asking this question, one is faced with the inherent There are certainly core themes and consistencies,
danger that 10 positive psychologists would provide but also differences in emphasis and interpretation.
10 different answers. Should this be taken to suggest In thinking about how best to represent positive
that nobody really knows, exactly, what positive psychology, and how best to position its under-
psychology is? We would argue that this is actually standing in the first issue of The Journal of Positive
far from the case, yet equally we have a very real Psychology, we believe it would be helpful to provide
sense that positive psychology might often be what we see as a definition of positive psychology
interpreted as being ‘‘all things to all people.’’ that identifies and delineates the different things that
Indeed, in the course of numerous presentations to it might mean to different people. We also specify
hosts of different audiences, both psychologist and what positive psychology is not, in the hope that we
non-psychologist, academics and practitioners, we can lay to rest some of the ghosts of criticism that
have the consistent experiences of eyes lighting up have haunted positive psychology (sometimes with
and people saying ‘‘Ah, positive psychology, that’s justification, often with misunderstanding) since its
what we need.’’ And when we ask what they inception. Further, as will become clear later in the
understand by positive psychology, we receive article, this definition and understanding of positive
different answers every time. In this sense, positive psychology helps to inform and develop the potential
6 P. A. Linley et al.

future pathways and applications of positive and to be expected, then, that in the early stages
psychology that we map out below. of the movement, differences would have been
emphasized and criticisms made of what had gone
before. However, as we go on to demonstrate below,
Toward a new definition of positive psychology the challenge of the crossroads at which positive
The meta-psychological level view psychology now stands is whether it continues
as an antithesis to business-as-usual psychology, or
First, we think it is instructive to understand positive whether it achieves synthesis through the integration
psychology at the meta-psychological level. By meta- and resolution of these dialectics, thus evolving into
psychological level, we mean that level at which ‘‘simply psychology,’’ with a focus that spans the
we understand the aims of positive psychology, and whole of the human condition, from disorder and
the way in which it offers a ‘‘grand vision’’ for the distress to well-being and fulfilment.
whole of psychology, and beyond. Here, we address Thus, viewed at this meta-psychological, even
the theoretical and philosophical position of positive meta-scientific level, positive psychology is an
psychology, as well as commenting on its value base. attempt to redress what is perceived as an imbalance
The aims of positive psychology can be understood in the focus of research attention and practice
from this meta-psychological perspective: objectives in psychology. It is undeniably the case
The aim of positive psychology is to begin to catalyse a that the negative is dominant in psychology (Rozin &
change in the focus of psychology from preoccupation Royzman, 2001), and that ‘‘bad is stronger than
only with repairing the worst things in life good’’ (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Finkenauer, &
to also building positive qualities (Seligman & Vohs, 2001). One need only look at citation counts
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p. 5; emphasis added). to establish this beyond any doubt: Rand and Snyder
(2003) examined the ratio of positive to negative
Hence, a positive psychological perspective on the subjects over the course of psychology publications
discipline of psychology (and, by extension, on other from 1872 onwards in the PsycINFO database.
areas of scientific inquiry, such as economics, Using dialectic pairs such as happiness–sadness,
sociology, anthropology, and even the natural hope–hopelessness, and optimism–pessimism
sciences) is that the focus of scientific research and revealed a ratio that was consistently more than
interest should be on understanding the entire 2:1 in favour of the negative pole.
breadth of human experience, from loss, suffering, As such, the first part of defining an understanding
illness, and distress through connection, fulfilment, of positive psychology is its meta-scientific value
health, and well-being. position: that the study of health, fulfilment and
A common perception has been that positive well-being is as meritorious as the study of illness,
psychology emphasises the positive at the expense dysfunction, and distress. Equally, that the study of
of the negative (Held, 2004; Lazarus, 2003). This human strengths and virtues is a topic that should be
may have been an easy juxtaposition to make, given central to a psychology of the human condition,
the value connotations of positive psychology, and rather than one that is ‘‘defined out’’ of psychological
the early emphasis of positive psychology that it was study, as Allport (1937) did, in his seminal definition
‘‘independent’’ from what had gone before (see, of what constituted the psychological study of
for example, Snyder & Lopez, 2002b, The future personality (cf. Cawley, Martin, & Johnson, 2000).
of positive psychology: A declaration of independence). Further, that these ‘‘positive’’ topics are in no way
In the beginning of any new scientific endeavour, ‘‘secondary, derivative, illusory, epiphenomenal,
there is a need to define one’s remit, and to parasitic upon the negative, or otherwise suspect’’
differentiate from what has gone before to emphasize (Peterson & Seligman, 2004, p. 4). Rather, the
one’s novelty. This is well recognized within the subject matter of positive psychology is authentic and
history of thought, most notably in Hegel’s (1807/ valuable, and intuitively represents a far greater
1931) identification of the cycle of thesis (any idea, proportion of normal human experience than does
belief, or set of arguments), followed by antithesis the subject matter of psychology’s more traditional
(conflicting, contradictory, or opposing views to the focus on dysfunction, distress, and psychopathology.
thesis), and then synthesis (the resolution of differ-
ences between the thesis and antithesis; this synthesis
then becomes the new thesis). A shared language. A second facet of this meta-
Viewed from this perspective, business-as-usual psychological perspective lies in positive psychology’s
psychology, with its focus on distress, disorder, and ‘‘taxonomic influence.’’ Here, we mean that positive
dysfunction, provides the thesis to positive psychol- psychology has provided a different lens through
ogy’s antithesis, that we should also focus on well- which to understand human experience, and perhaps
being, health, and optimal functioning. It is natural most importantly, has begun the creation of a shared
 Past, present, future 7

language and understanding that begins to locate As such, positive psychology shifts the implicit
the study of positive states, traits, and outcomes value basis of psychological inquiry from only a
in relation to each other. We use ‘‘taxonomic deficit-focus to also an asset-focus, and thereby
influence’’ in quotation marks in recognition of the reveals what is often new and fertile ground for
fact that positive psychology does not yet offer a investigation.
taxonomy within the strict sense of the term (Bailey, Overall, then, at this meta-psychological level of
1994; neither, arguably, does any field of psychol- understanding positive psychology, we have argued
ogy), but it has begun to provide a framework in that positive psychology: first, has the aim of
which researchers and practitioners with different redressing what is perceived as an imbalance in
interests and agendas are able to communicate with the study of the positive relative to the negative;
each other, and locate their findings within a broader second, has provided a structure and language that
classificatory context. However, as we elaborate permits communication, understanding, and relation
below, the challenge is now to expand our classifi- between diverse areas of psychological inquiry and
catory context in order to synthesize the positive and application that were not possible before; and third,
negative, health and illness, well-being and distress. offers a different lens through which to view the remit
In this way, positive psychology might do much to of psychological investigation and practice, calling up
bridge the scientist–practitioner divide, through its a different set of questions to those which business-
range of applications and a value position that might as-usual psychology has dealt with. However, as we
be considered more concordant with the needs and illustrate in more detail below, the big challenge now
aspirations of many practicing psychologists. facing positive psychology is to carry this meta-
In our view, this taxonomic influence represents psychological perspective forward into the synthesis
the greatest achievement of positive psychology to of positive and negative aspects of human experience,
date (but also its greatest future challenge with regard such that we really might enjoy a unified, integrated
to bridging the positive and negative aspects of psychology (cf. Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2001).
human experience). Before positive psychology,
researchers in (for example) wisdom, gratitude, The pragmatic level view
humility, creativity, curiosity, and emotional
intelligence might have considered they had little, In addition to this meta-psychological aspect of
if anything, to connect them. Since positive positive psychology, we propose a pragmatic level
psychology, these research areas are understood as of what positive psychologists do in terms of their
domains of psychological strengths, sharing a research and their practice, rather than what their
common theoretical heritage and much better able objectives may be. Here, we distinguish between
to be understood in proportion to, relation with, four levels of analysis for positive psychology.
and interaction with each other. The wellsprings of interest to positive psychology
may be defined as the precursors and facilitators
of the processes and mechanisms. They include things
Introducing the positive and integrating the such as the genetic foundations of well-being, and
negative. Further, at this meta-psychological level, the early environmental experiences that allow the
positive psychology offers a different lens through development of strengths and virtues.
which to study and understand psychological The processes of interest to positive psychology
phenomena. Our decisions about which phenomena may be defined as those psychological ingredients
to study or not study are inescapably value-based (for example, strengths and virtues) that lead to the
(Christopher, 1996), and the implicit value base of good life, or equally the obstacles to leading a good
much business-as-usual psychology is that the life (for example, a life of meaning and fulfilment;
negative is more worthy of investigation than the King, Eells, & Burton, 2004; King & Napa, 1998).
positive. Indeed, the negative has a pervasive and Positive psychology should seek to understand the
immediate allure (Rozin & Royzman, 2001), and it is factors that facilitate optimal functioning as much as
this that has shaped the questions of psychological those that prevent it.
inquiry typically to become those of ‘‘What is The mechanisms of interest to positive psychology
broken?’’ ‘‘What doesn’t work?’’ ‘‘What needs to be may be defined as those extra-psychological factors
fixed?’’ and ‘‘How can we fix it?’’ In contrast, positive that facilitate (or impede) the pursuit of a good life.
psychology asks ‘‘what works, what is right, and what For example, these mechanisms may be personal
is improving?’’ (Sheldon & King, 2001, p. 216). and social relationships, working environments,
Building from this further, we can then ask broader organizations and institutions, communities, and
questions, such as ‘‘How can we take what we have the broader social, cultural, political, and economic
learned here, generalize it, and apply it more broadly systems in which our lives are inextricably
to enable more people to improve their lives?’’ embedded.
8 P. A. Linley et al.

The outcomes of interest to positive psychology where positive psychology is now. As we have shown,
may be defined as those subjective, social, and it has come from propitious beginnings to establish
cultural states that characterize a good life. Here we itself as a popular but serious psychological move-
may think of factors such as happiness, well-being, ment. All the structural elements of a psychological
fulfilment, and health (at the subjective level), discipline are in place: an impressive and growing
positive communities and institutions that foster research corpus; an array of books, including hand-
good lives (at the interpersonal level), and political, books (Linley & Joseph, 2004a; Peterson &
economic, and environmental policies that promote Seligman, 2004; Snyder & Lopez, 2002a) and college
harmony and sustainability (at the social level). textbooks (e.g., Bolt, 2004; Carr, 2003; Compton,
2004; Snyder & Lopez, in press); numerous journal
An integrative definition for positive psychology special issues and journal articles; dedicated confer-
ences and themed sessions at other meetings;
Hence, we define positive psychology as follows: funding streams and prizes (e.g., the Seligman
positive psychology is the scientific study of optimal Award for Outstanding Dissertation Research; the
human functioning. At the meta-psychological level, Templeton Positive Psychology Prizes); international
it aims to redress the imbalance in psychological associations representing and promoting the interests
research and practice by calling attention to the of positive psychology; web pages and email discus-
positive aspects of human functioning and experi- sion lists; wider interest through the popular media,
ence, and integrating them with our understanding including print, television, and radio (see Seligman,
of the negative aspects of human functioning 2005, for a summary); positive psychology courses
and experience. At the pragmatic level, it is being included as part of existing degree programmes
about understanding the wellsprings, processes and (more than 100 positive psychology courses on
mechanisms that lead to desirable outcomes. offer by 2003 (Murray, 2003); and at least 27
Clearly, our delineation of the pragmatic level of positive psychology programmes at major US
positive psychology into wellsprings, processes, universities (Seligman, 2005); dedicated graduate
mechanisms, and outcomes is not fixed, but rather programmes (e.g., Master of Applied Positive
a way of understanding the remit of positive psy- Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania), and
chology, and how different elements may relate to now a dedicated journal (The Journal of Positive
each other. We do not claim that these elements are Psychology).
separate and distinct, but rather recognize that there Thus, it is clear from many perspectives that
will be interactions between them. For example, positive psychology has arrived. Yet in our view, this
while happiness is considered by many to be is just the beginning, and what has been achieved so
a desirable state (i.e., outcome), there is also increas- far, while both laudable and remarkable, may be just
ing evidence that it is also a desirable mechanism. It an historical footnote to what is to follow. Positive
can be said that happiness actually leads, over time, psychology now stands at a crossroads, and various
to other valued outcomes (see Diener & Seligman, factors will likely influence the path it takes. In the
2004; Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, in press). next section, we consider some possible future
Specifically within the definition presented here, scenarios for positive psychology, and assess the
and by way of example, positive institutions are merits and risks associated with each. It is our hope
viewed as each of a process, a mechanism, and and aspiration that in raising these issues for
an outcome: positive institutions are desirable in and consideration, positive psychologists both now and
of themselves, but they also serve as processes that in the future will be able to take more informed and
offer coherent and concordant values and philoso- reflective decisions on what positive psychology
phies that may guide and inspire their members, and should do; why it should do it; how it relates to
as mechanisms to facilitate and promote other valued psychology more broadly, and to other disciplines,
outcomes. Understanding positive psychology in this such as economics, sociology, and anthropology;
way allows a more systems-oriented appreciation of and perhaps most importantly, how positive psychol-
the interrelations of its various parts, and equally has ogy might be harnessed most effectively in the
important implications for the way that we under-
service of promoting integral human flourishing
stand where positive psychology is now, as well as
and fulfilment.
how we consider of the possible futures and
applications of positive psychology.
The (possible) future of positive psychology
Positive psychology in the present
Does positive psychology have a future? That
Where is positive psychology now? In this section is not so much of a bleak question as it might at
of the article, we will try and take stock, and assess first seem. Indeed, some eminent figures in the
 Past, present, future 9

positive psychology actually hope that it will psychology that realizes the discipline’s early promise
disappear: which has some how got lost along the way
(cf. Maslow, 1954; Seligman, 1999).
My hope is that positive psychology is a movement that
In our estimation, there are three possible routes
will eventually disappear because it becomes part of the
for the future of positive psychology. First, it could
very fabric of psychology. Thus, it will fade as a
simply disappear because it has brought about the
campaign precisely because it has been so successful
meta-psychological integration that was its aim. As
(Diener, 2003, p. 120).
such, there would be no need for positive psychology,
However, this is where an understanding of the because all of psychology would be fully appreciative
differences between the meta-psychological and of the full range of human functioning. Second,
pragmatic aspects of positive psychology is instruc- it could bring about some of the meta-psychological
tive. At a meta-psychological level, we too hope (and integration, enabling researchers and practitioners to
expect, if we may be so bold) that positive psychology understand both the positive and negative, but could
will disappear. That is to say, with the increasing continue as an area of research focus on topics
embedding of positive psychological thinking and such as strengths and happiness, much as there are
methodology in many areas of psychology, and the specialist divisions of psychology today. Third,
maturation of young scholars who have grown up it could fail to bring about the desired integration,
in a positive psychological context, positive and continue as a specialist, but increasingly
psychology’s aim of redressing the balance will have marginalized area, locked out of the major psycho-
been achieved. logical agendas. We go on to explore each of these
The shared language and social structures will be scenarios more fully in turn.
in place, and psychologists will take the under-
standing of the interrelations of strength and weak-
ness, positive and negative, for granted, just as the Meta-psychological integration. Considered from the
current generation of psychologists does not blink meta-psychological perspective that we defined
when considering the association of conscious and earlier, positive psychology may engender a change
unconscious aspects of personality and processing, of lens and a shift in emphasis for existing psychology
but which were just as novel in Freud’s time. To research and applied psychology professions. This
extend Gable and Haidt’s (2005) terminology, the would be achieved through infusion, namely, incor-
train will have changed direction, but the new porating the principles of a positive psychological
passengers will not even have noticed, instead perspective into existing professional psychological
having just been carried along on their way. practice, and thereby achieving a genuine and
In contrast, when we consider the pragmatic powerful integration of the positive and negative
aspects of positive psychology, our view is that the aspects of human experience, and an understanding
journey is just beginning. We are in the early stages of their interactions and interrelations.
of beginning to develop understandings of It might be legitimately argued that some profes-
sional domains of psychology do this already,
strengths and virtues, to grasp and build the
for example, health psychology and its emphasis on
interpersonal and social infrastructures that facili-
prevention, and counselling psychology and its
tate good lives, and to appreciate the nuances of
emphasis on human development. Other profes-
happiness and well-being, their effects as well as their
sional practices are more grounded in dysfunction
causes. But again, this journey is just beginning.
models, but there are still perceptions of what they
It has taken psychology 100 years to arrive at
may look like when infused with a more integrative
what we now know; can we even imagine what
positive psychological perspective that synthesizes
psychology might look like with another 100 years
both positive and negative. Consider, for example,
focused on building the things that make life worth
what clinical psychology might look like if it were
living?
to adopt a dimensional as opposed to a categorical
model of psychopathology, seeing problems in
human living as falling at points along a continuum,
Positive psychology at the crossroads
rather than being categorically different, and viewing
At this stage, as we suggested above, positive the positive clinical psychologist’s remit as being
psychology stands at a crossroads. While building as much about building strengths and resilience as
on what has gone before, positive psychology has it was about repairing weakness and damage
a remarkable opportunity to do things differently, (Maddux et al., 2004). Consider ‘‘positive organiza-
to ask the questions which deserve to be asked (see tional scholarship,’’ which is ‘‘concerned primarily
Sternberg in Morgeson, Seligman, Sternberg, with the study of especially positive outcomes,
Taylor, & Manning, 1999), to create a science of processes, and attributes of organizations and
10 P. A. Linley et al.

their members’’ (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, Marginalization. In contrast to these perspectives,
2003b, p. 4). Consider the applications of positive one can consider positive psychology as a stand-
psychology within school settings, based on the alone discipline, marginalized and fragmented. What
principles that school psychology can serve as a would be its remit, theoretical underpinnings, and
point of connection between positive psychology’s professional objectives? In brief, one might legiti-
promotion of optimal human development, and mately suggest that positive psychology would be
schools as the a priori institutions that can serve as concerned with the facilitation of optimal functioning
the vehicles for this development (Clonan, in any sphere of life, with the professional objective of
Chafouleas, McDougal, & Riley-Tillman, 2004; raising the health, fulfilment and well-being of people
Terjesen, Jacofsky, Froh, & DiGiuseppe, 2004). and their institutional or organizational contexts. It
Seen in these ways, the future of positive psychol- would not be able to locate its findings in relation to
ogy may be one in which it increasingly permeates psychopathology and distress, and would find itself
the professional practice of psychology, becoming in the same situation as it now criticizes business-as-
almost silently infused into the status quo for usual psychology for: focusing too much on only one
professional practice. That, surely, would constitute side of the human condition.
positive psychological success, with positive psychol- If this is all that positive psychology achieves, our
ogy having achieved its meta-psychological objective view is that it will have failed. We believe it will have
‘‘to catalyse a change in the focus of psychology from failed because it will have become just another
preoccupation only with repairing the worst things variant of professional psychological practice that is
in life to also building positive qualities’’ (Seligman & concerned with the ‘‘worried well,’’ but which is not
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000, p. 5; emphasis added). considered to have anything to offer to people
Then, positive psychology would be ‘‘simply who are in distress or suffering with disorder of
psychology’’ (Sheldon & King, 2001, p. 216). dysfunction. In this way, it will have lost its meta-
psychological imperative, betrayed its grand vision,
and squandered its genuine opportunity to catalyse a
step-change in psychological thinking and practice.
Integration with continued specialization. Understood
in this way, positive psychology may engender shifts
in psychological thinking that do serve to integrate Which way now?
the positive and the negative aspects of human
experience, but where structural barriers still In recognizing the crossroads at which positive
remain that block a full integration. For example, it psychology stands, we have considered what we see
is not difficult to imagine a funding situation that as the three alternative roads that are open to us. Our
dictates the role of the psychologist as being to view is that positive psychology offers a grand
‘‘alleviate distress and dysfunction,’’ but where the integrative vision that could change the face of
funding does not extend into the genuine promotion psychology. It could also become little more than
of well-being and optimal functioning. Hence, while a psychological sub-discipline concerned with
strengths and happiness that is ultimately margin-
the practicing psychologist may support the princi-
alized and largely ignored, as happened to humanis-
ples and aims of an integrative psychological practice,
tic psychology. Or, it could fall somewhere in
these structural barriers may remain. However, even
between. What are the factors that will likely
to have brought about this shift in psychological
influence the direction of these developments?
thinking so that these issues are even considered as
We suspect that within the next few years, and
issues could be considered a major achievement.
possibly sooner rather than later, positive psychology
With full integration not achieved, it may be
will reach a tipping point. This tipping point will be
envisaged that positive psychology research would
the moment in time when the decisions made have
continue into the positive side of human experience,
an irrevocable influence on the direction of positive
continuing to redress the imbalance in psychological
psychology’s evolution and development. We believe
inquiry and research output. While this in itself may
there are three major factors that will constitute these
not be considered unduly problematic, it is subject to
tipping points: professional psychology training,
an important caveat: such research must be con-
research output, and funding and stakeholder deci-
ducted from an integrative perspective that seeks to
sions. Below, we consider each of them in turn.
understand the positive in relation to the negative,
and continues to strive to take the positive psycho-
logical message more broadly. Seen in this way, one Professional psychology training. If positive psychol-
might consider that the positive psychology journey ogy is to alter the future direction of psychology and
continues, rather than that is has concluded and create a more integrative and holistic approach to the
either succeeded or failed. human condition, this will only lastingly come about
 Past, present, future 11

through changes at the grass roots level. Young findings of our discipline. These centripetal forces
psychologists in professional training will have to be already exist, and we are greatly encouraged by the
educated in the positive psychological perspective, fact that many of the advocates for them may be
and trained to balance their understanding of the identified with the positive psychology movement
human condition through the lens of both positive (e.g., Snyder, Tennen, Affleck, & Cheavens, 2000;
and negative. What we see determines the hypotheses Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2001).
we test and the approach that we take. Look for
disorder and you will find it. Look for fulfilment and
Funding and stakeholder decisions. Positive psychol-
you will find it. Look for both, and we may begin to
ogy does not exist in a vacuum. It exists in a multi-
understand how they fit together. If academic
faceted, multi-layered social and political context
and applied psychology trainings begin to infuse
that is driven by agendas that are often not
the positive psychology perspective, the meta-
determined by the interests of psychology and
psychological aspirations may be achieved.
psychologists. As such, psychology is beholden to
its funding providers and other powerful stake-
Research output. The positive psychology perspec- holders, such as governments, educational institu-
tive needs to produce quality research that is tions, commercial organizations, and healthcare
characterized by methodological rigor and practical providers. As positive psychologists, we need to
relevance (i.e., pragmatic research; Anderson, engage with them and make the case for why the
Herriot, & Hodgkinson, 2001). Positive psychology positive psychological perspective matters, in order
has immense popular value. People are interested in to enable stakeholders to develop an understanding
factors such as strength, virtue, health, and happi- of what it brings that is new, and what human and
ness. They want to know more about what is best financial benefits it offers over and above what has
about themselves, and what they can do to be already been done. In this way, and if such initiatives
happier, healthier, and more fulfilled. As such, are successful, positive psychology can begin to
there is an immense temptation for positive psychol- shape and determine funding and stakeholder
ogy to descend into popularist science; relevant imperatives, bringing about a shift in funding and
and highly interesting research questions, but which support emphasis from repairing weakness
lack the scientific rigor that should define our and treating pathology to also building strength and
discipline. These temptations have to be resisted, in facilitating wellness. If this fails to happen, the risk is
our estimation, if positive psychology is to have a that simple economics will dictate that positive
future. psychology falls by the wayside. If it does happen,
Similarly, this very journal has a central role to play the future for positive psychology may look very
here. If The Journal of Positive Psychology becomes bright indeed.
nothing more than a home for studies on the
correlates of happiness, it will have squandered its Issues and directions for the future of
opportunity to become the beacon of the positive positive psychology
psychology movement. If, in contrast, it is recognized
for its integration of the positive psychological In thinking about the future of positive psychology,
we have identified several pertinent areas that the
approach into psychology more broadly, through
movement may do well to consider. We do not set
the publication of first class empirical work com-
these out as any kind of manifesto (especially in light
bined with insightful theoretical integration, it will
of point five, below, about description versus
likely be recognized as one of the major journals
prescription), but rather as suggestions that positive
shaping the future evolution of psychology.
psychologists might choose to consider as the move-
Equally, with the advent of The Journal of Positive
ment advances. Neither do we claim that these are
Psychology, we also caution that a dedicated positive
the only issues that the movement faces; indeed,
psychology journal should not be taken as an excuse
there will likely be others that are not even now
not to take the positive psychology message to other
on the horizon, and our hope and aspiration is that
areas of psychology, both academic and applied.
The Journal of Positive Psychology will continue to
Indeed, that is one of the great dangers of a specialist
serve as a forum for informed debate.
journal, and one that we hope will be avoided.
Centrifugal forces within psychology will continue
to push us towards ever more specialization and 1. Synthesize the positive and the negative. Perhaps
fragmentation, but we strongly believe that most importantly in light of the points made above, is
The Journal of Positive Psychology should strive to be the need to strive for integration, and to carry the
a centripetal force for integration, offering a home for positive psychological message as far and as wide as
the best theoretical ideas and empirical research we can. In our own work, we have taken great efforts
12 P. A. Linley et al.

to emphasize this synthesis of the positive and We believe that positive psychology can also learn
negative within positive psychology (e.g., Linley & much from other areas of scientific inquiry, and
Joseph, 2003, 2004), and have striven to show how should be more active in opening dialogue with other
positive psychological approaches can speak to both areas of psychology, economics, sociology, anthro-
trauma and suffering (Joseph & Linley, 2005) and pology, science and practice more generally. For
existential issues (Bretherton & Ørner, 2004). example, the resilience literature offers many insights
Perhaps one of the most important points to take into successful functioning despite adversity (Yates &
from this is the need for positive psychologists to be Masten, 2004). Some areas of social work have
active in connecting with other areas of psychology for over a decade been practising strengths-based
and other disciplines (see e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, interventions (Noble, Perkins, & Fatout, 2000;
2005, for an example of how to achieve this). Saleebey, 1992). Economists have become interested
This invites us to write for their specialist journals in the subject of human happiness (e.g., Frey &
offering a positive psychological perspective, speak Stutzer, 2000; Layard, 2005), and this is even
at their conferences to elaborate what positive filtering through to government interest (Donovan
psychology can say, and conduct research that & Halpern, 2002). What these examples clearly
transcends these artificial boundaries of positive suggest is that positive psychologists could gain
and negative. much from making links with researchers and
As but one example, in our own work we have practitioners in other areas of psychology and
developed a positive psychological theory of how beyond, including other areas of science and social
people adapt following trauma and adversity (Joseph science (e.g., economics, politics, sociology,
& Linley, 2005), and have cast this theory in such anthropology).
a way that it draws from and speaks to both the
posttraumatic stress disorder (business-as-usual) 3. Integrate across levels of analysis. We can equally
audience and the posttraumatic growth (positive gain much by striving to understand positive
psychology) audience. We did so by using the psychological phenomena more holistically, through
language of posttraumatic stress disorder and inte- integrating the insights of neuroscience at the
grating it with the language of posttraumatic growth, biological level with an understanding of their
thereby knitting together an understanding of psychological and social markers. Indeed, work of
adaptation to trauma that was able to account for this nature is already going on, and represents some
both posttraumatic stress and posttraumatic growth. of the best positive psychology research. For exam-
If positive psychologists can strive to do the same in ple, consider the advances in the understanding of
their own research areas, the outcomes could offer how their social connections allow women to cope
a powerful movement towards more integrative with stress that were achieved through the integration
understandings of the human condition. of biological, psychological, and social data
(Taylor et al., 2000); or the development of social
neuroscience, which has allowed understanding
2. Build on historical antecedents and existing of the interactions between biological processes and
knowledge. There is also much that can be learned, social psychological processes such as sociality,
we suggest, by revisiting earlier humanistic and spirituality, and meaning making (Cacioppo,
existential ideas (methodological concerns notwith- Hawkley, Rickett, & Masi, 2005). We can hardly
standing), and seeing what insights they might offer do justice to the rigor and complexity of these
us about positive psychology’s current remit (e.g., research programmes within the context of this
Joseph & Linley, 2004; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005; article, but they do provide insightful examples of
Rathunde, 2001; Sheldon & Kasser, 2001). how scientific integration can produce novel insights
However, let us be clear that by saying this, we are that integrate and explain findings from diverse areas
in entire agreement with Peterson and Park (2003, of psychology. Positive psychology could learn much
p. 145), that positive psychology is not ‘‘but a from them.
footnote to Lao-tzu, Confucius, Aristotle, Aquinas,
William James, John Dewey, Carl Rogers, or 4. Build constituency and reach out to powerful
Abraham Maslow.’’ Positive psychology does bring stakeholders. Good pragmatic science allows us to
a unique identity and novel perspective to the study build constituency: funding bodies will support
of optimal human experience, but one that should positive psychology work that is well-conducted and
rightly build on what has gone before. Quite simply, leads to meaningful outcomes that have a real
not to do so would be academically dishonest and relevance for people. The more that positive psy-
intellectually fallible: positive psychology should be chology can produce deliverables, that is, research
neither of these things. that not only advances understanding but also
 Past, present, future 13

demonstrates applied benefits, the easier it will be to Shah & Marks, 2004). These are promising devel-
build this constituency. As positive psychologists, we opments, and speak to the potential for a positive
are in an enviable position. Not everyone will be psychological contribution through partnership and
clinically depressed or schizophrenic during their collaboration with established stakeholders.
lifetime, but it’s a fair assumption that (almost)
everyone will want to be happy, or to be good parents
and friends, or to be effective students, or to be 5. Description or prescription? In dealing with all of
productive and satisfied at work. As such, positive these issues, we must be very mindful of the
psychology has an appeal that is probably as broad as difference between describing something as good
one could get. We should capitalize on this, and use or prescribing it as good (Held, 2004). On this
the impetus it provides to facilitate constructive distinction rests the difference between a descriptive
change and improvement. science of positive psychology, and a prescriptive
As we begin to think about how positive psychol- science of positive psychology. A descriptive science
ogy may become a constructive force for social simply defines, delineates, and documents its find-
improvement, we are reminded of the third pillar ings, leaving them free of value judgement or
of positive psychology research, positive institutions admonition as to how they should be used. But, as
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). As has been we have noted elsewhere, positive psychology is far
noted elsewhere (Gable & Haidt, 2005), this is the from value free (Linley & Joseph, 2004b), and even
area of positive psychology that has received least inherent within the name positive psychology is the
attention to date. Why may that be? It is arguably the implicit value assumption that positive equals good
case that most positive psychology researchers are (Christopher, 2003). However, we agree with
from a social psychological tradition, and so are more Diener (2003, p. 116) that, ‘‘Positive does not have
concerned with personality, individual differences, to be a simple, monadic concept to be a useful
and group processes. As such, there was not a natural heuristic one.’’
foundation on which to build a science of positive Medical researchers may be prescriptive e.g.,
institutions and communities, and the early enthu- eating fruit and fresh vegetables is good for you;
siasm for partnerships with a ‘‘positive sociology’’ eating too much fatty food is bad for you), since
and a ‘‘positive anthropology’’ has largely not come within medicine there is almost universal agreement
to fruition. on what is good (e.g., living healthily, for longer).
However, there are certain trends that suggest this Yet within psychology, defining something as good is
may be beginning to change. For example, positive much more of a subjective enterprise (Christopher,
psychologists are now starting to address the issues of 1996), and definitions or bases for deciding the basis
happiness, health, and well-being from national of ‘‘goodness’’ may often not be consistent with
and societal perspectives (e.g., Huppert, 2004; each other.
Veenhoven, 2004). The advent of positive organiza- For example, Diener and Suh (1997) built on the
tional scholarship (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, philosophical work of Brock (1993) to suggest three
2003a) suggests that a greater understanding of possible bases from which people may determine
positive organizations may be on the horizon, which what is good. First, people’s choices may indicate
could in turn inform further understanding of what they perceive to be good. If people consistently
positive institutions and communities more broadly. choose something, it must be because they think
There is also recognition that psychologists are, it is good (an economic perspective). Second,
unfortunately, not powerful stakeholders within people’s experiences and judgments of positive
public policy, and as such their influence is limited. subjective states serve as an indicator to them that
However, there are increasing collaborations something is good (a subjective psychological
between economics and positive psychology (in perspective). Third, people may use value systems
relation to the measurement and achievement of that are based on norms, religious beliefs, or cultural
happiness), and this offers a powerful way forward. precedents, and the like, to determine what is good
Indeed, work is already underway to promote the (a social psychological perspective). While these
idea of national well-being accounts to complement three perspectives may sometimes be concordant,
economic indicators such as the gross domestic equally they may not (e.g., filling up one’s gas tank
product (Diener & Seligman, 2004; Kahneman, may be chosen repeatedly, but is neither subjectively
Krueger, Schkade, Schwarz, & Stone, 2004). enjoyable or consistent with an environmentally-
Within the UK at least, the government has supportive value system; Gable & Haidt, 2005).
an expressed interest in the state of the nation’s Thus, defining something as good is no easy task,
happiness (Donovan & Halpern, 2002), and there is requiring the recognition and balancing of complex
also a growing social agenda to promote well-being and multidimensional factors that may vary accord-
(e.g., A well-being manifesto for a flourishing society; ing to individual, situation, culture, and time.
14 P. A. Linley et al.

With this in mind, positive psychology ought to be Anderson, N., Herriot, P., & Hodgkinson, G. P. (2001). The
very mindful of erring into the trap of prescription practitioner-researcher divide in industrial, work and organiza-
tional (IWO) psychology: Where are we now, and where do we
without the necessary critical reflection, and assum- go from here? Journal of Occupational and Organizational
ing that a positive psychological position would ever Psychology, 74, 391–411.
be right for all of the people, all of the time. On the Bailey, K. D. (1994). Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to
other hand, ‘‘Although we cannot pretend to be classification techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D.
the final arbiters about what is good, at least we
(2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology,
can be ‘players’ in helping society define what is 5, 323–370.
positive’’ (Diener, 2003, p. 117). In this way, Bolt, M. (2004). Pursuing human strengths: A positive psychology
positive psychology can open up a vigorous debate guide. New York: Worth.
about what is good and desirable, and under what Bretherton, R., & Ørner, R. J. (2004). Positive psychology and
psychotherapy: An existential approach. In P. A. Linley &
circumstances, and in which cultural settings, of
S. Joseph (Eds), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 420–430).
which historical periods. Looking to the future, our Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
aspiration would be that positive psychologists may Brock, D. (1993). Quality of life in healthcare and medical ethics.
even be able to discover principles that unite different In M. Nussbaum & A. Sen (Eds), The quality of life
conceptions of the positive and good, thus allowing (pp. 95–132). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L. C., Rickett, E. M., & Masi, C. M.
movement toward a taxonomic understanding of
(2005). Sociality, spirituality, and meaning making: Chicago
positive psychological phenomena that would Health, Aging, and Social Relations Study. Review of General
provide a meta-theoretical foundation for optimal Psychology, 9, 143–155.
human existence. Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (2003a). Positive
organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline
(pp. 3–13). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (2003b).
Conclusion Foundations of positive organizational scholarship. In
K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton & R. E. Quinn (Eds), Positive
These are lofty aims indeed, and it is our hope and organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline
aspiration that The Journal of Positive Psychology can, (pp. 3–13). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
and should, be at the forefront of these developments Carr, A. (2003). Positive psychology: The science of happiness and
over the years to come. Positive psychology has human strengths. London: Brunner-Routledge.
Cawley, M. J., Martin, J. E., & Johnson, J. A. (2000). A virtues
certainly arrived, we have documented where we see approach to personality. Personality and Individual Differences,
the field as it stands now, and we have offered some 28, 997–1013.
thoughts about how we think it may evolve in the Chafouleas, S. M., & Bray, M. A. (2004). Introducing positive
future. Readers of The Journal of Positive Psychology, psychology: Finding a place within school psychology.
the future of positive psychology, if not psychology, Psychology in the Schools, 41, 1–5.
Christopher, J. C. (1996). Counseling’s inescapable moral visions.
is within your grasp; seize it with both hands, and Journal of Counseling and Development, 75, 17–25.
do with it as you will. Christopher, J. C. (2003). The good in positive psychology. Paper
presented at the Second International Positive Psychology
Summit., October, Washington, DC.
Clonan, S. M., Chafouleas, S. M., McDougal, J. L., &
Acknowledgements Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2004). Positive psychology goes to
school: Are we there yet? Psychology in the Schools, 41, 101–110.
We thank Edward Chang, Jonathan Haidt, Sonja Compton, W. C. (2004). An introduction to positive psychology.
Lyubomirsky, Nansook Park, Christopher Peterson, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). Legs or wings? A reply to
Martin Seligman, C. R. Snyder, Jingping (Jane) Xu, R. S. Lazarus. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 113–115.
and those members of various positive psychology Diener, E. (2003). What is positive about positive psychology:
discussion groups and listservs who helped us in The curmudgeon and Pollyanna. Psychological Inquiry, 14,
identifying and locating some of the information 115–120.
included in this article. We also offer sincere thanks Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money: Toward
an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public
to Robert A. Emmons and an anonymous reviewer Interest, 5, 1–31.
who provided very helpful comments on an earlier Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic,
draft of this article. social, and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40,
189–216.
Donovan, N., & Halpern, D., (2002). Life satisfaction: The state of
knowledge and implications for government. London: Downing
References Street Strategy Unit. Retrieved June 12, 2003 from, http://
www.strategy.gov.uk/2001/futures/attachments/ls/paper.pdf
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2000). Happiness prospers in
New York: Holt. democracy. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1, 79–102.
 Past, present, future 15

Gable, S. L., & Haidt, J. (2005). What (and why) is positive McCullough, M. E., & Snyder, C. R. (2000). Classical
psychology? Review of General Psychology, 9, 103–110. sources of human strength: Revisiting an old home and
Hegel, G. W. F. (1931). The phenomenology of mind (J. B. Baillie, building a new one. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,
Trans 2nd ed.). London: Allen and Unwin (Original work 19, 1–10.
published 1807). Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2005). Mental representations of
Held, B. S. (2004). The negative side of positive psychology. attachment security: Theoretical foundation for a positive social
Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44, 9–46. psychology. In M. W. Baldwin (Ed.), Interpersonal cognition
Huebner, E. S., & Gilman, R. (2003). Toward a focus on positive (pp. 233–266). New York: Guilford.
psychology in school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, Morgeson, F., Seligman, M., Sternberg, R., Taylor, S., &
18, 99–102. Manning, C. (1999). Lessons learned from a life in
Huppert, F. A. (2004). A population approach to positive psychological science. American Psychologist, 54, 106–116.
psychology: The potential for population interventions to Murray, B. (2003). A primer on teaching positive psychology.
promote well-being and prevent disorder. In P. A. Linley & APA Monitor on Psychology, 34, 52–53.
S. Joseph (Eds), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 693–709). Noble, D. N., Perkins, K., & Fatout, M. (2000). On
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. being a strength coach: Child welfare and the strengths
James, W. (1902). The varieties of religious experience: A study in model. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 17,
human nature. New York: Longman, Green. 141–153.
Joseph, S., & Linley, P. A. (2004). Positive therapy: A positive Peterson, C., & Park, N. (2003). Positive psychology as the
psychological theory of therapeutic practice. In P. A. Linley & evenhanded positive psychologist views it. Psychological Inquiry,
S. Joseph (Eds), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 354–368). 14, 143–147.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character strengths
Joseph, S., & Linley, P. A. (2005). Positive adjustment to and virtues: A handbook and classification. Washington, DC:
threatening events: An organismic valuing theory of growth American Psychological Association.
through adversity. Review of General Psychology, 9, 262–280. Rand, K. L., & Snyder, C. R. (2003). A reply to Dr. Lazarus, the
Joseph, S., & Worsley, R. (2005). A positive psychology of mental evocator emeritus. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 148–153.
health: The person-centred perspective. In S. Joseph & Rathunde, K. (2001). Toward a psychology of optimal human
R. Worsley (Eds), Person-centred psychopathology: A positive functioning: What positive psychology can learn from the
psychology of mental health (pp. 348–357). Ross-on-Wye: PCCS ‘‘experiential turns’’ of James, Dewey, and Maslow. Journal of
Humanistic Psychology, 41, 135–153.
Books.
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of
Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D. A., Schwarz, N., &
psychotherapy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Stone, A. A. (2004). Toward national well-being accounts.
Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity
American Economic Review, 94, 429–434.
dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology
King, L. A., Eells, J. E., & Burton, C. M. (2004). The good life,
Review, 5, 296–320.
broadly and narrowly considered. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph
Saleebey, D. (Ed.). (1992). The strengths perspective in social work
(Eds), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 35–52). Hoboken, NJ:
practice. New York: Longman.
Wiley.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1999). The president’s address. American
King, L. A., & Napa, C. K. (1998). What makes a life good?
Psychologist, 54, 559–562.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 156–165.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Positive Psychology Network 2004
Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a new science. London:
progress report, Retrieved June 28, 2005, from http://www.
Allen Lane.
positivepsychology.org/progressreport2004.pdf
Lazarus, R. S. (2003). Does the positive psychology movement
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000).
have legs? Psychological Inquiry, 14, 93–109.
Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist,
Linley, P. A., & Joseph, S. (2003). Putting it into practice.
55, 5–14.
The Psychologist, 16, 143.
Shah, H., & Marks, N. (2004). A well-being manifesto for a flourishing
Linley, P. A., & Joseph, S. (Eds). (2004a). Positive psychology in
society. London: New Economics Foundation. Retrieved 12
practice. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. January, 2005, from http://www.neweconomics.org/gen/
Linley, P. A., & Joseph, S. (2004b). Toward a theoretical uploads/21xv5yytotlxxu322pmyada205102004103948.pdf
foundation for positive psychology in practice. In P. A. Linley Sheldon, K. M., & Kasser, T. (2001). Goals, congruence, and
& S. Joseph (Eds), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 713–731). positive well-being: New empirical support for humanistic
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. theories. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 41, 30–50.
Lyubomirsky, S., King, L. A., & Diener, E. (in press). The Sheldon, K. M., & King, L. (2001). Why positive psychology is
benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead necessary. American Psychologist, 56, 216–217.
to success? Psychological Bulletin. Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (Eds). (2002a). Handbook of positive
Maddux, J. E. (2002). Stopping the madness: Positive psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
psychology and the deconstruction of the illness ideology Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2002b). The future of positive
and the DSM. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds), psychology: A declaration of independence. In C. R. Snyder &
Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 13–25). New York: S. J. Lopez (Eds), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 751–767).
Oxford University Press. New York: Oxford University Press.
Maddux, J. E., Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2004). Toward Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. (in press). Positive psychology.
a positive clinical psychology: Deconstructing the illness Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ideology and constructing an ideology of human strengths Snyder, C. R., Tennen, H., Affleck, G., & Cheavens, J.
and potential. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds), Positive (2000). Social, personality, clinical, and health psychol-
psychology in practice (pp. 320–334). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. ogy tributaries: The merging of a scholarly ‘‘River of
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: dreams.’’. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4,
Harper. 16–29.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). Unified psychology.
Van Nostrand. American Psychologist, 56, 1069–1079.
 16 P. A. Linley et al.

Taylor, E. (2001). Positive psychology and humanistic R. (2004). Integrating positive psychology into schools:
psychology: A reply to Seligman. Journal of Humanistic Implications for practice. Psychology in the Schools, 41,
Psychology, 41, 13–29. 163–172.
Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Veenhoven, R. (2004). Happiness as a public policy aim: The
Gurung, R. A. R., & Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioural greatest happiness principle. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds),
responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight- Positive psychology in practice (pp. 658–678). Hoboken, NJ:
or-flight. Psychological Review, 107, 422–429. Wiley.
Tennen, H., & Affleck, G. (2003). While accentuating the Yates, T. M., & Masten, A. S. (2004). Fostering the
positive, don’t eliminate the negative or Mr. in-between. future: Resilience theory and the practice of positive psychol-
Psychological Inquiry, 14, 163–169. ogy. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds), Positive psychology in
Terjesen, M. D., Jacofsky, M., Froh, J., & DiGiuseppe, practice (pp. 521–539). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Appendix

Journal Special Issues (or Sections) on Positive Psychology.

Journal Publication year Volume (part) Editor(s)

American Psychologist 2000 55 (1) Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 2000 19 (1) McCullough & Snyder
American Psychologist 2001 56 (3) Sheldon & King
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2001 41 (1) Rich
Journal of Clinical Psychology 2002 58 (9) Held & Bohart
American Behavioral Scientist 2003 47 (4) Fowers & Tjeltveit
Psychological Inquiry 2003 14 (2) Lazarus (target article author)
School Psychology Quarterly 2003 18 (2) Huebner & Gilman
The Psychologist 2003 16 (3) Linley, Joseph, & Boniwell
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2004 591 Peterson
Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies 2004 5 (1) Cheng
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B 2004 359 (1449) Huppert, Keverne, & Baylis
Psychology in the Schools 2004 41 (1) Chafouleas & Bray
Ricerche di Psicologia 2004 27 (1) Delle Fave
Review of General Psychology 2005 9 (2) Simonton & Baumeister
Revue Québécoise de Psychologie 2005 26 (1) Mandeville

View publication stats