William James, who could be considered a direct ancestor of today’s positive psychology, wrote, “The faculty of voluntarily bringing back a wandering attention, over and over again, is the very root of judgment, character, and will. An education which should improve this faculty would be the education par excellence. But it is easier to define this ideal than to give practical directions for bringing it about.”

It is quite common for researchers to say that their particular focus areas have received little emphasis. Kashdan says it about curiosity. Haidt says it about elevation. I believe that Snyder said it about hope. And so on.

Positive psychology is a young field — and at that, an amalgam of the work of many different people following their own particular interests and goals. Perhaps you can pose interesting research questions that will stimulate researchers to explore the importance of mindfulness to positive psychology more fully.

I believe that Barbara Fredrickson has been doing some work with mindfulness in her Positive Emotion and Psychophysiology Lab, but I’m having trouble tracking down a resource that I could share. You might try getting in touch with her directly.

Kathryn

I do agree with you on the emphasis - when I was learning about PP a few years ago, I wondered why the course I was doing didn’t cover mindfulness and meditation. That’s changing now.

Mindfulness was mentioned frequently in the Australian Positive Psychology conference this year in April. And the Happiness Conference. Some lecturers already integrating it into their curriculum (e.g. Tal Ben-Shahar at Harvard). I include it in my corporate workshops and coaching. If Pos Psych is concerned with the scientific study of wellbeing, then mindfulness definitely has a place here. In The How Of Happiness, Sonja Lyubomirsky discusses mindfulness (a little).

Good luck with your course - it sounds great.
Amanda

What does RMIT stand for? Will your notes for the course — e.g., your research section — be published in any form that the rest of us could see it?

Did you ever contact David Cooperrider about the AI research question,as we discussed earlier? Did you happen to look at the chapter by David Cooperrider and Leslie Sekerka in Positive Organizational Scholarship — the chapter called Toward a Theory of Positive Organizational Change? I wonder if it might have some pointers to research.

Kathryn

Secondly its interesting that we have had different experiences of positive psychology. I find in Australia that people tend to read “authentic happiness” and become experts on positive psychology. I have also seen people doing all sorts of things under the guise of positive psychology without any rigorous research supporting what they do (e.g. appreciative inquiry - I haven’t been able to find any peer reviewed studies on AI - just case studies which could be all Hawthorne effect). Research supposedly is what distinguishes positive psychology from pop psychology.

I think that Positive Psychology promotes both being and doing. It promotes a way of seeing the world, therefore how we ‘be’ in the world, and from that position it affects what we do and how we interact. The ‘doing’ is also emphasised in the practical aspects of Pos Psych, activities we can undertake to improve our wellbeing.

In Australia my experience with corporates and executives has been great - this area resonates with them. They are eager to bring Positive Psychology to their teams and organisations. The scientific research definitely helps to deal with the cynicism.

Amanda

Do you think that positive psych emphasises doing as opposed to being?

Also I’m interested in your experience of positive psychology in Australia. I have found that corporates are cynical as it is perceived to align closely with pop psychology - what has your experience been.