How Can Positive Psychology Influence Public Policy and Practice
Abstract
Positive psychologists who decline to involve themselves in government policy issues may be similar to medical doctors who refuse to work in hospitals or clinics. Both the positive psychologist and the doctor may greatly reduce their positive effect if they avoid involvement in these institutions that widely impact the population. This chapter explains what positive psychologists bring to policy discussions: An emphasis on measurable well-being, a desire to do more than just ameliorate pathology, and a broad knowledge of psychological findings. The chapter provides examples of policy relevant findings related to: (a) measurement of well-being, (b) identification of groups with particular needs, and (c) exploration of paths to the good life. The chapter also gives warnings about ways to fail in policy engagement, such as limiting efforts to legislative lobbying, ignoring lessons from policy-engaged academics, failing to consider costs, seeking to change fundamental belief systems of opponents, ignoring unintended consequences, expressing hubris, providing imbalanced emphasis on particular types of well-being, and failing to test policies incrementally. The chapter closes by proposing a strategy for policy engagement that not only promotes, but also embodies positive psychology.
