A Market for Merriment: Three Ways to Shop for Happiness

Shopping is a pastime that many people turn to when they feel stressed or overwhelmed, which can lead to regrettable purchases. Thankfully, there are ways you can engage in retail therapy and feel great about what you buy–here are three ways that you can spend money to boost your happiness, with evidence from psychology research from all over!

Tip #1: Invest in experiences

One of the ways that you can spend money to increase your happiness is to invest in experiences, like going to a concert or going on vacation, rather than on material goods like jewelry or clothes. One reason is that we may identify more with our experiences than with our material possessions. In a series of studies where participants considered the purchases they have made in relation to their sense of self, Carter and Gilovich found that, overall, participants felt  that their experiences, rather than material goods, were more connected to their sense of self [1]. We may also feel more grateful for these experiences. Looking at undergraduate students and online reviews, Walker, Kumar, and Gilovich found that participants were more grateful for their experiences than for their material possessions [2]. Finally, it might be worth bringing along a friend–Caprariello and Reis looked at undergraduate and online participants’ attitudes towards their purchases and found that participants preferred experiences that they shared with others over material purchases or experiences that they had alone [3].

Tip #2: Spend on others

Spending on others comes with several benefits. For instance, spending money on others feels good–Aknin et al. found that, looking at people across 136 countries and a wide range of income levels, spending money on others was associated with greater happiness [4]. Spending on others may also be good for your health. Whillans et al. found that older adults with high blood pressure who spent money on others for three weeks had lower blood pressure than those who spent money on themselves [5]. Finally, spending money on others can benefit the person receiving the gift. Zhang et al. asked participants recruited on a survey platform to recall an instance when someone bought something for them and found a relationship between participants’ willingness to accept (WTA) the gift and their reported subjective well-being (SWB), with the gift’s attractiveness and positive perceived intention of giving being related to SWB via WTA [6].

Tip #3: All sales final

Many stores offer warranties and return policies to protect consumers and their goods. These are appealing because they make the decision reversible–people tend to prefer reversible decisions because they bring about feelings of freedom and act as a safety net [7]. However, people may actually end up unhappier as a result of making reversible decisions. In a study where students performed a series of decision-making tasks, Bullens et al. found that reversible decision-making led to lower levels of satisfaction afterwards and also that making reversible decisions may lead to focusing on negative aspects of the choice while making irreversible decisions may result in focusing instead on positive aspects that make the choice appealing [8]. The next time you go shopping, consider skipping out on the warranties and return policies, especially if they cost you extra. You might end up spending more money to make a decision that you will ultimately be less happy with.

References:

1. Carter, T. J.; Gilovich, T. I Am What I Do, Not What I Have: The Differential Centrality of Experiential and Material Purchases to the Self. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2012, 102 (6), 1304–1317. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027407.

2. Walker, J.; Kumar, A.; Gilovich, T. Cultivating Gratitude and Giving through Experiential Consumption. Emotion 2016, 16 (8), 1126–1136. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000242.

3. Caprariello, P. A.; Reis, H. T. To Do, to Have, or to Share? Valuing Experiences Over Material Possessions Depends on the Involvement of Others. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2013, 104 (2), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030953.

4. Aknin, L. B.; Barrington-Leigh, C. P.; Dunn, E. W.; Helliwell, J. F.; Burns, J.; Biswas-Diener, R.; Kemeza, I.; Nyende, P.; Ashton-James, C. E.; Norton, M. I. Prosocial Spending and Well-Being: Cross-Cultural Evidence for a Psychological Universal. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2013, 104 (4), 635–652. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031578.

5. Whillans, A. V.; Dunn, E. W.; Sandstrom, G. M.; Dickerson, S. S.; Madden, K. M. Is Spending Money on Others Good for Your Heart? Health Psychol. 2016, 35 (6), 574–583. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000332.

6. Zhang, W.; Chen, M.; Xie, Y.; Zhao, Z. Prosocial Spending and Subjective Well-Being: The Recipient Perspective. J. Happiness Stud. 2018, 19 (8), 2267–2281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9918-2.

7. Bullens, L.; Harreveld, F. Second Thoughts about Decision Reversibility: An Empirical Overview. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2016, 10 (10), 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12268.

8. Bullens, L.; van Harreveld, F.; Förster, J.; van der Pligt, J. Reversible Decisions: The Grass Isn’t Merely Greener on the Other Side; It’s Also Very Brown over Here. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2013, 49 (6), 1093–1099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.07.011.

9. Unsplash. Photo by Erik Mclean on Unsplash. https://unsplash.com/photos/nfoRa6NHTbU (accessed Nov 3, 2020).

The Psychology Behind Political Ideologies

It is abundantly clear that Democrats and Republicans have vastly different opinions. Discussions bloom into heated arguments, and it is near impossible to end a political discussion with a consensus that's more significant than to “agree to disagree.” Why is this? Discussions and debates should logically be meant for individuals to understand and become educated about different perspectives, is there a reason this rarely occurs? Is there a correlation between political involvement and individual psychologies? Or does it differ between different opinions? 

In short, there is a correlation and a relationship between political identification and personal psychology. Especially in terms of liberal and conservative opinions, there have been psychological trends in individuals that correlate with certain beliefs. For instance, liberals are generally more creative and curious about the world around them, while conservatives tend to be more driven by fear or stress [4,6]. This could explain why conservative beliefs are generally more resistant to change, especially socially, and have strong connections to the past [1], which in turn creates strong sentiment towards political slogans or ideas, like President Trump’s campaign promise to “Make America Great Again.” Similarly, conservatives tend to have very focused and reliably consistent ideas relating their self-identity and values; it was found that conservatives associated their beliefs and values with words like honor, tradition, and religion [6]. 

Contrastingly, liberals are much more open to change and tend to feel safer and more confident about the amount of control they have in both daily tasks and their general livelihoods [4]. In the same studies that found the words which conservatives associate themselves with, liberals were found to describe themselves as loving and compassionate [6,11].  Furthermore, the circle that liberals empathize with has been found to be more extensive than liberals, reaching “non-human and imaginary subjects like animals and aliens” [6]. This logically connects to the lesser feeling of fear, as conservative ideologies show a need to prioritize themselves and their closest ones out of their comparatively cynical view of the world [2,13].

Physically, these traits have been noticeable through research of brain structure using MRI scanning. In liberals, there is a larger gray matter volume of anterior cingulate cortex, which has been associated with feelings of pain, or empathy, and impulse control. Contrastingly, conservatives have increased right amygdala sizes, which has a correlation with stronger reactions to fearful or negative stimuli [9].

Overall, such research seems to be taken advantage of in political campaigns and the media to garner support from each side [3]. As Psychology Today describes, conservatives are “pro-family because being surrounded by close relatives is the best defense against threats that surround them” [2]. Conservatives have been shown to view social inequalities - where the status quo is frequently challenged - to be zero sum, that is, one party can only gain if another party loses [7]. On the other hand, liberal media and politicians trends towards focusing on the need for change, and drawing empathy for larger, marginalized groups [5,12]. 

While it may feel like political divisions are currently at an all-time high, John Hibbing, a political scientist  at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, argues that “we have always had this very same division, this very basic difference between people who are fairly sensitive to threats and think we need to be vigilant and those people who are more into experimentation and trying new things” [8]. But what if we could use this information to instead alleviate tensions and partisan thinking? With an understanding of our common differences—that our political opponents are not inherently bad people but simply view the world differently—we can finally begin to bridge the gap that divides us, even if we ultimately disagree with their conclusions.

References

1. Andreasson, S. Conservatism. Political Ideologies: An Introduction 2014, 47–70.

2. Barber, N. Why Liberal Hearts Bleed and Conservatives Don't.; 2012 https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/201210/why-liberal-hearts-bleed-and-conservatives-dont 

3. Bovard, J. Why Presidents Want You Scared: James Bovard. https://mises.org/power-market/why-presidents-want-you-scared (accessed Oct 16, 2020).

4. Brueck, H. A Yale psychologist's simple thought experiment temporarily turned conservatives into liberals. https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-turn-conservatives-liberal-john-bargh-psychology-2017-10 (accessed Oct 16, 2020).

5. Brueck, H. Scientists have discovered two simple psychological differences that make you liberal or conservative. https://www.businessinsider.com/liberals-and-conservatives-process-disgust-and-empathy-differently-2018-1 (accessed Oct 16, 2020).

6. Brueck, H. These key psychological differences can determine whether you're liberal or conservative. https://www.businessinsider.com/psychological-differences-between-conservatives-and-liberals-2018-2 (accessed Oct 16, 2020).

7. Davidai, S.; Ongis, M. The Politics of Zero-Sum Thinking: The Relationship between Political Ideology and the Belief That Life Is a Zero-Sum Game. Science Advances 2019, 5 (12).

8. Hibbing, J. Nature, Nurture And Your Politics. NPR, 2018.

9. Kanai, R.; Feilden, T.; Firth, C.; Rees, G. Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults. Current Biology 2011, 21 (8), 677–680.

10. Kiley, G. Political polarization? Don't blame the web, Brown study says. https://www.brown.edu/news/2017-03-20/internetpolarization (accessed Oct 16,  2020). 

11. Public Opinion on Patriotism, Personal Traits, Lifestyles and Demographics. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/26/section-9-patriotism-personal-traits-lifestyles-and-demographics/ (accessed Oct 16, 2020).  

12. Teaching the Children: Sharp Ideological Differences, Some Common Ground. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/09/18/teaching-the-children-sharp-ideological-differences-some-common-ground/ (accessed Oct 16, 2020).

13. Waytz, A.; Iyer, R.; Young, L.; Haidt, J.; Graham, J. Ideological Differences in the Expanse of the Moral Circle. Nature Communications 2019, 10 (1). 

Am I Speaking Too Fast?

If you have ever tried to listen to native speakers of a language you are learning, you probably had trouble understanding them because they seem to be speaking too fast. It turns out that this might not just be because you are new to the language. People who speak different languages actually voice syllables at different rates, so some languages are consistently spoken faster than others. However, this doesn't mean that speakers of these languages convey information faster, according to a new study published in Science Advances.

A study conducted by researchers from the University of Lyon found that languages are constrained by a tradeoff between speed and efficiency. Languages spoken faster will contain less information per syllable, so that universally, languages tend to convey information at the same rate of 39.15 bits per second. Despite the large differences between languages-for instance, English has almost 7,000 distinct syllables, while Japanese only has a few hundred-a combination of biological, cultural, and social factors constrain them to be more similar than you think.

 The study investigated 17 Eurasian languages, including Japanese, Mandarin, German, Vietnamese, Spanish, French, and Italian. For each language, the researchers estimated the information density (ID) for each language, or the amount of information that is contained in each syllable, calculated in bits per second. A bit in linguistics is the amount of information contained in a syllable that reduces uncertainty by half. For example, in conversation, if you could narrow a topic of a conversation down by half from a single syllable, that syllable would contain 1 bit of information.

The researchers also asked 10 speakers for each language to read 15 texts and measured the duration and number of syllables spoken. They then calculated the speech rate (SR), the speed at which syllables are produced. You can imagine that speech rate would depend largely on the individual speakers, but the researchers found that it varied more by language than by speaker within a language.

 The information rate for each language was then calculated by multiple information density (ID) with average speech rate (SR). The researchers found that languages are more similar to each other in information rate than in speech rate, and that information rate negatively correlated with information density. These findings extend the results from a previous study, which found that English had an information density of 0.91, while Japanese had a density of almost half, at 0.49. However, English was spoken slower, at 6.19 syllables per second, compared to 7.84 syllables per second for Japanese.

 Overall, languages occupy a range of information rates, which the researchers suggest are due to the communicative and cognitive limitations of both speakers and listeners. If a high information density language was spoken to fast (termed "high-fast"), this would require the speaker to vocalize more complex sounds and require cognitive planning. As you can imagine, listeners would also have a hard time listening and understanding such speech. On the other hand, "low-slow" languages, low ID languages spoken slowly, would be less efficient and also require speakers and listeners to use more memory.

The researchers hope to broaden their results by studying more languages across the world from regions in Africa and the Americas. They are also interested in extending these findings to conversational speech, not just read speech. Interestingly, this study also relates to previous studies that found that within a single language, faster speakers tend to be less informational. Our brains find a balance between cognitive limitations and communication requirements, so that we can get our points across effectively and efficiently.

References

1. Coupé, C.; Oh, Y.; Dediu, D.; Pellegrino, F. Different Languages, Similar Encoding Efficiency: Comparable Information Rates across the Human Communicative Niche. Science Advances 2019, 5 (9).

2. Kluger, J. Slow Down! Why Some Languages Sound So Fast. http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2091477,00.html (accessed Oct 13, 2019).