A Formula for Predicting Happiness, Low Depression, Low Anxiety, and Life Success Using the Success and Happiness Attributes Questionnaire (SHAQ)

Development and Research Results of SHAQ on 3441 People.

About This Research Paper

The following research paper contains extensive research related to the Happiness Quotient (HQ), depression, anxiety, anger, interpersonal relationships, peoples basic values and beliefs, important life skills such as self-management and emotional coping, self-esteem, and many other important factors related to emotional outcomes and life success in one's career, relationships, health, and personal life.  The terms Subjective Well Being (SWB) and Emotional Intelligence (EQ) are closely related concepts.  The paper also includes a brief cognitive theory of emotions and human functioning.  Many of the presented in the paper are ideas originated in Dr. Tom Stevens' first edition of the book, You Can Choose To Be Happy: "Rise Above" Anxiety, Anger, and Depression (available free on this website).   The Success and Happiness Attributes Questionnaire (SHAQ) is the primary instrument used for this research and is also available free on this website.

=> For a brief, layman's summary of the research, go to Chapter 10 of Dr. Stevens latest version of his book.

=>To download an Adobe pdf copy of this monograph, click here.

Development of the Success and Happiness Attributes Questionnaire (SHAQ) To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety

Psychologist, Counselor-Professor Emeritus
California State University, Long Beach
Email: tstevens@csulb.edu
Draft Version

Results for other outcomes included for the Relationship Outcomes scale, R = .693, R Square = .467; for the Health Outcomes scale, R = .816, R Square = .666; for Highest Income, R = .486, R Square = .236; and for Educational Attainment, R = .458, R Square = .210. Behavioral measures used as outcomes also yielded good results. For example, for a Major Depression Checklist, R = .596, R Square = .356; Amount of Therapy for Depression, R = .452, R Square = .204; and Amount of Medication for Depression, R = .409, R Square = .167.

What is Happiness 
A Cognitive Systems Model of Happiness, Anxiety, and Depression 
Developing and Specifying Life Knowledge, Skills, and Habits 
Brief Overview of the Harmonious Functioning (HF) Model of Emotions 
Key Attribute Domain Areas 
The Success and Happiness Attributes Questionnaire (SHAQ)
Description of the SHAQ Scales 
PROCEDURE 
RESULTS 
Table 1: Outcome Regression Results for 56 SHAQ Scales/Subscales 
Table 2: Outcome Regression Results for 70 SHAQ Scales and Subscales Including Learning-Academic Scales 
Regression Outcome Results by Scale Sets 
Table 3: Outcome Results for SHAQ Major Scale Sets 
Happiness Quotient (HQ) Predictive Power 
Table 4: Emotional Outcomes By Original Main Scales 
Table 5: Relationship, Income, and Academic Success Outcomes By Original Main Scales 
Table 6: Correlations of Outcomes and Life Value-Theme Scales 
Table 7: Correlations of Outcomes with Top Belief-Value and Fear Scales 
Table 8: Correlations of Outcomes with Ethics-Related Beliefs 
Table 9: Correlations of Outcomes with Self-Confidence/Skill Scales 
Table 10: Correlation of Outcomes with Self-Management and Emotional Coping Scales 
Table 11: Correlations of Outcomes with Interpersonal Skill Scales 
Table 12: Outcome Scales and Learning-Academic Scales 
Evidence for Higher Self Values and for Making Happiness a Top Goal 
Importance of Overcoming Worst Fears 
Relation of Biographical Characteristics to Outcomes 
Table 13: Correlations between Outcomes and Sex, Age, and User Rating 
Correlations Between Outcome Scales-The Rich Get Richer 
DISCUSSION 
SHAQ Reliability Issues 
Conclusions about the sample and use of the Internet 
Construct validity of SHAQ 
The Characteristics of Happy People 
Primary Value of SHAQ and this Research 
Using SHAQ as a diagnostic research, clinical, and self-help instrument. 
Using SHAQ for large-scale college student assessment and college planning. 
Importance of Psychology’s Unique Contribution to Support of Societally Functional Values, Beliefs, And Behaviors 
REFERENCES 
APPENDICES 
APPENDIX A: MOST INTRA OUTCOME SCALE AND ITEM CORRELATIONS 
Table 14: Inter Outcome Correlations 
APPENDIX B:  HIGHER SELF SCALE 
Table 15: Higher Self Belief Scale Correlations with Outcomes 
APPENDIX C: RELIABILITY OF ORIGINAL LIFE VALUES-THEMES SCALES 
APPENDIX  D:  ORIGINAL ACADEMIC SUCCESS SCALES 
APPENDIX  E : ORIGINAL SRQ INTERPERSONAL SKILLS/HABITS SCALES 
APPENDIX  E : ORIGINAL SRQ INTERPERSONAL SKILLS/HABITS SCALES 
APPENDIX  F: SCALE MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, NUMBER OF SUBJECTS (N) 
Table 15: Outcome Scale Means and Standard Deviations 
Table 16: Life Belief-Values Scales Means and Standard Deviations 
Table 17: Knowledge-Skills Scales Means and Standard Deviations 
APPENDIX G:  OUTCOMES BY LEARNING-ACADEMIC SCALES 
Table 19: Correlations of Outcomes with Learning-Academic Scales 
APPENDIX H: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHAQ SUBSCALES AND DEPRESSION, ANXIETY, AND OCD SYMPTOMS 
Table 20: Relationships Between All SHAQ Subscales and Behavioral Symptoms 
APPENDIX I:  BELIEF AND FEAR SUBSCALE SETS’ RELATIONSHIP TO OUTCOMES 
Table 21: Regression Correlations Between Belief or Fear Sets and Outcome Variables 

The function of man, then, is exercise of his vital facilities [or soul]. . .in obedience to reason. .. the good of man is exercise of his faculties in accordance with excellence. . . the manifestations of excellence will be pleasant in themselves. . . the life of these men is in itself pleasant. . . Happiness is, then, at once the best and noblest and pleasantest thing in the world, and these are not separated. . . Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 2

For all these characteristics are united in the best exercises of our faculties. . .(Aristotle, Ethics).

Some definitions of happiness don‘t distinguish it from the lower pleasures. Aristotle, on the other hand, understood the intimate connection between the emotion of happiness and mental functioning. I prefer a definition of happiness that gives primary importance to an emotional state that is intimately related to cognitive states and is superordinate to pleasure. Pleasure/pain is related more to specific biological needs or states. Happiness is an emotional reaction to the harmonious functioning of the cognitive system and provides feedback and motivation for the cognitive system related to its performance (Stevens, 1998). When people fall in love, make progress toward goals, engage in a meaningful activity, are mentally ―in tune‖ with nature or music, or achieve new insights, they feel the emotion happiness. When people satisfy biological needs for sex, hunger, thirst, touch, taste, or temperature, they feel pleasure. You may be unhappy about not getting enough to eat, but there is a difference between hunger and happiness. For the purpose of this research, I developed the Overall Happiness Scale described below, which measures self-reported happiness in a variety of life areas over different periods of time (see below).

Philosopher-theologians such as Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, Bertrand Russell, and the Buddha have made happiness the centerpiece and most important value of their philosophies. Jesus‘ ‗Sermon on the Mount‘ could be viewed as a self-help course on happiness. Maslow (1954, 1962) was a founder of the humanistic tradition of psychology, and his study of self-actualizing people‘s characteristics formed a basis of his conclusions. I considered his self-actualization values and personality characteristics to be important parts of a larger theory of happiness, and I included some as SHAQ questions. Csikzentmihalyi (1990) wrote of flow which emphasized being in an optimal state of functioning like being ―in the zone.‖ His flow concept is similar to my concept of harmonious functioning (Stevens, 1998).

Other philosophers and major religions state that people‘s core beliefs and values are the most important determinant of happiness. Psychologists--including James (1905), Maslow (1962), Rogers (1961), Frankl (1969), Wong and Fry (1998), and Emmons (1999) and many others--have stressed the importance of values such as truth, integrity, and unconditional caring for all people, and caring for people‘s happiness, health, relationships, and personal development. Values and meaning have been at the core of the humanistic and existential schools of psychotherapy. Even very different approaches such as Kelly‘s (1955) cognitive therapy, and Staats‘s (1968), Ellis‘s (1977, 1989), and Beck‘s (1987, 1999) varieties of cognitive behavioral therapies have also stressed higher level beliefs and values as powerful determinants of emotions (see below). Kasser et al (2004), Solberg et al (2004), and others present evidence that materialistic values are associated with lower levels of happiness (SWB) and poorer psychological health.

Another line of research has stemmed from Peter Salovey, John D. Mayer (1990, 2003). Goleman‘s (1997) concept of emotional intelligence which focuses upon cognitive skills. Martin Seligman‘s (1998, 2000) focus upon learned helplessness and optimism has been very influential. As a researcher and as president of APA, he has led a recent movement for studies in positive psychology. Another line of research emphasizing the functionality of cognitive systems concerns the concept of wisdom. Sternberg (1990) and Baltes and Staudinger (2000) have elucidated wisdom as a higher order cognitive system related to success and happiness. They believe that wisdom builds upon years of successful self-development of knowledge, skills, beliefs, and values.

This article is based upon two aspects of a cognitive theoretical model imbedded herein. One type of model is a psychological process model emphasizing the concept of hierarchically arranged cognitive systems, their development, and their interactions among Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 3

The other aspect of the model is cognitions‘ content. Certain values-themes-beliefs are hypothesized as being fundamental to harmonious functioning of the cognitive system and of society. These include values like maximizing happiness and love for all; empathy, understanding, forgiveness, and kindness; truth, knowledge, learning, exploration, and creativity; organization, impact, and efficiency; unconditional love of self and others; self-control, self-discipline, self-development, and integrity; optimistic belief in positive forces controlling the universe and people‘s lives; zero expectations about what we will receive or are owed by life; gratitude for all that we have; healthy activity and play; and beauty.

My first attempt at a theoretical model was a 300-plus page theoretical, research review and monograph I wrote as a PhD student for part of my degree requirements (Positive Behavior Change: A Behavioral Systems Approach, 1971) . This monograph outlined a cognitive, human learning approach to theory following my PhD dissertation chair, Arthur Staats. The Behavioral Systems Model posited that most meaningful human behavior is controlled by a collection of cognitive systems (similar to Staats‘ complex s-r behavioral hierarchies). Further, these behavior systems are primarily cognitive systems that are developed by learning processes governed by the principles of classical and instrumental/operant conditioning (Staats, 1963, 1968). Stephen Grosberg (1975, 1980, 1991) has updated learning theory by integrating it with neural network theory.

While learning principles and processes of the model are important, I believe that understanding the content of people‘s cognitive-behavioral systems will better explain the individual differences in human happiness and success. I became convinced that people‘s (1) core values-beliefs and their (2) life knowledge-skills were the most important causes of human behavior and emotions from my work as a therapist. An important goal was to organize and specify these two content areas. The more superordinate core-values-beliefs system is the most central, primary, abstract, comprehensive, and general of the two areas. It is superordinate to all human knowledge-behavior domains. The life knowledge-skills aspect is more domain-specific. It is partially derived by cognitive processes similar to deductive reasoning or ―programming‖ by the higher, core cognitive systems. Conversely, the superordinate cognitions are derived partially by induction from lessons learned at the lower levels. The interacting top-to-bottom and bottom-to-top learning gradually increase integration and harmony within the overall cognitive-psychological system.

However, if so much content relates to people‘s happiness, how can we ever specify a model of human happiness and success? Part of Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 4

the challenge of developing such a model is to find the key attributes having a greater impact upon human happiness. A good starting point is the accumulated wisdom of experts. This paper will focus less upon the processes and principles of the cognitive systems theory of emotions and more upon the structure and content of those systems. I will first focus on the knowledge-skills-habits content aspect and then on the core value-beliefs aspect, because that was the route my psychological career took—from bottom attributes to top attributes.

Developing and Specifying Life Knowledge, Skills, and Habits

During the early part of my career I was engrossed in behavior theory and behavior therapy. This behavior-outcome-results emphasis caused me to focus more upon understanding and specifying the life knowledge-skills areas than the more general core value-belief areas that ironically had been the central aspect of my own personal conversion experience and my earlier study in philosophy, theology, and humanistic psychology. I was also convinced that psychologists shouldn‘t tamper with clients‘ values. It is worth noting that a study by Jensen and Bergin (1988) found that an overwhelming majority of therapists do routinely attempt to change clients‘ value and beliefs to those more like their own (e.g. make clients more open, honest, empathic, accepting, etc.)

Should intervention focus more on the top or the bottom of the cognitive hierarchy? I came full circle in my own thinking. I began my career by becoming a United Methodist minister because I had believed that people‘s most important center of causation was their core beliefs and values. I wrote an article then called, The hierarchical integration of the personality (1968) in which I followed the theologian Paul Tillich‘s (1956, 1967)‘s ideas about the importance of one‘s ultimate concern(s) (core values) for determining their personality and behavior. I also liked George Kelly‘s (1955) emphasis on the central power of people‘s superordinate personal constructs. However, in my psychology graduate training following Art Staats (1968) and others, I focused more upon a cognitive-behavioral-skills approach because these attributes were more specifiable, observable, and presumably more teachable. I developed workshops, classes, and my own counseling approaches based upon this cognitive-behavioral approach teaching self-management, Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 5

However, I discovered some problems with relying too exclusively on this approach. For example, I found that some people had very good self-management or assertion skills, but lacked the motivation to use these skills. Of course, insight-oriented therapists might say, ―I told you so.‖ However, I found the remedy to be more value and belief-oriented than traditional insight-oriented therapy. Instead of the ―deeper‖ or core issues being psychodynamic ones, I found them to be closer to what theorists like Tillich, Maslow, some existentialist psychologists (Frankl, 1969) or even traditional religions proposed. As I was rediscovering the value of the people‘s personality core, I discovered that other current psychologists (c.f. Bergin and Richards, 2005 and Pergament, 2001) were also emphasizing people‘s core values and beliefs as a locus of control. I called my own approach, Spiritual Cognitive Therapy (using the word spiritual in its broadest psychological meaning, not making any statement about cosmology, and leaving the theological interpretations to the reader).

Based upon my personal experience and 30+ years of teaching, research, and clinical experience, I wrote You Can Choose To Be Happy: "Rise Above" Anxiety, Anger, and Depression (1998). The book had three primary objectives (1) to present a brief summary of my theoretical cognitive process model of human emotions and functioning, (2) to present a description of my content model of attributes leading to happiness and success, and (3) to present these models in a manner that would help readers use the book as a self-help guide for increasing their own happiness and success.

Specifying the cognitive systems model of happiness and related emotions. I attempted to integrate the processes of the cognitive model (above) with the content of the core values-beliefs domain and the life skills domain. Central concepts in my theory include Higher Self cognitive system (Ch 3) and the Theory of Harmonious Functioning (Chs 7-8). These concepts help both (1) explain my theoretical model of emotions and (2) specify key core value-belief and life skills content. I believe that understanding both process and content can help improve one‘s ability to manage emotions and life success.

9. These HF mechanisms are part of a fundamental learning-motivation process integral to creating the comprehensive neural cognitive system. This cognitive system includes a semantic network constituting the meaning of percepts, concepts, objects, people, or any aspect of the world; and it includes specialized executive functions controlling thought and action.

Core beliefs-values and the Higher Self cognitive system. Key topics in the book included the importance of core values-life goals such as happiness for self and others over time, love of self and others, knowledge-truth-honesty, integrity, beauty, health, and autonomy-freedom with responsibility. A postulated cognitive system I call the Higher Self (no supernatural references intended) similar to Maslow‘s ―inner self‖ or Kelly‘s superordinate personal construct system is executive source of these related core cognitive values-beliefs. I think the Higher Self develops at an early age through empathy and is the cognitive center for love and happiness. It may be in conflict with cognitive systems internalizing more negative values-beliefs possibly learned from parents (a bit Freudian but more Maslow and Rogers).

Unconditional worth of self and others. Following Carl Rogers (1951, 1961) and major religions and philosophers, I posit that unconditional human self-worth and unconditional valuing of all humans as having some significant amount of worth is an important determinant of happiness. Unconditional self-worth is distinguished from (conditional) self-confidence (see below).

Positive world view and optimism. From Peale‘s classic self-help book, The Power of Positive Thinking (1952) to Seligman ( 1998) and many others have written about the importance of a positive world view and/or optimism for happiness. Evidence seems very supportive of this hypothesis, and it appears to be one of the strongest factors associated with happiness.

Internal control.. Julian Rotter‘s (1954) dimension of internal versus external locus of control has proved to be a useful distinction. The assumption here is that giving one‘s own values, beliefs, goals, decisions, and plans priority over ones actions versus doing what others want one to do will increase the likelihood that those values and goals will be fulfilled. That fulfillment increases the probability of personal success and happiness. Internal control does not mean that one is ―selfish‖ and considers only themselves. A person can have as a goal others‘ happiness or improving society and work diligently focused on these goals versus letting others derail them. The issue is locus of control. Codependence—caring for others more than for self and caring more than others‘ care for themselves--is a related instance of external control. Richard Ryan and Edward Deci (2000) use the construct of self-determination to explain important phenomena such as intrinsic motivation and think it is a key to happiness. Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 7

Self-confidence, knowledge, and skills. I define this term to be very similar to Albert Bandura‘s (1982, 1997, 2000) definition of positive self-efficacy. Self-confidence is contingent upon people‘s self-perception of their ability to achieve goal-related outcomes in specified situations. Self-confidence can range from the specific to more general situations. Self-confidence can be about confidence of making an A in a math course, about one‘s math abilities in general, or about general academic success. Research shows that self-confidence develops most robustly from years of developing knowledge and success in certain task domains (REFERENCE?). The model posits that confidence, knowledge, and skills influence happiness through a variety of means.

Self-confidence probably influences happiness, anxiety, and depression directly (see HF model) and influences actual success indirectly as a self-fulfilling prophesy. Combined with actual domain-related knowledge and skills, one has increased power/control to create an external environment conducive to one‘s happiness. One can experience happiness from the benefits of academic, career, interpersonal, health, economic, and recreational success. These benefits include more interesting, productive, and satisfying work; love, respect, and support from others; beautiful, safe surroundings; health; economic power; accomplishment of goals per se; or fun, challenging experiences. I attempted to roughly specify the major areas of one‘s inner university cognitive expert systems and their related self-confidence areas in my model. SHAQ assesses them with brief general questions to save testing time.

Self-management and self-development skills. Decision-making, goal-setting, planning, and time-management are the featured skill sets under this area. This scale is based upon a self-management system called OPATSM I developed and taught in workshops initially in 1974. Many of my ideas for OPATSM came from a book on time management by Lakein (1974) and from behavioral self-management techniques. Self-management skills influence emotional well-being and success in a variety of ways such as increased life balance, efficiency, functional goal-setting, attainment of goals and increased confidence. Self-development helps people develop more functional attributes, and self-control helps people control dysfunctional cognitive systems and habits.

Emotional coping skills. How one reacts to negative emotional states has been seen as an important area since Freud coined the concept of defense mechanisms. In SHAQ subjects are asked to estimate the proportion of time they react to a negative emotional state with a specified response. For example, if you are upset, how often do you eat, withdraw from others, engage in physical activity, try to solve the underlying problem, etc. I used an almost identical scale in my earlier LSQ . In the LSQ it had a correlation r = 38 with overall happiness. The response to a negative emotion can have a dramatic effect on whether that emotion is continued, worsened, or improved. Over time the thousands of daily coping responses have a huge impact upon ones overall happiness. Since one‘s emotions can also affect their functioning and success, they can affect success in all life areas. There has been a whole line of research demonstrating the value of good coping skills (how people react to stressful events). Pargament (1997) and others have shown how religious faith-based coping can be helpful (or not) depending upon the types of beliefs and thoughts involved. Vaillant (2000), Taylor, et al (2000), and others have summarized a convincing array of evidence of how positive coping can help people overcome very stressful events and improve health outcomes as well.

Learning and academic-related skills. Reading skills, writing skills, various study, critical thinking, analysis/synthesis, methodological, and other cognitive processing skills affect our understanding of ourselves and the entire world around us. They underlie the development of all other beliefs, knowledge, and skills at all levels of the entire cognitive system. That previous research with the LSQ found learning and thinking skills correlated with career success and interpersonal success as well as academic success should be no surprise.

Assertiveness and interpersonal skills. Our scales from the SRQ (summarized above) included Assertive Conflict Resolution, Intimacy Skills, Romance, Independent-Intimacy, and Liberated Roles. My main interest has been in family, friends, and romantic relationships. I have not systematically studied interpersonal skill areas more specifically related to career-business areas such as sales and management. I would welcome additional scales in those areas.

All of the above categories can be construed as describing partially autonomous cognitive systems. I believe that positive functional cognitive systems tend to spread their effect to interacting systems: good begets good. Thinking of the cognitive system as hierarchically arranged, the effect can spread top-to-bottom, sideways, or bottom-to-top. For example people who develop life goals to maximize happiness for self and others (top) will more likely look carefully at how they use their time (time-management), take positive steps to modify negative emotions (coping skills), treat other people more positively (interpersonal skills), and attempt to make positive contributions to the world and have a good income themselves (academic and career skills). The top-to-bottom increase in skills will also increase likelihood of success in these life areas. Conversely, a person might learn to cope with a particular problem such as depression, an addiction, or loneliness and develop better coping skills, self-management skills, or interpersonal skills and begin to generalize from lessons learned in the particular context to higher value, goal, and strategy areas of the cognitive system (bottom-to-top learning).

Another factor that should increase the good-begets-good effect is that if people are exposed to highly functional (or highly Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 8

Cognitive Systems’ redundancy and robustness. Another way to view the redundant content of the various cognitive systems is as a human means of establishing redundancy and robustness for dealing with life‘s many challenges. If one cognitive system doesn‘t solve a problem, than perhaps another one might. By implementing many variant instances of broader functional themes the cognitive system has more chances of solving life‘s problems. For example, a lad wants to be happy. He meets a girl he thinks will help accomplish that goal. He uses his planning and interpersonal skills to get the date. After she rejects him, he uses his coping and analysis skills to accept the situation and seek better ways of finding dating success in the future. He uses his unconditional love of self and others to deal with inherent negative feelings toward self and the girl. He uses his optimistic world view to give him motivation to try again.

SHAQ was developed for two main purposes. First, it was written to test the utility of the key attributes presented in the You Can Choose To Be Happy book. These attributes‘ utility was to be assessed by new scales to measure outcomes such as happiness, depression, anxiety, anger, relationship success, academic success, and income. Second, SHAQ was developed as a self-help, self-assessment instrument for users to get feedback about these changeable attributes. Learning specific, modifiable cognitions and behaviors may help users improve chances for happiness and success. SHAQ acts as an expert system referring users to free information about targeted attributes from my book and elsewhere. SHAQ and my book are free on the Internet at www.csulb.edu/~tstevens.

I designed the book and consequently SHAQ to describe a comprehensive, though not exhaustive, set of attributes that can increase users‘ chances of happiness and life success. SHAQ is a large questionnaire with 81 scales and subscales (plus 6 outcome scales and additional biographical items). Due to my interest and experience related to college students‘ academic success and career choice, I included a large section devoted to academic success and career choice consisting of 25 subscales (of the 81).

SHAQ‘s scales and items were developed from statements in my book (Stevens, 1998) and from the LSQ and SRQ (above). One goal of both the book and the questionnaire is to focus on items that are clear and learnable. The idea of You Can Choose To Be Happy is that people can learn values, beliefs, skills, and habits that will increase their chances of being happy (and successful in many life areas). Because of the emphasis on assessment and intervention for both the book and questionnaire, SHAQ was developed with different assumptions than many questionnaires designed using classical test development approaches. I was not interested in identifying stable, very broad, possibly hereditary traits such as the Big 5 traits, If a person wanted to change themselves to be happier and more successful, the items on the Big 5 related inventories might not help much.

Also, classical test development focuses on developing scales with items that measure essentially the same trait. My goal was different. I viewed a scale as measuring a key sample from a broader domain of values-beliefs, skills, or habits. That domain might typically consist of a population of so many specific cognitions or behaviors that to measure them all would require a questionnaire Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 9

with a huge number of questions. Therefore, my approach was to write items sampling from as many different aspects of a domain as possible. Ideally, each item should measure some specific value, belief, skill, or habit. The result is items in the same scale that are quite different from each other versus a traditional scale that might have very similar items. Despite this different approach, the Cronbach alpha‘s to measure the main scales‘ internal consistency were generally good (greater than 80)—see below.

Another aspect of item development was transparency and face-validity. I didn‘t have the resources to validate each item: to see if it measured the real belief, behavior, or whatever was being asked about. Therefore, I developed items with high face validity. By face validity, I mean (1) items clear enough so that people answering honestly would choose an answer truly reflecting their real-world state and (2) those states have obvious significance to experts. For example a question like, ― I make a prioritized task list which covers to-do‘s from my school, work, social, recreation, and other areas of my life at least once per week.‖ (1) should be easy for test-taker, researcher, or self-help learner to understand or answer correctly and (2) the question should be one of obvious significance to time-management for time-management experts.

Return to Contents

The 11 Value-Themes scales are the result of a factor and logical analysis of the original four scales—Achievement-Status; Social-Family Related; Internal-Intrinsic; and Non-Dysfunctional Values-Themes. Data from this factor analysis and all other factor analytic studies will not be presented in this article because of the added complexity. The data will eventually be posted on my website.

1. Higher Self (HighSlfV, T1HigherSelf). Values self happiness, integrity, development, learning, discipline, self-sufficiency, independence, balance, and strong philosophy of life. (See www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/h3hiself.htm, Chapter 3, 10 items). Cronbach alpha = .916.

2. Non-Family Social Intimacy (IntimVal, T2SocIntimNoFamScale). Values intimacy, romance and being liked, respected, and supported. Dislikes conflict (6 items). Cronbach alpha = .871.

3. Family Care (FamilyVa, T3FamCareScale).Values family and parents. Care-giving. (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .795.

4. Success-Status (SucStatVa, T4SuccessStatusMater). Values education, success, high income and possessions, respect, status, being a CEO, and completing important goals. (8 items). Cronbach alpha = .891.

5. Goodness Idealism Order (IdealOrd, T5OrderPerfectGood). Values goodness, beauty, idealism, orderliness, perfection, organization, justice, simplicity, cleanliness (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .875.

6. God Spirituality Religion (SpiritGd, T6GodSpiritRelig). Values spiritual intimacy, God, religion, obedience to God (4 items). Cronbach alpha = .934.

7. Impact Giving Challenge Exploration (ImpactEx, T7ImpactChallengeExplor).Values giving, impact on world, mental challenge, exploration, uniqueness, and diversity (6 items). Cronbach alpha = .858.

8. Attention Adventure Play (AdvntPlay, T8AttentionFunEasy). Values adventure, play, attention, fun, effortlessness (4 items). Cronbach alpha = .777.

9. Value Self-All Unconditionally (UncondVa, T9ValueSelfAllUncond). Unconditional valuing of self and others (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .601.

10. Overcome Problems--Accept Self (OvercomP, T10OvercmProbAcceptSelf). Values overcoming problems, self-protection, and personal healing (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .600.

11. Duty Punctuality (DutyPunc, T11DutyPunctual). Values duty, obligation, and punctuality (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .640.

1. Positive World View. Optimism about the future of the world and own life, lack of entitlement thinking, plus daily positive versus negative thoughts (see www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/h4world.htm, Chapter 4, 10 items). Cronbach alpha = .808. It divides into the following three subscales.

a. Grateful abundance beliefs (Grateful, sswvGrateful). High gratitude for life and whatever one has; high proportion of positive thoughts (5 items). Cronbach alpha = .806

b. Optimism (Optimism, sswvOptimism ). Optimism about self and world. Good forces in control (3 items). Cronbach alpha =.762.

c. Not Entitlement Beliefs (NoEntitl, sswvNoEntitl). Not believing that person owed either the basic necessities or a high standard of living (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .630.

2. Self-Worth Scale (Unconditional Worth of Self and Others). Degree to which one accepts/values all parts of one‘s self and others not contingent on others‘ individual characteristics or behaviors. It also has items related to unconditional gratitude for life. My definition of self-worth is the unconditional aspect of self-esteem. It differs from self-confidence (see below) which is the aspect conditional upon success or other factors. (See www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/h5self.htm, Chapter 5, 12 items). Cronbach is alpha = .778. Three subscales.

a. Non-contingent or dysfunctional self-worth (NoContSW, ssswNonCont). Self-worth not based upon being liked, strong, the best, living by the rules, or being a winner (6 items). Cronbach alpha = .802.

b. Balanced love-happiness gratitude (LoHapGr, ssswHapAllGrat ). Love and happiness for self and all others, gratitude, and make decisions to maximize happiness balancing it across time and people. This scale‘s meaning is also overlaps with my concept of Higher Self. (5 Items). Cronbach alpha = .787.

c. Accept all of self (AccSelf, ssswAcAllSelf). Accept all parts of self (1 item).

3. Internal Control. Degree of self-sufficiency and responsibility one takes for his/her own life, health, and happiness without undue influence from others (See www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/h6intern.htm, Chapter 7, 7 items). Cronbach alpha = .707. Three subscales.

a. Autonomy, independence (Autonomy, ssieautony). Belief in taking care of self, controlling own happiness, not dependent upon one person (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .680.

b. Not codependent (NotCodep, ssiencodep). Not care for others above self or care more for another than they do for self (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .682.

c. Not external control (NotExtrC, ssienother). Belief that happiness not controlled by heredity or others (2 Items). Cronbach alpha =.505.

4. Absolute-Grounded Integrated Ethics..Ethics philosophers and religions agree on many general principles. I attempted to pick a few themes I thought might be important for this scale which bases a person‘s ethics more on absolute principles and wholes such as humanity, nature, or God than on self, family, or any group. It judges people even more on their inner qualities and assumes some basic inner goodness and inherent value in all people. In addition, I included questions about astrology (very much frowned upon by philosophers, scientists, and religion) and life after death, which is believed by many approaches and people. Some people base their ethics on the reward of heaven. (14 items). Cronbach alpha = .746. Five subscales.

a. Ethics based upon absolutes (AbsoEth, ssb2.Ethics grounded in abstract absolutes versus relativism. Philosophical beliefs guide daily life. Ethically responsible even if bad genes or environment. Science/reason alone not enough to guide ethics. (4 items). Cronbach alpha = 598.

b. Forgiving, egalitarian ethics (ForgivEth, ssb2Forgiv). Forgiveness based upon inner qualities not based upon good works. Not believe bad only happens to bad (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .634.

c. Identify with humanity (HumIDEth, ssb2IDgrnd) Identify with humanity more than family or any group. (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .480.

d. Meaning from abstract absolutes (AbsMeanE, ssb2GrndMng). Primary ethics meaning from abstract absolutes (e.g. God, Nature); not from self or other people. (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .316.

e. Value inner goodness (InrGood, ssb2InrGood). Inner goodness in all, goodness depends more on attitude (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .563.

f. Not astrology belief (NoAstrol, ssb2noAstr). Not belief in astrology (1 item).

g. Life after death belief (EverLife, ssb2lifad). (1 item).

5. Low Greatest Fears (LoGrFear). Low degree of common major fears such as illness, poverty, death, failure, rejection, and

a. Low social fears (LoSocFr, sswfsocial). Low fear .of being unwanted, alone, unloved, etc. (4 items). Cronbach alpha = .818.

b. Low self-related fears (LoSelfFr, sswfself). Confidence can overcome worst fears/problems. Low fear of being overwhelmed by personal problems (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .502.

c. Low failure-poverty fear (LoFailFr, sswfpovfai). Low fear of poverty, failure, lack of career success. (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .800.

d. Low illness-death fear (LoDeIlFr, sswfilldea). Low fear of illness or death. (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .726.

1. Self-Confidence. A list of knowledge and skills areas was developed, and subjects were asked to rate their own confidence/skills for each area. The Self-Confidence scale measures the contingent, efficacy aspect of self-esteem. This scale has emerged as a separate factor from the other main scales in factor analytic studies. I assume that the scale‘s self-report ratings reflect a combination of actual knowledge and skill and of confidence level. I also assumed that these scales measure something similar to Bandura‘s (1982, 1997, 2000) concept of self-efficacy. (Chapter 5, 41 items). Cronbach alpha = .955. Seven subscales.

a. Learning Self-Confidence (LearnSC, sssclearn). Confidence in own intelligence, learning, study skills, analytical thinking, synthesis, research methodology, computer-related, and critical thinking (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .891.

b. Optimistic-assertive task and person engagement SC. (AssertSC, sssccopopt). Achievement motivation, work habits, emotional control, optimism, self-disclosure, and caring conflict resolution (6 items). Cronbach alpha = .860.

c. Self management (SlfManSC, ssscsmsmsd ). Self-management of decision-making/planning, time-management, self-development/change, finances, self-discipline, and health (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .884.

d. Career Interpersonal SC (CarIntSC, ssscinterp). Managing others, persuasion, meeting people, public speaking, and adaptability (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .864.

e. Helping Counseling SC (HelpSC, ssscallhelp). Knowledge of philosophy, religion, and social science and helping, counseling, teaching interpersonal skills. (6 Items). Cronbach alpha = .843.

f. Natural Science SC (NatSciSC, ssscscience). Natural science, biology, and engineering (4 items). Cronbach alpha = .815.

g. Art and Creative SC (ArtCreSC, ssscartcre). Fine and performing arts, and creative thinking (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .758.

2. Self-management Skills. Skills related to self-care, decision-making, goal-setting, and time-management including leading a balanced life and attending to all main need/value areas. Many items are based upon my OPATSM time-management system, used on hundreds of students who reported high consumer ratings. (See www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/h9patsm.htm) It had good validating evidence from earlier LSQ studies. (Chapter 9, 15 items). Cronbach alpha = .871. Four subscales.

a. Time-management (TimeMan , sssmTimeManGoalSet). Time management/goal-setting/decision-making –Frequent sessions prioritizing goals and writing daily task lists for each life area. Breaking large projects into organized, scheduled tasks (5 items). Cronbach alpha = .827.

b. Accomplishment (Accompt, sssmAccompLoRush ). Busy, efficient task completion without feeling too rushed or pressured (2 items). Cronbach alpha= .507.

c. Self-development (SlfDevel, sssmSelfDevel). Self-development habits and skills including taking advice and self-change program(s) (3 Items). Cronbach alpha = .754.

d. Self-health care (SlfHelth, sssmHealthHabs). Self-care health—exercise, diet, sleep. (3 Items). Cronbach alpha = .574.

3. Emotional Coping. Proportion of the time the user makes a particular positive or negative coping response to a negative emotional state. It had very good validating evidence from earlier LSQ studies (See www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/h8hf2.htm, Chapter 8, 20 items). Cronbach alpha = .850. Six subscales.

a. Problem-solving coping responses (PrbSlvCR, sscpProbSolv). Face, explore, and discuss problems (4 items). Cronbach alpha = .692.

b. Positive thoughts CR (PosThCR, sscpPosThoughts). Positive; not critical, punitive, or negative thoughts in response to negative emotions (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .517.

c. Positive actions CR (PosActCR, sscpPosActs). Fun, involving, or vigorous activities when upset (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .542.

d. Not critical or angry CR (NoAngCR, sscpNoBlameAngerWDraw). Not critical, blaming, or angry toward self or others and not withdraw from others in response to negative emotions (5 items). Cronbach alpha = .771.

e. Not smoke or drugs CR (NoSmDrCR, sscpNotSmokDrugMed). No smoking, drinking, or taking medication in response to being upset (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .607.

f. Not eating CR (NotEatCR, sscpNotEat). Avoid eating as a response to being upset versus eat when upset (1 item).

1. Democratic, assertive communication and conflict resolution (AssertCR, IntSS1a). Seeks win-win solutions to conflicts, with clear, caring, understanding, non-defensive, calm, persistent, honest, friendly, non-threatening behaviors (13 items). Cronbach alpha = .909.

2. Open, Honest Communication and Goal Harmony (OpenCm, IntSS1b). Reveal most private and sensitive thoughts and feelings regularly, shared goals, and feelings of relationship commitment (10 items). Cronbach alpha = .888.

3. Close, Romantic Interactions (Romantic, IntSS2). Romantic attraction, playful, romantic surprises, fantasize about partner, go to romantic places, have special celebrations together (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .879.

4. Liberated Roles (LiberRol, IntSS3). Equality in decisions, roles, chores/tasks, career priority, some non-stereotypical role behaviors (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .844.

5. Valuing Partner--Love and Respect for Partner. (LoveRes, IntSS4). Love, respect, cheerfully do favors for, praise more than criticize partner. Feel free when partner home, feel committed not trapped (9 items). Cronbach alpha = .813.

6. Relationship Independence-Autonomy (IndepRel, IntSS5). Autonomy within committed relationship. Partners feeling encouraged and free to pursue own interests and friendships. Each enjoy being alone, having partially separate funds, and believing they could be happy with another person if necessary. Value individual happiness over marriage per se. (11 items). Cronbach alpha = .766.

7. Positive, Supportive Communication (PosSupCm, IntSS6). Supportive of partner even during disagreements, rarely use negative labels, exaggerations, threats, anger. If one partner gets angry, other usually uses deescalating response (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .777.

8. Collaborative, Non-Manipulative Relationship (Collabor, IntSS7). Neither partner manipulating or controlling. Partners feel safe revealing weaknesses. Can work together or teach each other effectively (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .781.

9. Separateness (Separate, IntSS8). Spending weekends alone OK. Not consult for small decisions (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .661.

Several academic scales were created after factor analysis of the original five scales of Learning and Study Skills, Learning Skill Areas, Learning Disabilities, Academic Motivation, and Academic Satisfaction. The following 12 scales and 2 self-report aptitude items are more independent and specific. (See www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/LEARN.htm.) Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 13

1. Time Efficient and Confident Study--versus learning disability (ConfEffc, ssl1aConfidEfficStudyTest) Think that tests and grades reflect abilities (versus smarter than test). Not need more time for tests and assignments (8 items). Cronbach alpha = .859.

2. Not Study Avoidant (NoAvoidS, ssl1bConfidNotAvoidStudy). Not slower or more anxious about beginning assignments, reading, or writing than other students. Feel like college capable (5 items). Cronbach alpha = .669.

3. Positive Campus Life Attitudes (CampsLif, ssl2SatisCampusFacFriendsGrdes). Look forward to classes, campus activities. Enjoy students and instructors. Happy with campus and grades (8 items). Cronbach alpha = .902.

4. Writing Skills-Confidence (WriteCon, ssl3WritingSkills). Good at organizing papers and writing. No vision problems (added due to factor analysis). (4 items). Cronbach alpha = .818.

5. Build Mental Structures (MentStru, ssl4BldMentalStruct). Study alone, struggle with difficult material, attempt to build own theories and associations. Make boring material interesting (7 items). Cronbach alpha = .834.

6. Basic Study Skills (StudySkl, ssl5BasicStudySkills). Preview, outline, review assignments; take good notes; good concentration; create visual map; review material at least 3 times for exam (6 items). Cronbach alpha = .811.

7. Degree Motivated (DegrMotv, ssl6SelfmanAcadGoals). Motivated and confident will degree and won‘t drop out. Not confused about goals and confident of finances (5 items). Cronbach alpha = .818.

8. Math-Science Seek Principles (SeekPrin, ssl7MathSciPrinc). Enjoy and good in math, and seek to understand basic principles in math and science (2 items). Cronbach alpha = .628.

9. Study Environment (StudEnvr, ssl8StudyEnvir). Homework encouraged by family, friends; not chores conflict; good place to study; and time available to study (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .516.

10. Attendance and Persistence (Attend, ssl9AttendHW). Attend classes, never drop classes, and manage study time well (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .702.

11. Efficient, Confident Learning (EfficLrn, ssl10MemNotAnx). Efficient learning time use, good memory, relaxed during exams (3 items). Cronbach alpha = .732.

12. Internal Motivation--to be in college (IntMotiv, ssl11NotNonAcadMot). Internal motives versus pleasing parents, making money, or being confused why in school. Financially self-supporting (4 items). Cronbach alpha = .473.

13. Verbal Aptitude test score estimate (ssl12). (1 item).

14. Math Aptitude test score estimate.(ssl13). (1 item).

1. The Overall Happiness (OvHap) Scale. A 7-point scale measured happiness in various life areas including home, career, family, romance, recreation, health, and direct questions about overall happiness for recent past, current, and expected future time periods (15items). Cronbach alpha = .919.

2. The Low Depression (LoDep) Scale. Items were developed from the DSM-IV depression diagnosis criteria and written as self-assessment items. The scale also asks the amount of psychotherapy and medication taken for depression. It was scored in reverse so that high scores would mean low depression (6 items). Cronbach alpha =.828.

3. The Low Anxiety (LoAnx) Scale. Items were developed from the DSM-IV anxiety disorder diagnosis criteria and written as Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 14

4. The Low Anger-Aggression (LoAng) Scale. Items include frequency of losing temper, name-calling/yelling, aggressive acts, and thoughts about getting even. Reverse scored. (5 items). Cronbach alpha = .850.

5. The Interpersonal Relations Outcomes (IntRelOut) Scale. Number and quality of friends, happiness in marital-like relationship, and work relationships (7 items). Cronbach alpha =.698. This is not a well-unified scale, but consists of a collection of related relationship items that are each important.

6. Physical Health (PhyHlth) Scale. Frequency of illness, alcohol and drug use, weight, and conditioning estimates. (6 items). Cronbach alpha =.544. This is not a unified scale, but it is a collection of important health behaviors and outcomes.

Return to Contents

SHAQ has a grand total of 70 independent scales/subscales. The SHAQ experience also includes biographical items, 6 outcome scales, and potentially 11 major-career choice scales. Subjects‘ goals and choices determine scales administered. In addition two redundant scales overlap other scales, but are of special interest. One scale is the Higher Self scale that consists of items fitting the description of Higher Self in Chapter 3, and one is the Forgiveness scale. The original value-theme, SRQ interpersonal, and academic scales are not described in this body, but are described in the Appendices.

Dyer (1976) coined the term, ―Happiness IQ.‖ I wanted to summarize this complex maze of SHAQ scales for both users and researchers. Therefore, I created the Happiness Quotient (HQ). The HQ is a simple formula for estimating one‘s overall ability to achieve happiness. The HQ is the linear combination of the 56 non-academic SHAQ scales. The weights are the correlations of the individual scales with happiness.1 One use of the HQ is to give users feedback about their progress developing success and happiness-related attributes. Users may examine the components of their HQ score to see strengths and areas needing improvement. They may even look at individual questions and follow Internet links to help them develop those areas. Since the questions were designed to be face-valid, clear, learnable items, question/score examination can be very useful.

1 Even though I performed a linear regression using the same scales and found beta weights that were better predictors than the correlations, I used the correlations because the correlations do not remove common variance. I think it is more useful for a user to get the result of the overall correlation since it is unknown whether the removed variance is really due to association/causation from that factor or not. In some beta weight cases it is even possible that a variable moderately correlating with happiness has a negative correlation after removing common variance when in fact it might be/probably is truly a positive factor. Such nuances would be very confusing/misleading to most users. Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 15

Almost all items and all scale scores range in value from 0 to 1. Items typically were scored on 7 to 13 point scales. The individual item scores were each divided by the number of scale points. Similarly, the raw scale scores were divided by the number of scale items. This relative score for both items and scales allowed a more interesting comparison across items and scales. For example a score of 3 on a 7 point scale is not the same as a score of 3 on an 11 point scale. In the first case the relative score would be 3/7 and in the second it would be 3/11--revealing that difference. Similar types of items or items on the same scale usually used the same rating scale.

Return to Contents

SHAQ is part of a larger website environment devoted to self-development. The title of the website is, Success and Happiness Website--Dedicated to Human Growth and Development at California State University, Long Beach. The website URL is www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/success and it contains not only SHAQ, but text and references to many self-help topics. It is also closely linked to my other website www.csulb.edu/~tstevens--You Can Choose To Be Happy--which features my book and other self-help materials. Everything on both sites is full text, downloadable, and free. SHAQ has three parts, the biographical questions, the outcome questions, and the SHAQ scales. I wrote almost all items myself and didn‘t use other authors‘ scales to avoid copyright problems for the free distribution of all SHAQ items. Not using established outcome scales presents scale validation problems. However, I have some previous data from the LSQ and SRQ scale research; and making all scales freely available seemed worth validation problem disadvantages.

I wrote SHAQ as a java applet that is downloaded and run on users‘ Internet browsers. The data is sent back to the CSULB server. I wrote SHAQ as a simple expert system. The user‘s checked user type and goals determine the scales to be administered. Users can also select to take only specific scales. The process of answering questions is rapid, and users may backtrack within any scale. Users seem to like and value the experience. The last question is, ―How interesting and beneficial overall would you rate your experience taking SHAQ?‖ On a 7- point scale, the mean was 6.082 (SD = 1.037, N = 3247). Therefore, users seemed very satisfied with the experience.

1. Sex: 63.1% female, 36.9% male.

2. Age: mean, 34.525. Percentiles and age: 10th, 20.0 yrs; 25th, 25.0 yrs; 50th, 33.0 yrs; 75th, 43.0 yrs; 90th,50.0 yrs.

3. Location: USA,72%, Other nations, 27% (mostly English-speaking); zip codes spread throughout USA.

4. Highest education completed: not complete HS, 3.1%; high school, 26.3%; technical degree, 4.8 %; 2-year degree, 11.3%; bachelor‘s degree, 32.8%; master‘s degree, 15.6%; doctorate, 4.6%.

5. Occupation: student, 29.0%; people professional, 20.8%; technical professional, 18.6%; educator, 11.4%; manager, 10.9%; consultant, 6.0%; sales, 7.1%; other technical, 4.3%; clerical, 7.5%; service, 8.0%; own business, 1.1%; others, 11.3%.

6. Hours work/week: Mean, 30.8; Median, 40.0; Less than 10 hrs, 20.2%; 10-40 hrs, 28.2%; 40 hrs, 31.2%; 40-50 hrs, 14.5%; over 50 hrs, 5.5%.

7. Primary ethnic heritage: North America, 49.3%; Northern Europe, 26.2%; Asia, 11.5%,; Southern Europe, 7.3%; Africa, 3.2%; South America, 1.0%; Pacific, 0.7%; other, 4.6%.

8. Fluent in following languages: English, 95.0%; Spanish, 6.9%; French, 5.8%; German, 2.7%; Chinese, 2.0%; Vietnamese, 0.4%; Korean, 0.4%; Other Asian, 6.0%; Other European, 4.1%; Other, 37.1%.

9. Religious affiliation: No Affiliation, 21.2%; Catholic, 18.1%; Conservative Protestant, 13.9%; Liberal Protestant, 12.4%; Agnostic, 11.5%; Jewish, 2.6%; Buddhist, 2.4%; Islam, 1.4%;

10. Motivation for completing part or all of SHAQ could also be important. SHAQ was designed to let users have some choice over what scales they took because SHAQ is so long and because many people may have more specific self-development interests. Two questions were designed for this purpose. Each is in the form of a checklist. The questions and results follow:

a. Type of User: Check ALL that apply to you: I want to know more about self, 71.7%; I want help with a Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 16

b. Want help with: Check ALL that apply to you: explore values, 74.9%; relationships, 66.1%; success-happiness, 59.9%; procrastination, 59.8%; self-esteem, 58.0%; loneliness, 56.5%; time management, 54.0%; emotional coping, 53.9%; anxiety, 53.0%; depression, 51.6%;; meeting people, 44.8%; anger/aggression, 43.8%; academic success, 16.8%; career planning, 19.3%; career help only, 1.6%; not taking for self, 23.6%.

Outcome variable data sources. Since I was particularly interested in happiness and success (personal, academic, relationship, and career), it was important that we have a large subset of subjects who were old enough and represented a broad enough cross-section of the population to have meaningful outcomes such as time to graduate from college or have marital or career success or failure. Our sample met those goals.

Potential sample selection biases. How does the sample compare to the larger U.S. or world population? A better question is what larger population does it more accurately represent? First, the sample is female heavy (63% to 37%) and a little better educated than the general population. An important selection bias concerns the type of people who find SHAQ online and complete it. How are they alike and different from the general population. Most obviously, they are English-speaking people who use the Internet. What are their motives? The SHAQ type and goal questions provide relevant information. Most people seem to seek and complete SHAQ for self-development reasons. Our sample probably includes people with greater than average self-improvement motivation. This may be the greatest relevant source of sample bias compared to the whole population. About 63% report that are taking SHAQ for specific self-help reasons and about 58% for more general self-development reasons. Since about 29% are students (3.5% in high school), it is natural that about 16% want academic help. Well over half want help improving self-esteem and emotions and 66% want help with relationships and 56% loneliness. From my experiences as a therapist, these data for help-seekers are similar to frequencies of people seeking therapy or other forms of self-development help. What may be more surprising is that 74% wanted help exploring values and 54% wanted time-management help. However, the website did use these as keywords, along with keywords related to many other self-development issues.

Another issue to consider is that if the sample has a ―self-development‖ bias (or any other kind) that restricts the range of the subjects‘ scores (standard deviations) taking SHAQ, that bias might actually underestimate the size of the correlations for the larger population. (due to the restriction of the range phenomenon). However, since most of the important correlations are already substantial, the reduction of sample size for regression analysis does not appear to be an important issue. Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 17

Return to Contents

Individual Cronbach alphas are reported in the scale descriptions above. For the SHAQ main scales the results were alpha > .9 for 4 scales; alpha= .8-.9 for 13 scales; and alpha = .7-.8 for 8 scales. Four scales with only two items had alpha = .6-.7. For the SHAQ learning scales, alpha > .8 for 6 scales and alpha = .7-.8 for 1 scale. Four scales with 2-3 items had alpha < .7. For SHAQ subscales with > 3 items alpha > .8 for 10 scales; alpha = .7-.8 for 3 scales; and alpha < .7 for 1 scale. For subscales of 2-3 items (11 had only 2 items), alpha > .7, for 6 scales; alpha = .5-.7 for 11 scales; and alpha < .5 for 2 scales.

The outcome scales that were true scales were Overall Happiness, alpha = .919; Low Depression, alpha = .828; Low Anxiety, alpha = .790; and Low Anger-Aggression, alpha = .850. The other two ―scales‖ were actually summaries of relationship success measures, alpha = .698; and health and healthy behavior outcomes, alpha = .544.

The only method I have had available for validating SHAQ has been my website. I have used only questions I wrote myself to avoid copyright issues or high costs since taking SHAQ is free and I am not on a grant. In an effort to offset this disadvantage, I attempted to write outcome questions that were very straightforward, face valid, and contained information that was of research interest per se. As stated above, the anxiety and depression scales restated DSM-IV criteria. I encourage other researchers interested in validating SHAQ to compare it with other instruments, give SHAQ to specialized population groups (e.g. depressed patients, criminals, high achieving professionals, etc.), or use SHAQ in experimental research. I will be happy to assist—even by including additional scales online if necessary (and they don‘t violate copyright). Following are my regression and corelational data relating SHAQ scales to the outcome scales and items.

My book title, You Can Choose To Be Happy: "Rise Above" Anxiety, Anger, and Depression (1998) describes major hypotheses of my research. People can learn cognitive and behavioral methods for maximizing their chances for being happy and minimizing their chances for being unhappy (i.e. feeling depression, anxiety, or anger). The SHAQ items and scales are my attempt to specify the means for accomplishing this goal of maximizing happiness. If these attributes really accomplish increase happiness, then the SHAQ items and scales should correlate with higher scores on happiness measures and lower scores on negative emotions measures. To be meaningful, those correlations should be good predictors of those outcome measures. I was also interested in SHAQ‘s relationship to health, relationship, academic, and career-related outcomes. The first major results section provides evidence for SHAQ‘s overall ability to predict these important outcomes. A linear regression analysis was performed using the 56 SHAQ scales and subscales listed above as variables to predict outcome measures for all subjects who completed the relevant SHAQ scales.

SHAQ’s predictive power for emotions. Individual regression analyses were performed for the 56 SHAQ subscales predicting each major outcome variable described above. 1123 subjects completed all SHAQ scales. The dependent variable Overall Happiness yielded a multiple correlation coefficient of R = .865 with the 56 subscales. The amount of variance (effect size) accounted for was R Square = .749. For Low Depression R = .730, R Square = .533. For Low Anxiety R = .675, R Square = .426. For LowAnger-Aggression R = .701, R Square = .491. For the 224 subjects who completed all 70 scales including the academic scales R = .897, R Square = .805 for Overall Happiness. See Tables 1 and 2. Tom G. Stevens PhD Development of SHAQ To Validate a Cognitive Model of Happiness, Depression, and Anxiety 18

For treatment and symptoms of depression and anxiety. Regression correlations between the 56 SHAQ subscales and the following behavioral disorder outcome measures follow. Correlation with the amount of therapy for depression R = .452, R Square = .204; with length of time medication taken for depression R = .409, R Square = .167. With major depression symptoms checklist R = .596, R Square = .356. With PTSD2 symptoms R = .498, R Square = .248; lasting OCD3 problems R = .460, R Square = .211. number of phobias R = .572, R Square = .328. With number of panic attacks R = .429, R Square = .184. With length of time on medication for anxiety R = .389, R Square = .151. With amount of therapy for anxiety R = .399, R Square = .159. (N = 1123 for all analyses.)

Meaning of effect size. Many non-researchers aren‘t familiar with the meaning of the term effect size. I would like to explain. Think of effect size as predictability. Maximum predictability is 100%--meaning you can predict an outcome with 100% accuracy. An R Square of .749 for predicting the happiness score means that you can predict happiness with about 75% accuracy using the combined 56 SHAQ subscales—a very high degree of predictability. Depression effect size/predictability was 53%; anxiety, 43%; and anger, 49%. R Square means measured effect size.

SHAQ’s predictive power for health outcomes. Regression results for the 56 scales predicting the Health Outcomes Scale score was R = .816, R Square = .666. Correlations with individual health items produced the following results. Low Frequency Illness past 3 yrs R = .477, R Square = .227; Low Num Alcoholic Drinks R = .572, R Square = .328; Low Smoking Freq R = .827, R Square = .683; Low Illegal Drugs R = .521, R Square = .271; Physical Conditioning Level R = .600, R Square = 489; Low Body Weight R = .539, R Square = .291.

SHAQ’s predictive power for relationship outcomes. For the Relationship Outcomes Scale, the SHAQ subscales correlated R = .693, R Square = .467; N = 1123.

SHAQ’s predictive power for academic and career success outcomes. Most users completing SHAQ didn‘t complete the academic portion of SHAQ. For the 56 scales not including the learning-academic Scales the regression produced the following results. For highest personal income R = .486, R Square = .236.(For age > 40 R = .538; R Square = .289.) Highest education completed R = .458, R Square = .210 and College GPA R = .393, R Square = .154. For the users completing all of SHAQ including the learning-academic scales, the results were highest personal income R = .620, R Square = .384 (N = 160, age > 25); highest education completed R = .580, R Square = .336 .(N = 296, age > 25);and college grade point average (GPA) R = .583, R Square = .339 (N = 240).

1: Outcome Regression Results for 56 SHAQ Scales/Subscales

                                                                P < .0001 for all Rs

Table 2: Outcome Regression Results for 70 SHAQ Scales and Subscales Including Learning-Academic Scales

                                                                                                                                               P < .0001 for all Rs;  * For subjects Age > 25; ** For subjects Age > 30

Return to Contents 

Regression Outcome Results by Scale Sets

Regression analyses were also performed upon sets of SHAQ scales to get an idea about how each related to the various outcomes.  The scales were divided into six sets—life values-themes (11 scales), general beliefs-values (19 Subscales), knowledge-skills (17 Subscales), interpersonal skills (9 scales), and learning-academic scales (14 scales).  It is clear from the results that each scale set had good predictive power with the general beliefs-values and knowledge-skill sets leading the way with Rs of .802 and .797 for happiness.  Interestingly, they were also the best predictors of health and relationships. See Table 3. 

Emotional Outcomes. All six sets performed well on all outcomes except Highest Personal Income. On Overall Happiness, General Beliefs-Values (R = .802) and Knowledge-Skills (R = .797) led the way.   Most surprising was learning-academic (R = .668); however, most of the subjects completing those scales were college students and their academic skills and academic life is a very important part of their current happiness. Other emotional outcomes followed a similar pattern. 

Other Outcomes.  Knowledge-skills led on Health Outcomes (R = .791).  Knowledge-Skills (R = .585) and General Beliefs-Values (R = .561) led on Interpersonal Outcomes.  Surprisingly, the Interpersonal Scales set wasn’t quite as strong a predictor at .486.  This is not entirely consistent with other studies and the correlations which found individual interpersonal scales with higher correlations than those  However, it isn’t surprising that the non-interpersonal skills areas related strongly to interpersonal scales, since it is known that people’s values and beliefs are important factors in interpersonal relationships. (The previous LSQ results found that self-management and emotional coping scales correlated well with interpersonal items.)   Also, some of the general belief and value scales’ items were related to relationships. Highest income was best predicted with R’s .300 to .400 in all areas except Life Values-Themes.  Learning-Academic (R = .365) and General Beliefs-Values (R = .363) led.

Table 3: Outcome Results for SHAQ Major Scale Sets

                                                                P < .0001 for all Rs; * For subjects age > 25; ** For subjects age > 30. 

Return to Contents

Happiness Quotient (HQ) Predictive Power

The current HQ scale uses the 56 scales and subscales with their individual correlations as beta weights to predict happiness.  The result of using HQ to predict happiness is slightly less than a regression analysis; however it uses all positive weights and doesn’t give extra weight to scales arbitrarily processed first. For the HQ model R = .801, R Square = .642;  N = 992.  Predicting Low Depression R = .551, R Square = .303; N = 916.  Predicting Low Anxiety R = .533, R Square = .284; N= 916.  Predicting Low Anger-Aggression R = .594, R Square = .353; N = 912. Health outcomes R = .594, R Square = .353; N = 923. Relationship outcomes R = .632, R Square = .399; N = 909. 

Correlations Between Outcomes and Individual Scales

Now that we have established SHAQ’s overall ability to predict happiness, negative emotions, health outcomes, and relationship outcomes, let’s look more closely at how individual scales or sets of scales correlate with these outcomes.[5]

Individual SHAQ scales’ correlations with emotional outcomes.   Since SHAQ was designed to identify attributes that improve people’s happiness and other emotions, it was expected that the highest correlations would be with the emotional outcomes.  Indeed that was the result. Table 4 lists the Pearson, r,  correlations  between each original main scale and the outcome scales.Tables 5-11 list the correlations between each SHAQ scale or subscale.  The SHAQ scales are grouped by the scale attribute types listed above—Life Value-Themes through Learning-Academic sets. 

Table 4: Emotional Outcomes By Original Main Scales 

 All correlations except * significant at p < .0001.        N’s ranged from 1448 to 3298

Return to Contents

Table 5: Relationship, Income, and Academic Success Outcomes By Original Main Scales

TO BE ADDED Xxxx put new table here  Also include relationships, income, and etc. by other scales in tables.

  Also put range of Ns as did in book.

Table 6: Correlations of Outcomes and Life Value-Theme Scales

                Note:  All correlations are significant at p < .0001, except  *, p < .05; **, p < .01; ns = not significant. 
                Number of Subjects (N) ranged from2300 to 3300.

Table 7: Correlations of Outcomes with Top Belief-Value and Fear Scales

                Note:  All correlations are significant at p < .0001, except  *, p < .05; **, p < .01; ns = not significant. 

Table 8: Correlations of Outcomes with Ethics-Related Beliefs

                Note:  All correlations are significant at p < .0001, except  *, p < .05; **, p < .01; ns = not significant. 

Table 9: Correlations of Outcomes with Self-Confidence/Skill Scales

                                         Note:  All correlations significant, p < .0001.

Table 10: Correlation of Outcomes with Self-Management and Emotional Coping Scales

                        For all correlations, p < .0001.

Table 11: Correlations of Outcomes with Interpersonal Skill Scales

                                Note:  All correlations are significant at p < .0001, except  *, p < .05; **, p < .01; ns = not significant. 

Table 12: Outcome Scales and Learning-Academic Scales

Note:  All correlations are significant at p < .0001, except  *, p < .05; **, p < .01; ns = not significant.   Ns ranged from 401 to 1086, since some items added later. Most were over 8.

 Return to Contents

Evidence for Higher Self Values and for Making Happiness a Top Goal

        One hypothesis of the book was that making happiness for self and others a top goal in life, and living by that goal will increase the probability one will be happier and more productive. My research supports the idea that making happiness as a top goal is associated with being happier; having less depression, anxiety, and anger; having better relationships; being healthier; and being more successful in some ways.  Making happiness a top goal correlated R= .446 with Overall Happiness, R= .217 with Low Depression, R= .185 with Low Anxiety, R= .316 with Low Anger-Aggression, R= .298 with Health Outcomes, and R= .396 with good Relationship Outcomes.  (All R’s were significant at .0001 level and N’s ranged from 2589 to 3195.)

        The Higher Self Values scale discussed above included making happiness important, but also included values like integrity, self-sufficiency, impacting the world, and learning and self-development.  The Higher Self scale correlated r = .503 with Overall Happiness, r = .252 with Low Depression, r = .197 with Low Anxiety, r = .372 with Low Anger-Aggression, r = .365 with Health Outcomes, and r = .436 with Relationship Outcomes, r = .37.  (All r’s were significant at .0001 level and N’s ranged from 2567 to 3129).

,

Importance of Overcoming Worst Fears

        Because I suspected that peoples underlying worst fears were important causes of their emotions, I created the SHAQ Low Greatest Fears scale and subscales.         The Greatest Fears (LowGF) scale had a strong relationship to the Overall Happiness  scale. The correlation was r = .55.       The LowGF scale correlated .48 with Low Depression, .45 with Low Anxiety, and .38 with the Low Anger/Aggression scale. The LowGF scale also correlated with good Relationship Outcomes, .31; Health Outcomes, .32; Highest Personal Income, .18; Highest Education Completed, .10; and College GPA, .19.

Greatest Fears Subscales. The four subscales of the GF scale and their correlates to outcomes are:

1. Low Fears of Illness and Death: Happiness,.22; Low Depression, .22; Low Anxiety, .31; Low Anger, .30; Good Relationships, .09; Health, .25; Income, .08; Education level, .07; college GPA, .05.

2. Low Fears of Failure and Poverty: Happiness, .38; Low Depression, .31; Low Anxiety, .30; Low Anger, .27; Relationships, .16; Health, .23; Income, .19; Education, .07; College GPA, .07.

3. Low Rejection/Social-Related Fears: Happiness, .49; Low Depression, .44; Low Anxiety, .37; Low Anger, .28; Relationships, .32; ; Health, .26; Income, .14; Education, .08; College GPA, .06.

4. Low Self-Related Fears: Happiness, .57; Low Depression, .48; Low Anxiety, .43; Low Anger, .38; Relationships, .33; ; Health, .28; Income, .12; Education, .08; College GPA, .11.

        It should be clear that these underlying fears are substantially related to happiness and success and that working to overcome them should be a high priority for anyone who chooses to be happy, healthy, and successful in relationships and other areas of life. (For all correlations, p < .0001 and N’s ranged from 2048 to 3199.)

Relation of Biographical Characteristics to Outcomes

Generally we found only weak relationships between biographical characteristics and outcomes.  Sex significantly correlated with happiness (.086--higher for females) and relationships (.148).  Males had higher incomes (-.175).  Among the emotional outcomes, age was mildly related to both anxiety (.112) and anger (.130).  However, ageit was one of the best predictors of income (.454); probably because students and younger people have not had time to develop higher incomes.  Similarly, age related to education completed (.252).  Age was not related to relationships but was negatively related to health (-.070). 

For religion, being  Jewish (.060) or being Methodist (.052) correlated the highest with happiness; being agnostic was negatively related (-.092).  Of the various ethnic groups, being “other Asian” (.082) and Mexican (.081) had the highest positive correlations, while having a northern European background had the most negative (-.053) with southern Europeans right behind (-.048).  People who spoke “other European” languages were particularly unhappy (-.111).  German (-.086) and ‘other European’ (-.127) speaking people had slightly higher anger/aggression scores.  Depression was slightly less (.072) among Chinese language and ‘other Asian’ (.069), but was mostly unrelated to language, ethnicity, or religion.  Though ‘other Fundamentalist’s were slightly less depressed (.083) and anxious (.068) than other people. 

Among occupations, students (.081), people professionals (.080), educators (.074), and managers (.061) were the happiest; only ‘other’ occupation had a negative correlation (-.057).  ‘Others’ were also the most depressed (.057) and least healthy (-.076).  While students were the happiest, they were also the most anxious (-.068) and the healthiest (.082) of the occupations. 

Health wise, ‘other Asian’s (.124) and Chinese language (.086) had better health among the ethnic/language groups. The ‘other European’ (-.124) and German language people (-.079) faired the poorest.  The Mormons  led the way among religions (.077); Buddhists (.051) were second. 

I included the User Feedback Rating of the SHAQ experience as an indirect measure of a response tendency to rate everything positively.  It did have had a mild positive correlations with some outcomes; but wouldn’t account for much of the overall effect on outcomes. The correlations ranged from -.017 with depression and .017 with college GPA to .091 with relationships.  The effect sizes ranged from .0003 to .0083 (.03% to .83%)—pretty small.

Table 13: Correlations between Outcomes and Sex, Age, and User Rating

                Note:  All correlations significant at p < .0001 except *, p < .05; **, p < .01; and ns = not significant.

 Return to Contents

Correlations Between Outcome Scales-The Rich Get Richer

The Harmonious Functioning model of emotions presented in my book predicts that happiness, depression, anxiety, and anger should be interrelated and moderately to highly correlated.  The model also gives high priority to cognitive values, beliefs, knowledge, and skills (including learning skills) as causal factors in affecting both moment-to-moment and overall emotional states.  It is my personal and clinical experience that changing these cognitive factors can have dramatic and immediate effects upon people’s emotional states.  This model makes different predictions than models which downplay the effects of cognitive factors.  Successes in cognitive therapy and other approaches changing cognitions help validate these hypotheses.  Happiness correlates .596 with low depression, .402 with low anxiety, and .325 with low anger/aggression.  Depression correlates .639 with anxiety and .364 with anger-aggression.   

Since we also believe that many of the same cognitions are responsible for better relationship and health management, it is interesting to note that correlations of happiness with relationship success .620 and with health .402.  Similarly, health correlates with low depression .382, with low anxiety .342, and with low anger-aggression .390.  Relationship success correlate with low depression .286,  low anxiety .180, and low anger-aggression .167.   See Appendix A, Table 13,  ?? for a complete set of all outcome intracorrelations. 
Return to Contents

DISCUSSION 

SHAQ Reliability Issues 

This study included finding the Cronbach alphas as a measure of reliability for each scale and subscale. The results are summarized above and point to a reasonably good reliability (alpha > .80) for almost all of the main scales.  The reliabilities of even the very small scales (2 to 5 items) were almost always acceptable as well.  I have not performed a study of test-retest reliability since I have had no control over test-takers though it might be possible even over the Internet.  I would encourage an enterprising researcher to find a sample of subjects and do so SHAQ and Validity Issues. 

Some of the most obvious and/or significant facts about this study are: (1) the size and scope of the study testing 3446 subjects on about up to 81scales covering a broad variety of human attributes; (2) using the Internet as a means of collecting that data which yielded a wide variety of subjects on many dimensions; (3) using only items written by one author and therefore not having collaborating independent evidence; (4) the overwhelming number, strength, and proportion of positive regression/correlation coefficients (and lack of insignificant or negative ones). Let’s look at these facts in more detail.  These facts relate to conclusions about the validity of SHAQ and of the study results. 

Conclusions about the sample and use of the Internet

As discussed above, using the Internet to recruit subjects had its advantages and disadvantages.  On the positive side, I was able on very limited resources, to administer a huge questionnaire to a large, diverse sample of subjects.  On the negative side, they were self-selecting first by being only people having access to the Internet and second by choosing to find this unusual website and take this long questionnaire.  SHAQ test-takers were probably not a representative sample of everyone.  From our data it was clear that they were generally more female (63%) and seeking self-improvement.  So are our results generalizeable to the broader population or just to people seeking self-improvement?  I don’t know, but I doubt that they would be much different.  It is even possible that due to restricted variance the correlations could be higher for the larger population. A recent review by Birnbaum (2004) concluded that “Experience with studies done via the Web and in the lab indicates that if Web studies are properly designed, one can replicate lab results in many fields of psychology.”  A later review by Skitka and Sargis (2006) concluded that use of the Internet was a valid and useful means of collecting data, and it encouraged more researchers to do so.  

Construct validity of SHAQ   

Construct validity is normally found by comparing one instrument to other, well-validated instruments.  Ideally it should correlate highly with those it is supposed to be similar to and minimally with those instruments it is supposed to be different from. Unfortunately, in this study I couldn’t put validated instruments on the Internet because of copyright and/or cost limitations.  Therefore, traditional construct validity research has not yet been performed upon SHAQ or the outcome scales.  That is a serious problem that I do not want to minimize, and I hope that other researchers will correct this deficiency.   

Nevertheless, I believe that the bootstraps approach I have used does provide some evidence for SHAQ’s construct validity.  First, if we can start with the premise that many individual items reflect face valid, clear, and interesting data in themselves, then I think we can construct an argument that SHAQ does indeed have evidence for construct validity. Second, another important aspect of this study is the diversity of the questions and question types.   Some questions measure subjective self-reports of emotions, some measure values and beliefs, some measure self-reports of behaviors and facts (such as grades, educational attainment, relationships, health, and income).   

The bootstrap idea is that if everything works and goes as predicted for the huge, complex data set, then the results provide evidence for both the whole and the parts.  In this case the overwhelmingly positive evidence and almost total lack of negative evidence support the conclusion that both the whole and the parts are valid.

Differences in explanatory power between SHAQ’s attribute scales and other scales and items.  My model predicted that variables such as sex, age, occupation, religious background, ethnic group, language, income, or other similar variables would be much poorer  explaining/predicting emotional or other outcomes than the cognitive attribute scales included in SHAQ.  While there were a number of significant correlations between these biographical variables and the outcomes, they were much weaker than the associations between the SHAQ variables and the outcomes. One interesting result similar to what some other studies have found is the low correlation between income and happiness (r = .051).  Many people would be surprised that people’s income and possessions are not very important to happiness. Instead inner qualities, relationships, and health seem to be much more important factors in determining our happiness.  Kasser et al.(2004), Solberg et al. (2004), Myer’s (1992), and others’  reviews have found similar results. These results provide positive evidence for the differential predictive validity of SHAQ.

SHAQ’s strong correlations met or exceeded expectations.   I expected moderate correlations between the SHAQ scales and the outcomes, but I was surprised by both the strength and the consistency of the SHAQ scale correlations with the outcomes.  On the surface these strong results provide supportive evidence both (1) for the validity of SHAQ for predicting what it was designed to predict and (2) for the cognitive model upon which SHAQ was built. It may be surprising that all of SHAQ’s major cognitive attribute areas—values-themes, world view, self-worth, I-E control, ethical beliefs, fears, self-confidence areas, self-management, emotional coping, interpersonal, and learning-academic skills correlated so strongly with each other and with the outcome variables.  However, that correlation pattern was predicted by the model.   

One of the underlying causal agents for the fairly strong relationships between all these sets of variables might be reinforcement of two kinds: (1) reinforcement expectation validation and  (2) reinforcement by increased happiness/decreased negative emotions.  According to my model, reinforcement causes positive-functional values/strategies tend to gradually permeate the cognitive system, becoming more dominant than poorer performing ones.  In time reinforcement of functional cognitions leads toward integrity of the personality and the high functioning people Maslow describes. Unfortunately, reinforcement in dysfunctional environments can strengthen dysfunctional cognitions.  Therefore, environment functionality may also be a powerful factor behind these correlations.

Alternative explanations of the results.   Before getting too excited about the results, we need to look for alternative explanations.  Can these results be explained by variables or artifacts that don’t fit the model?  One possible reader reaction to these data is that they are almost too good to be true. Honestly, that was my first reaction.  As psychologists we are trained to be suspicious of results that are too good.  We are taught to think that something besides the variables we think we are examining may be explaining the results.  We look for these alternative explanations as we should.  In this case the most obvious explanation is that subjects may have had a positive response bias.  What if a large percentage of subjects are simply prone to answer questions affirmatively or negatively?  If such is the case, then that response bias could explain at least some of the results, since all my scales seemed to positively correlate with each other and with almost all the outcomes.   I would like to have included a social desirability measure to test for one type of response bias; but didn’t because of the extra length it would have added (and the copyright issue).  I strongly encourage researchers to see how SHAQ and the outcome scales correlate with a social desirability scale and other scales of response bias.   

There is one small built-in test of social desirability/positive response bias the user rating question.  If a person has a positive response bias or is answering to please the researcher, then surely they would check a higher rating on that question.  If many subjects had a positive response bias, then the there should be a high correlation between the user rating and both the outcome scales and the SHAQ scales.  However, the correlations of the user rating question were r = .084 with happiness, r = -.017 with low depression, r = -.030 with low anxiety, r = .012 with low anger, r = -.038 with health, r =.091 with relationships, .048 with education attained, r = .017 with college grades, and r = .062 with income. The effect sizes ranged from .0003 to .0083 (.03% to .83%).  These small correlations would not support the positive response bias explanation of the results. 

There are other good reasons to restrict doubt about this studies’ many high correlations as being valid indicators of what is happening in the real world.  I used well-accepted practices of writing these questions and scaling them. The types and content of items are similar to those of many other questionnaires.  Let’s look at some of the different types of questions I used. 

Subjective, inner-state questions.  Many SHAQ questions and outcome questions are self-reports about inner states such as beliefs, values, or emotions. Much evidence exists in the literature that these types of questions generally do indeed measure what they purport to. For example questionnaires that have studied subjective well-being have used subjective questions similar to these and after study researchers have accepted them as valid indicators of inner states.  Lucas, Diener, and Larsen (2003) reviewed and compared research on a variety of behavioral, physiological, neuroimaging, and other measures of emotions.  They concluded that “psychologists can confidently assess positive emotions using a variety of well-validated measurement techniques. The simplest and most flexible are self-reports of emotions; and self-reports probably provide the best insight into the experience of emotion within individuals over time.”

Behavioral and factual questions. Even more accepted is the use of simple questions reporting behaviors or facts.  Many of my questions are of this type.  Yet in all types of questions across many content domains, results supported hypotheses.  While a response bias can explain part of the variance/effect, response biases have never been found to have the kind of effects that would explain the number and strength of these regressions/correlations.

Test-taking motivation and testing conditions. It is important to note that SHAQ was administered under conditions which generally are very supportive of honest responding. Subjects were self-directed, were not taking SHAQ to get a job or any other outcome where looking good would be an extraneous factor, and were under very impersonal/objective conditions (a computer on the Internet).  Most were also taking the questionnaire for self-improvement for the purpose of getting honest feedback about themselves.  Most subjects were probably aware that answering dishonestly inherently undermined the very purpose for which they were taking SHAQ.   There is evidence that subjects completing questionnaires on the Internet may be more honest than in other contexts. Skitka et al. (2006) in their review of Internet research concluded that “Recent research indicates that collecting data on the Web avoids some of the data quality problems one sometimes sees when using other collection methods. As also reviewed in Skitka & Sargis (2005), Web-based surveys are lower in measurement error, survey satisficing, and social desirability bias than are surveys conducted over the phone or via intercom (Chang & Krosnick 2002a,b).”

Results consistent with previous research.  Another point to ponder is that none of these results is really very surprising to anyone who has studied issues related to this research.  My questions and scales have not discovered any radically new or surprising human attribute, key for happiness, or other positive outcome.  My study is different primarily by its scope and complexity.  Additionally, SHAQ’s scales may offer more specificity of values, beliefs, and skills than most. The increased specificity may have helped increase the strength of the associations. Piers Steel, Joseph Schmidt, and Jonas Shultz (2008) point out that previous meta-analyses of the relationship between personality factors and happiness or subjective well-being have given greatly underestimated the true relationship because of methodological flaws. 

Return to Contents

The Characteristics of Happy People

I included the “Choose To Be Happy Checklist” in my book (at http://www.csulb.edu/~tstevens/hhapchkl.htm) which is written as a set of life guidelines.  SHAQ was designed partially from that checklist.  To summarize from the scale descriptions above, the happiest people (also not depressed, not anxious, not angry-aggressive, with good relationships and tending to be generally successful) have the following characteristics. 

1.       Highest Values

a.       Love and health/happiness for self and all others tends to be their top goal.

b.       Spirituality, God, and intimate relationship with God and/or Nature.

c.        Integrity, honesty, truth, knowledge, learning, and self-development

d.       Unconditional love for all people (including self) and valuing relationships—friends, family, romantic, peer, etc.

e.        Beauty, goodness, order, organization, perfection, justice, simplicity, and cleanliness,

f.        Contributions to society, positive impact on others’ lives, spreading health and happiness.

g.        Achieving goals, self-discipline, self-responsibility, excellence, and accomplishment.

h.       Exploration, play, adventure, challenge, and spontaneity.

2.       Positive World View

a.       Positive forces in control of nature/world/people’s lives.  We can control own lives and happiness.

b.       Progress and optimism--future will be better for world, others, and self (in general at least). People/self can learn and improve.

c.        Gratitude for gift of life and all of positives in life (start with ‘zero expectations’), no entitlement thinking.

3.       High Self-worth

a.       Value self (and others) unconditionally. 

b.       Seek truth about self and accept all parts of self—including previous actions and effects of actions (no repression).

c.        Lack of dysfunctional beliefs basing self-worth upon opinions of other, success, or other contingencies.

4.       Internal Control-Autonomy

a.       Focus on own values/goals (above), and self-discipline/integrity-- keeping thoughts and behavior consist with them. May include treating people empathetically and kindly despite their treatment of the person.

b.       Take responsibility for own health and happiness.  No excuses. Not allow others to interfere with top goals.

c.        Not allow self to take primary responsibility for others’ happiness, be manipulated, or be codependent.

5.       Enlightened Philosophy-Ethics

a.       Values humankind more than any subgroup (e.g. nation, family, etc.)

b.       Find greatest meaning from own abstract philosophy, values, and spirituality versus concrete realities--other people, work, play, home, or any life role.

c.        Strong adherence to ethical standards based upon values above.

d.       Forgiving based upon beliefs in inner goodness/value of all people.

6.       Low Fears of death, illness, failure, poverty, being alone, or other people’s opinions or actions—philosophically based.

7.       Self-Confidence based upon high knowledge and skills in general and in important life areas described above as the university in one’s head—such as philosophy, science, language, math, psychology, art, business, engineering, athletics.  (Especially important are the areas listed below.)

8.       Self-Management Skills

a.       Time management, goal-setting, decision-making, life planning.

b.       Self-development, self-improvement, and habit change integrated into life.

c.        Self-health care; adequate exercise, diet, safety, medical care, healthy habits.

9.       Emotional Coping Skills (habitual responses to negative emotions or their prevention)

a.       Problem-solving, self-exploration, and help-seeking.

b.       Positive thoughts generated from positive philosophy, beliefs, and values (not negative).

c.        Positive actions, involving, fun, vigorous mental and physical constructive activities (not harmful ones).

d.       Not critical, blaming, or aggressive responses toward self or others.

e.        Not eat, smoke, drink alcohol, take drugs, or other self-destructive habit.

10.    Interpersonal Beliefs and Skills

a.       Democratic and assertive.  Seeks win-win solutions with mutual discussion and empathy-respect. Collaborative--avoid blaming, threatening, manipulative actions.  Remain calm and caring during even heated discussion.

b.       Open, honest, empathetic, caring, respectful of others and supportive of their autonomy.

c.        Romantic, playful, friendly.

d.       Good helping and teaching skills.  Empathetic, positive, supportive, and clear.

e.        Good (honest, caring) persuasive skills (sales, marketing, and speaking).

f.        Good management/leadership skills, inspiring, organizing, group decision-making, planning, follow-up,

11.    Learning, Critical Thinking, and Academic Skills

a.       Internal motivation to obtain knowledge and/or degree with adequate time and concentration to learn.

b.       Curious/exploratory, seek deep theoretical/abstract principles and theories of all phenomena.

c.        Face and use analysis and problem-solving for difficult or confusing material. Make the uninteresting, interesting.

d.       Good learning and study skills—outlining, note-taking, summary, and review methods.

e.        Good, motivating study/work environments—enjoyable, supportive, and distraction free.

These characteristics are SHAQ’s prescription for happiness, health, and success.  We have presented some fairly strong evidence that people with these characteristics tend to have a better emotional life.  They are happier, less depressed, less anxious, and less angry. They also have better interpersonal relationships, are better educated, and seem to be healthier.  It is important for psychologists to note that these are learnable, teachable characteristics not physiological ones such as serotonin levels.  My guess is that these learned attributes will have more significant effects upon serotonin levels than be the results of them.  Recently, psychologists and the public have become enamored with the wonderful developments in neurophysiology; however, psychology is not physiology—it is a higher level of analysis.  No matter what the underlying mechanisms and physiology may be, these learned, psychological attributes are the most important determinants of our emotional life; and we need focus upon developing them through learning and other psychological means.  Psychology—not physiology--is the primary mission or our profession.  It is unlikely we will ever find a pill that teaches us math or any of the attributes above.  We still have to learn them the old-fashioned way.  Unfortunately, that learning requires a lot more time and effort than popping a pill.

Return to Contents 

Primary Value of SHAQ and this Research

I believe that the greatest contributions of this research are: (1) demonstrating that the wisdom of the ages and conclusions of years of cognitive and positive psychology theory can be partially condensed into an instrument measuring a complex array of values, beliefs, and skills intimately related to primary emotion and life success indicators;  (2) supporting cognitive systems theory and the Harmonious Functioning models; (3) supporting the utility  SHAQ as both a research instrument and a diagnostic assessment tool related to improving happiness, depression, anxiety, anger, academic success, interpersonal relationships, and possibly career success. Furthermore, SHAQ is accessible (free) to any English-speaking person in the world via the Internet.

Further Conclusions and My Hopes for the Future 

My hope for future SHAQ research is that other researchers will test SHAQ and its reliability and validity in many new ways on many different subgroups of people. I would like to improve SHAQ as more becomes known about it. My hope for future SHAQ use is that it will become more widely known, accepted, and freely used.. 

Using SHAQ as a diagnostic research, clinical, and self-help instrument. SHAQ has three main advantages over most other instruments as an assessment device—its comprehensiveness, its transparent items, and its free availability.  By transparent items, I mean items that are specific enough, clear enough, and behavioral enough to make them fairly easy for therapists or clients to understand.  Clients and therapists can read any item and know what belief, thought, or action is needed to improve the score on that item.  Many psychologists ( Nathan and Langbucher, 1999; Beutler and Malik, 2002; and others) have summarized evidence for the diagnostic limitations of the psychiatric-based DSM and evidence for the lack of intervention utility of the DSM and most psychological assessment devices.  By using SHAQ in research on depression, anxiety, anger, and interpersonal clinical problems, the researchers and clinicians will gain knowledge of teachable attributes they can measure and impart to those seeking help.  SHAQ’s items and scales have more focus on positive cognitions, but allow for a wide range of responses that go beyond moving from high depression to no depression, they also range to high states of happiness. These scales fulfill the request of those in the positive psychology movement who want instruments and research that studies not just clinical problems, but a wider range of human functioning.  SHAQ could be very useful for both research and clinical diagnosis and treatment.  SHAQ could also be useful for studying deeper factors underlying differences between exceptionally high functioning people, average/normal functioning people, and people diagnosed with clinical disorders.

The comprehensiveness of SHAQ allows a researcher or clinician to see the true complexity of depression. For example one client may be low on positive world view/optimism, internal control, self-worth, emotional coping; and high on materialistic-status values, and interpersonal values and skills..  A therapist should treat that client very differently from one who was low in higher-self values, self-worth, emotional coping, and interpersonal skills but high in internal control, achievement values, self-management, self-confidence, and academic skills.  A more severely depressed person may score low on almost all of these scales. An examination of the subscales and individual items could provide the therapist and client with more specific and useful intervention objectives.

Using SHAQ for large-scale college student assessment and college planning.  SHAQ was partially developed for use with college students—my specialty.  It makes a very useful tool for ‘ University 100: Introduction to the University’ type classes.  SHAQ can help students understand personal attributes that will make a difference in their college and future life happiness and success.  SHAQ can give them concrete goals for personal development.  Students can pursue these goals by choosing college courses and activities that will enhance those attributes.  Therefore, SHAQ can help colleges with their core mission—to help students become happier, healthier, more productive contributors to society after graduation. 

Importance of Psychology’s Unique Contribution to Support of Societally Functional Values, Beliefs, And Behaviors

If I sound enthusiastic about SHAQ and these results, it is because I am.  However, my enthusiasm comes not only from these results; but from a lifetime of seeing SHAQ-type attributes make such a huge difference in my own, my clients, and so many other peoples’ lives.  My enthusiasm comes from seeing hundreds of people who have changed their lives by improving themselves on these attributes.  I can think of no greater contribution our profession can make than to help the people on this planet lead happier, healthier, and more productive lives.  I want to do whatever I can to contribute to that goal. In our society, we are constantly exposed to many messages in the media highlighting or promoting values such as conflict,  rebelliousness, violence, dysfunction, selfishness, greed, dependence, codependence, overprotection, apathy, lack of self-discipline and integrity, and dishonesty. Even many intellectuals and academics believe that pursuing SHAQ attributes are naïve. Bertrand Russell (1930) penned the following,

It is common in our day, as it has been in many other periods of the world’s history, to suppose that those among us who are wise have seen through all the enthusiasms of earlier times and have become aware that there is nothing left to live for.  The men who hold this view are genuinely unhappy, but they are proud of their unhappiness, which they attribute to the nature of the universe and consider to be the only rational attitude for an enlightened man. 

SHAQ was designed with items that ask people what they value and believe and how they act.  Values and related beliefs, knowledge, and skills that support pursuing happiness; unconditional love/acceptance; integrity; honesty; self-reliance and self-discipline; beauty; productivity and efficiency; contribution to society; truth, knowledge, and self-development are diametrically opposed to many of the attributes being directly or indirectly taught in the media.  SHAQ provides some comprehensive and convincing evidence that if we want to be happy, healthy, have good relationships, and have academic-career success,,  then we must be as those staid, un-newsworthy sages of the ages have told us we must be and ignore those negative media messages.

For more than 30 years as a cognitive therapist almost every new counselee would enter my office upset and leave feeling better.  It wasn’t that we solved their problems that really existed outside my office.  It was that they found a new cognitive structure for coping with those problems, and they often found hope where there had been despair or desperation.  As my Harmonious Functioning model explains, one of the most interesting things about happiness is that almost anyone can find it happiness even in the most awful circumstances because of our human ability to cognitively adapt to situations.  That is the good news.  The bad news is that even in the best of circumstances, it is possible for us humans to feel very anxious, depressed, or angry because of how we think about the situation.

It is sad to see how society and many in our own profession overlook the lessons psychologists have worked so long and hard to learn.  A half-century ago George Kelly (1955), in his personal construct theory, explained depression, anxiety, and anger in cognitive terms as did Staats (1963, 1968),  Miller, Galanter, and Pribram (1960),  and many others since (c.f. Lopez and Snyder, 2003).  We have the results of studies showing that cognitive therapy is at least as effective in the short frun and more effective in the long run as medication (Cuijpers et al. , 2009;  Chan, 2006 ; Gould et al., 1997).  There is also evidence that cognitive treatments are also more cost-effective than pharmacological treatments (Hunsley, 2003). Yet many people would rather pop a pill than learn methods for permanently improving their cognitive values, beliefs, and skills in ways that will increase their chances at happiness the rest of their lives. Some therapists would rather refer clients for medication, possibly because they don’t know how to help these clients.  In seeing hundreds of clients for anxiety and depression, I only referred a few for medication because cognitive therapy worked well without it.   

Maslow (1954, 1962) led a movement to help teach positive approaches to living and overcoming negative emotions and problems.  Martin Seligman (2000) edited a the classic American Psychologist Special Issue on happiness and positive functioning to begin the new millennium on a positive note. APA later published a landmark handbook on assessing positive psychological characteristics by Lopez and Snyder (2003).  Seligman was a breath of fresh air as APA president (like Maslow so many years before) advocating more focus upon positive emotions, positive contributions, and positive means of human development.  These means to these positive outcomes are learnable and teachable.  Religions teach millions of people some of these means. This data is not groundbreaking; however, it paints a somewhat comprehensive picture of the multitude of cognitions involved in a robust approach to overcoming negative emotions and achieving happiness.  This data supports the conclusion that these cognitions are not only important in achieving a good emotional life, they also appear to be important in achieving health, good relationships, and academic and career success. Finally, because of their specificity, most of these cognitions appear to be learnable and teachable beliefs and skills, and not general heritable traits.

Return to Contents 

REFERENCES

Anderson, John (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Baltes, Paul B. and Staudinger, Ursula M. (2000).  Wisdom: a metaheuristic (pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue toward excellence. American Psychologist, 55, 123-134.

Bandura, Albert (2008).  Longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived self​-​efficacy for self​-​regulated learning in academic continuance and achievement.Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 525-534.

Bandura, Albert and Locke, Edwin (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited.  Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 87-99.

Bandura, Albert (2000). In Kazdin, Alan E. (Ed).  Encyclopedia of psychology, Vol. 7. (pp. 212-213). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association; Oxford University Press.

Bandura, Albert (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of self-control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Bandura, Albert, Reese, Linca, and Adams, Nancy E. (1982).  Microanalysis of action and fear arousal as a function of differential levels of perceived self-efficacy. J of Personality and Social Psychology, 43,5-21.

Batson, Schoenrade, and Ventis (1993).???

Beck, Aaron; Shaw, Brian; Rush, John; and Emery, Gary (1987). Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford Press.

Bergin, Allen E. and Richards P. Scott (2005).  A spiritual strategy for counseling and psychotherapy: 2^nd Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Berlyne, D. E. (1967). Arousal and reinforcement. In Levine, David, Nebraska symposiumon motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Beutler, Larry E. (Ed); Malik, Mary L. (Ed). (2002). Rethinking the DSM: a psychological perspective. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association,

Birnbaum, M. H. (2004). Human research and data collection via the internet. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 803-832.

Burns, David (1980). Feeling good: the new mood therapy. New York: Signet.

Caprara, G. V., Fida, R., Vecchione, M., Del Bove, G., Vecchio, G. M., Barbaranelli, C., and Bandura, A. (2008). Longitudinal analysis of the role of perceived self-efficacy for self-regulated learning in academic continuance and achievement.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 525-534.

Carnegie, Dale. (1936 ).  How to win friends and influence people.  New York: Simon and Shuster.

Clark, David T.; Beck, Aaron T.; Alford, Brad A. (1999). Scientific foundations of cognitive theory and therapy of depression. New York: John Willey.

Cronbach, Lee  J. (1956). Assessment of individual differences. Annual Review of Psychology, 7:173-196.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (1988). Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Efficacy of cognitive-behavioral, pharmacological, and combined treatments of depression: A meta-analysis.

Chan, Eric King-Hay (2006). Efficacy of cognitive-behavioral, pharmacological, and combined treatments of depression: A meta-analysis. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 67(4-B),..

Cuijpers, Pim; van Straten, Annemieke; Warmerdam, Lisanne; Andersson, Gerhard (2009). Psychotherapy versus the combination of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy in the treatment of depression: A meta-analysis. Depression and Anxiety,26, 279-288.

Cuijpers, Pim; van Straten, Annemieke; Andersson, Gerhard; van Oppen, Patricia (2008). Psychotherapy for depression in adults: A meta​-​analysis of comparative outcome studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,76,909-922..

Dawis, Rene  V. (1992). Scale construction. In Kazdin, Alan E. (Ed). Methodological issues and strategies in clinical research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Diener, Ed (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575.

Diener, Ed (2000). Subjective well-being: the science of happiness and the proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55, 34-43.

Digman, John M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor theory. Annual

Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440.

Dobson K. S. (1989). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of cognitive therapy for depression.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57:414-19.

Dyer, Wayne (1976). Your erroneous zones. New York: Avon Books.

Ellis, Albert (1977). Rational emotive psychotherapy. New York: Psychology Today.

Ellis, Albert (1988). Humanistic psychotherapy: The rational emotive approach. New York: Crown Publishing Group.

Emmons, Robert A. (1999). The psychology of ultimate concerns: motivation and spirituality in personality.  New York: Guilford Press.

Ford, Donald H. (1987). Humans as self-constructing living systems. Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Fournier, Geneviève; Jeanrie, Chantale (2003). Locus of control: back to basics. In Lopez, Shane J. (Ed); Snyder, C. R. (Ed). Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures. (pp. 139-154). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Frankl, Victor (1969). Man's search for meaning. New York: Washington Sq. Press.

Goleman, Daniel (1997). Emotional intelligence.  New York: Bantam Books.

Gould, Robert A.; Otto, Michael W.; Pollack, Mark H.; Yap, Liang (1997). Cognitive behavioral and pharmacological treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: A preliminary meta-analyis. Behavior Therapy. 28, 285-305.

Grossberg, S; Commons, M. L.; Staddon J.E.R. (1991). Neural network models of conditioning and learning. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Grossberg, Stephen (1988). Neural Networks and Natural Intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Grossberg, Stephen (1982). Processing of expected and unexpected events during conditioning and attention: A psychophysiological theory. Psychological Review, 89, 529-572.

Grossberg, Stephen (1980). How does a brain build a cognitive code? Psychological Review, 87, 1-51.

Grossberg, Stephen (1975). A neural model of attention, reinforcement, and discrimination learning. International Review of Neurobiology, 18, 263-327.

Heatherton, Todd F.; Wyland, Carrie L.(2003). Assessing self-esteem. In Lopez, Shane J. (Ed); Snyder, C. R. (Ed). (2003). Positive psychological assessment: a handbook of models and measures. (pp. 219-233). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Hunsley, John (2003). Cost effectiveness and medical cost-offset considerations in psychological service provision. Canadian Psychology, 44, 61-73.

James, William (1905).  The varieties of religious experience.  New York: Longman’s, Green, and Co.

Kasser, Tim; Ryan, Richard M.; Couchman, Charles E.; Sheldon, Kennon M. (2004). Materialistic values: Their causes and consequences. In Kasser, Tim (Ed); Kanner, Allen D. (Ed). Psychology and consumer culture: The struggle for a good life in a materialistic world. (pp. 11-28). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Kelly, George (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.

Keyes, Corey L. M.; Magyar-Moe, Jeana L.(2003). The measurement and utility of adult subjective well-being. Lopez, Shane J. (Ed); Snyder, C. R. (Ed). (2003). Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures. (pp. 411-425). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Lakein, Alan (1974). How to get control of your time and your life. New York: Signet.

Lopez, Shane J. (Ed); Snyder, C. R. (Ed) (2003). Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures.American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, US,

Mandler, G. and Kessen, W. (1959). The language of psychology. New York: Wiley.

Maslow, Abraham H. (1962). Towards a psychology of being. New York: Van Nostrand.

Maslow, Abraham H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.

Miller, G. A.; Galanter, E.; and Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York: Holt.

Myers, David G. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people. American Psychologist, 55, 56-67.

Myers, David G. (1992). The pursuit of happiness. New York: Avon Books.

Newell, Allen and Simon, Herbert A. (1995). GPS, a program that simulates human thought. In Feigenbaum, Edward A. and Feldman, Julian (Ed). Computers and Thought. (pp. 279-293). Menlo Park, CA, US: American Association for Artificial Intelligence; The MIT Press.

Newell, Allen (1990). Unified theories of cognition.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Niedenthal, Paula M.; Winkielman, Piotr; Mondillon, Laurie; and Vermeulen, Nicolas (2009). Embodiment of emotion concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1120-1136.

Pargament (1997). The psychology of religion and coping. New York: The Guilford Press.

Pargament, Kenneth I. (1996). Religious methods of coping: Resources for the conservation and transformation of significance.  In

Shafranske, Edward P. (Ed).  Religion and the clinical practice of psychology. (pp. 215-239). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Peale, Norman V. (2002). The power of positive thinking. New York: Running Press (first published 1952).

Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2001). Values in action (VIA) classification of strengths, http://www.psych.upenn.edu/seligman/taxonomy.htm

Rogers, Carl (1961). On becoming a person. New York: Houghton Miffin.

Rogers, Carl (1951). Client-centered therapy. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

Rotter, Julian S. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. New York: Prentice.

Russell, Bertrand (1958). The conquest of happiness. New York: Bantam Books.

Ryan, Richard M. and Deci, Edward L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.

Peter Salovey, John D. Mayer, David Caruso,and Paulo N. Lopes (2003). Measuring emotional intelligence as a set of abilities with the mayer–salovey–caruso emotional intelligence test (pp. 251. In  Lopez, Shane J. (Ed); Snyder, C. R. (Ed) Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures  (pp. 251-265) . Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Salovey, Paul.,and Mayer, John. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 9, 185–211.

Schutz, William C. (1967). Joy. New York: Grove Press.

Schwarzer, Ralf; Knoll, Nina (2003). Positive coping: Mastering demands and searching for meaning. Lopez, Shane J. (Ed); Snyder, C. R. (Ed). (2003). Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures. (pp. 393-409). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Seligman, Martin E. P. and Csikzentmihalyi, Mihaly (2000). Positive psychology. American Psychologist, 55, 5-14.

Seligman, Martin E. P. (1998). Learned optimism: how to change your mind and your life. New York: Pocket Books.

Shank, Roger and Abelson, Robert (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding. Hillsdale, N. J.:Lawrence Erlbaum.

Simon, Herbert A. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1-20.

Skitka, Linda J. and Sargis, Edward G. (2006).  The internet as psychological laboratory. Annual Review of Psychology, 57: 529-555.

Solberg, Emily G.; Diener, Edward ; and Robinson, Michael D. (2004) Why are materialists less satisfied? . In Kasser, Tim (Ed); Kanner, Allen D. (Ed). Psychology and consumer culture: The struggle for a good life in a materialistic world. (pp. 11-28). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Staats, Arthur S. (1968).  Learning, language, and cognition. New York: Holt.

Staats, Arthur S. (1963). Complex human behavior. New York: Holt.

Steel, Piers; Schmidt, Joseph; and Shultz, Jonas (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 134, No. 1, 138–161

Stevens, Tom G. and Stevens, Sherry B. (1995). Taking care of self (versus obligation)--a basis for relationship happiness. Western Psychological Association Annual Conference.

Stevens, Tom G. (1989). Relationships between life skills and college and life success--the life skills training program and research. National Freshman Year Experience Conference.

Stevens, Tom G. (1987). Large-scale life skills assessment and referral of university students. Western Psychological Association Annual Conference.

Stevens, Tom G. (1981). The effects of self-instructional mediated learning modules on interpersonal and self-management skills: evaluating an alternative method for delivering psychological services. Resources in Education.

Stevens, Tom G. (1972).  Positive behavior change--from theory to intervention. Monograph: University of Hawaii.

Stevens, Tom G. (1968). The hierarchical integration of the personality, Theolog at Claremont School of Theology, 3, 4-17.

Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (1990). Wisdom: its nature, origins, and development. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Tillich, Paul (1967). Systematic theology. New York: Harper & Row.

Tillich, Paul (1956). Dynamics of faith. New York: Harper & Row.

van Ingen, Daniel J.; Freiheit, Stacy R.; Vye, Christopher S.(2009). From the lab to the clinic: effectiveness of cognitive​-​behavioral treatments for anxiety disorders. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 69-74.

Weisz, John R.; Doss, Amanda; and Hawley, Kristin M. (2005). Youth psychotherapy outcome research: a review and critique of the evidence base. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 337-363.

Wong, Paul T.P. and Fry, Prem (1998). The human quest for meaning. New York:  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.