Lecture 3: The Biological Basis Of Well-being

PSY324 LECTURE 3 PART 1 -​ If subjective well being is a state it can vary quite alot in response to the situation and events that occur in your life. -​ If subjective well being is more of a trait it is relatively stable- internal non-situations factors that account for subjective well being Subjective well being a trait or state? Have to look at test- retest correlations - Looking at stability- want long time intervals. Long time intervals- use software - figure out how much variance in subjective wellbeing comes from different sources. 1.​ Rapidly changing component: -​ State component: Variance is going to come from a component that changes a lot - response to situations and events experienced in life. -​ Random measurement error: So some of that rapidly changing variancestate variance, is valid, but some of this is going to be just measurement error as well. 2.​ Stable trait component: Genes, personality traits that do not change much over time. 3.​ Measurement artifact: Random source- doesn't say much about wellbeing, autoregressive variance. Panel studies: longitudinal design, collect large representative samples in a particular nation over a long period. Collect information about well being. Found that 30 - 40% of life satisfaction is stable Tells us that life satisfaction is both a trait and a state. Criticism are issues with the theory. Words like rapidly, completely and all are not correct Adapt to our circumstances and things we experience in life. Situations impact wellbeing on the short term- return to baseline after. Humans are resilient- Experience bad things- wellbeing returns to pre adversity levels Experience something happy- wellbeing returns to previous state after some time. That's why situations and events do not contribute much to well being Baseline is not a zero point! Could be slightly positive begin with. -​ Even when people return to the baseline they could be slightly happy with their lives. Once we know how much measurement error we have- we can correct for it. -​ After doing this we’re left with evidence that wellbeing has both state and trait-like properties. After correcting for measurement error: 50% of our wellbeing changes over time. 50% of the variance is stable- does not change overtime (less stable than personality) -​ Stable internal factors: need to look at genetic influences, biological processes and personality traits -​ Unchanging environmental circumstance: settling down in adulthood- stable environment (family groups, friendships) This doesn't mean that your well-being is completely determined by those internal factors. Rather it might be those internal factors set your baseline, perhaps but your circumstances can move you above or below that baseline, depending on what you would experience. Can assess how much wellbeing due to genes by calculating heritability estimate- can use behavioural genetic designs Can use a family study because if wellbeing is due to genes then we should see similarity in wellbeing between people who are genetically related to eachother. Use twin studies- monozygotic twins share 100% alleles in common- can look at correlation between wellbeing of 1 twin and wellbeing of another twin - concordance rate. Mono twins should be more similar, higher concordance and positive correlation. Identical twins share the same family and environment as well so is the environment or genetics making their wellbeing similar? Look for identical twins that were adopted by different families from birth (rare) -​ They are similar in wellbeing just as twins raised in the same environment are→ genes play a strong role. -​ Using correlations- calculate corruptibility coefficient ➔​ A statistic that tells us how much of the variance we see in a population comes from genetic sources vs environmental sources. ➔​ Calculate a coefficient based off of these correlations ➔​ Ex. h^2 =0.40 → 40% heritability in that population, 40% comes from genes. Can calculate environmentality: a statistic that tells us how much of all that variation in the population comes from environmental sources. -​ -​ Subtract whatever amount is due to heritability by one because we assume that 100% of the variation has to come from genes of the environment. Whatever doesnt come from genes comes from the environment Heritability is a population statistic so if the coefficient for happiness is 4, that does not mean that 40% of happiness comes from genes. It is 40% of all the differences in happiness in the population comes from genetic sources. - So it is not about an individual, it is a population level variable. Heritability assesses the relative contribution of genes vs environment- that means heritability could increase or decrease even though genes are not changing. Ex. self esteem, heritability coefficient- gets smaller as people get older due to environmental changes. As you get older- more control over the environment in comparison to when you’re young. As you’re older, environment starts mattering more, heritability is like a see-saw: environment up→genetic contributions down, even though genes dont change, heritability estimates change if environment starts mattering more. Environmental factors: -​ -​ -​ Shared: environmental factors that everyone i the same family are exposed to Non-shared: unique to you even if raised in the same environment- unique experiences and enviornments Measurement error First behavioural study of wellbeing 1988 Monozygotic and dizygotic twins: raised in the same families or adopted away into different families from birth. Gave twins multidimensional personality questionnaire Found: Monozygotic twins are more similar to each other in terms of wellbeing even if they were raised apart compared to the other twins. -​ This supports genetic contribution. Was subjective well being actually measured? -​ Criticism: this doesn't tell us about the heritability of subjective well being because we don't have valid measures of it. Tried to replicate Tellegen et al first study. -​ Used a measure of cheerfulness (personality disposition) -​ Cheerfulness reflects tendency to experience positive -​ Measured this disposition of cheerfulness. Used a sample of monozygotic twins, reared together, reared apart in different families. -​ Used time interval of 10 years -​ -​ -​ -​ Longitudinal component = stability At that 50% stable portion - 80% is heritable Stability in well being comes from genes Researchers said that your happiness relies on genes so it’s useless to change anything ❖​ There are criticisms…. -​ -​ Small sample sizes- findings might be due to chance. Need more than 2 time points to increase validity. ●​ During time one concordance rate was light - lots of similarities between twins ●​ During time two (10 years later)- concordance rate was lower → means the environment is playing a stronger role. Their results actually indicate environmental influence, so no- it cannot all be due to your genes. -​ Cheerfulness is not subjective well being. It is a tendency to respond to positive emotion. Study found that the environment contributed to our emotions and moods just as genes did. Heritability estimates are going to differ based off what you are measuring. Meta analysis: reviews all the previously published findings and uses meta analytical techniques to tell you what is the overall finding or the average finding. Bartels gave us a meta analysis of 30 twin family studies -​ Both genes and environment -​ Genes only contribute half the variance of your well being -​ Environments experienced in the past and now will have influence on your well being. Well being is not predetermined by genes. Genes contribute to the stability of your wellbeing but don't set your well being Limitations to behavioural genetic designs -​ Can only split environmental factors into shared and non shared -​ Doesn't talk about the individual’s well being, only population -​ Does not control for environments identical twins shared before they were even born. -​ Can only catch additive and non additive effects of genes ❖​ Additive effects of genes: more genes in common- more similar. ❖​ Non additive effects of genes: About interactions of genes. More interactions - more similar. Genes interact with environments and not just with each other. (Gene environment interaction) Diathesis stress interaction: The genes you inherit make you vulnerable to perhaps developing depressive symptoms. Just because you possess the genes does not mean you will develop depression - have to encounter stressor in your life. Gene environment correlation: ●​ Passive gene environment correlation: Parents' genes contribute to happiness. -​ optimistic, hopeful, kind parents → pass characteristics to children → chances of the child being the same. ●​ Evocative gene environment correlation: genes you possess will make it more likely you will elicit certain responses from your environment. -​ People's positive affect evokes responses from us -​ reinforces those positive characteristics and behaviours so well-being increases. ●​ Active gene environment correlation: genes you possess make you seek out certain environments. -​ Outgoing individual → social environment ➢​ Epigenetics: genes do not have to interact with the environment- directly interact with themselves. -​ Environmental factors can turn genes off and on. -​ Has nothing to do with the genes inherited from your parents. Heritability and environmental estimates we have do not account for any of these interactions. Molecular genetics: assign the genes themselves that may play a role -​ There are no well being genes, but we have good candidates. ❖​ Neurotransmitter genes: regulate emotions like serotonin -​ Short allele: lead to serotonin dysregulation if you get a short allele from both parents. -​ Long allele: linked to wellbeing when you inherit 2 long alleles from parents ❖​ Modelling oxidase enzyme -​ Breaks down serotonin- linked to wellbeing -​ If turned off, serotonin levels are higher ❖​ Oxytocin genes -​ Promotes bonding behaviour (ex.Mother and infant) -​ Cooperative behaviour among individuals Brain is involved in the experiences of pleasure and pain- numerous structures. Therefore, negative and positive affect. Three circuits important for our experience of wanting/desire: 1.​ Reward pathways in the brain: -​ Mesolimbic dopamine system: connected circuits and brain regions -​ These areas are rich in neurons that release a response to the neurotransmitter dopamine. -​ Responsible for helping our brains determine what a reward is. -​ Motivation to approach certain stimuli because they are associated with positive outcomes (rewards). ❖​ Obtaining money -​ Some stimuli are natural rewards ➔​ Sleep ➔​ Food ➔​ Sex These reward circuits are important for producing positive affect: Neurotransmitters -​ Dopamine -​ Endogenous opioids: natural opioids we produce, they’re important for our experience of pleasure and euphoria. ❖​ Ex. runners high When we engage in some behaviour- rush of pleasure- helps the brain learn that behaviour is a reward because it’s associated with positive affect. Dopamine system is important for learning as well - reinforcement and operant conditioning. -​ The more you do something → the more rewarding it is → continue to do it. -​ Neurological bases of desire fulfilment theories of well being. Motivated to do rewarding things - higher well being - continue to do them. Endogenous receptors can be found all over the brain. We know that they're going to be important for modulation of our affective states and therefore motivation, because they produce pleasure/euphoria. They produce that positive effect. They also are going to play an important role in helping to modulate some of the other responses that we have. Example: -​ They influence stress hormone production and regulation. -​ important for experience of negative affect of pain because they are the body's natural painkillers, they reduce our sensation of pain. -​ They reduce levels of negative affect. Endogenous opioid system unlies ‘liking’ Hedonic hot spots: regions rich in receptors for endogenous opioids. ❖​ Prefrontal cortex ❖​ Mesolimbic dopamine system -​ Receive information from our sensory receptors - all connected to eachother. -​ Hedonic hotspots activate one another. ➔​ Like something → activate hotspot → activates others → really like it → want it. Special hedonic hotspot -​ Ventral Pallidum -​ Amplifies pleasant sensation to experience liking - when destroyed, unable to experience pleasure like chocolate cake → hotspot is destroyed → cake tastes disgusting to them. Cortisol is released when we encounter a possible threat or stressor in the environment -​ Circulates throughout the blood -​ Tells cells to release glucose -​ Glucose produces energy -​ Threat in the environment - flight, fight, freeze. Need energy. -​ Mobilises the body's resources to help respond to events. -​ Correlated with positive and negative emotional states. -​ Healthy individuals have a typical pattern of cortisol release throughout the day. -​ Healthy cortisol regulation- positive affect and personal wellbeing -​ Dysregulation cortisol - major depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, PTSD -​ Individuals with PTSD- traumatic experience in the past- brain responds to it as if still experiencing the event- dysregulated response to stressors. Associated with increase in negative affect, high levels of anxiety and fear. -​ Correlation research -​ Research has only been done on mice and rats Oxytocin: hormone and neuropeptide that plays an important role in birth (contractions and lactation). -​ Animal models: increasing oxytocin promotes maternal bonding with infants. Stimulates mice and rats to engage in more grooming behaviour - promotes pair bonding. -​ Oxytocin can interact with dopamine- it can alter dopamine regulation in the mesolimbic dopamine system. -​ Oxytocin plays a role in motivation. -​ Infant is a stimulus, a reward that should be approached. - reinforcing nurturing and pair bonding. -​ Oxytocin interacts with endogenous opioids and modulates our experiences of painthats on animal models -​ Research of the effect of oxytocin in humans is more limited. ❖​ Kosfel et al. Those who experience that increase in oxytocin, they seem to be more trusting when playing that investment game with someone else. ❖​ Love et al. Has shown that variations in an allele in an oxytocin regulation gene seems to be associated with increased proneness to anxiety, but also that seems to be correlated with people's responses on measures of emotional well-being. Serotonin plays a role in almost everything (sex, sleep, agression, eating, cognition, learning). -​ -​ -​ Serotonin is involved in mood regulation. Antidepressants such as SSRI manipulate and alter serotonin levels in the brain and can reduce depressive symptoms. Genes important for serotonin regulation ➢​ Serotonin transporter gene: you can a short allele or long allele or one short one long Caspi. Researchers had a sample of three-year olds from New Zealand. They assessed their genotype for that serotonin transporter gene -​ wanted to see if they had: 2 short alleles? 2 long alleles? or maybe 1 short one long. They followed those kids for the next 20 years and collected data on events. -​ Gave them depression inventories - they wanted to see who was experiencing depressive symptoms. -​ They found that it was the interaction of those individuals who have the two short alleles. Those two short shorts seemed to make them vulnerable to the negative effects of stressors. They were a bit more reactive to stressors. -​ That didn't automatically mean that they experienced depressive symptoms. Have experienced lots of stressful events in life. Those were the ones who were more likely to manifest depressive symptoms. Prefrontal cortex allows us to interpret and reinterpret events Uses information in the hippocampus to help you reinterpret a situation -​ Ex. turbulence on a plane → you tense up, fear of threat → it isn't your first time on a plane → you relax because you know this is normal (reinterpreted the situation) To help you reinterpret this situation- this is not a threatening situation- you've been here before - nothing bad happened. The prefrontal cortex can play an important role in our well-being. In the prefrontal cortex, more activity on the left side seems to be related to positive emotions. So we experience positive emotions with greater activity on the left side than the right. With negative emotions, there's more activity on the right side than the left- asymmetry. Some researchers have found that more left side activity. So that might suggest them that more left sided activation might be associated with them with higher levels of well-being. Some studies say it is more lateralization of hemispheric activity that is linked to higher levels of wellbeing rather than asymmetry. Studies show that asymmetry matters for wellbeing but they have relatively small effect sizes. -​ Suggests a weak influence of asymmetry on well being. Some studies even say the right side-amygdala may influence well being- scores on extroversion. Researchers propose that maybe this symmetry/asymmetry is not a direct contributor to our wellbeing- it might just influence how reactive we are to situations. -​ Might be vulnerability or diathesis that interact with our life event and then influence our wellbeing. Physical health contributes to people’s well being. Ryff et al. examined whether psychological well being is the opposite os psychological ill being. Tested 2 hypothesis 1- mirror hypothesis -​ Traditional. They are opposites from each other. 2- distinct hypothesis; they are independent constructs -​ See relationships for psychological wellbeing doesn't mean i’ll see the same for psychological wellbeing because they are independent from each other. Sample of older adults And they gather data on psychological well-being so, that psychological They assessed positive affect. So we'll sample or measure of hedonic well-being and of course they measured psychological ill being- so they looked at people's scores on a depression inventory. They measured people's scores on trait anger (their proneness to experience anger). They collected biological information, therefore physical health. Example: they tracked people's cortisol throughout the day They found that cardiovascular functioning i's correlated with psychological well-being and psychological illness. -​ Just know that it's correlated -​ Just know that it is correlated -​ If there's a positive correlation with well being there should be a negative correlation with ill being Here is how they tested all of those relationships between psychological ill being and the neuroendocrine functioning, the cardiovascular functioning. If the mirror hypothesis is true, we should see that the correlations for well-being are simply the opposite of those for ill being. -​ if there is a positive correlation with ill being there should be a negative correlation with well being. Rows: illbeing Columns: wellbeing Personality: non situational internal contributor to well being. Five factor model: When it comes to personality and wellbeing: -​ Extroversion seems to predict our positive affect -​ Neuroticism seems to predict our negative affect They count for 20% of variance and affect - but these correlations are stable overtime. Costa Mccrae proposed the Tempermetal- instrumental view. -​ Two explanations within one Temperamental view Certain personality traits that reflect people's tendencies to experience emotions (direct effect) -​ Extraversion → are the personality traits that reflect people's tendencies to experience emotion -​ Neuroticism Costa McRae based the temperamental view on earlier work done by Gray → Gray proposed that there are two neurological systems that underlie motivation: -​ (BAS) Behavioural activating system is responsible for approach motivations. ❖​ How much we are motivated to approach rewards. ❖​ People can vary in terms of strength in this vast system. ❖​ It is extroversion that reflects how strong behavioural activation is (motivation to approach rewards). ❖​ The stronger it is - more positive affect in life- more positive emotion → reflected by extraversion. ❖​ Correlation between extraversion and positive affect . -​ (BIS) Behavioural inhibition system Captures our avoidance motivations. ❖​ Motivation to avoid punishments, negative outcomes and aversive stimuli ❖​ Individual differences: the system might be stronger for some people and weaker for others. ❖​ Neuroticism is the personality trait that captures the strength of the system. ❖​ People who are unable to avoid negative outcomes/stimuli → experience a lot of negative affect in their life. ❖​ Neuroticism is linked to negative affect. ❖​ Higher levels of neuroticism would correspond then to lower levels of emotional stability, Neuroticism and Extraversion are one of the big 5 personality traits that predict well being. -​ -​ No neurological evidence found that suggests there is a separate BAS and a separate BIS circuit. Evidence that supports Extraversion and Neuroticism are important for affect Instrumental view Certain personality traits indirectly affect our wellbeing. Personality traits influence what kinds of environments you are exposed to. Ex. People who are high on extraversion are more likely to encounter environments that lead to experiencing positive affect. (fun, lots of people etc) People high on Neuroticism are more likely to encounter environments that lead to experiencing negative affect. Dynamic Equilibrium Theory: -​ Personality traits reflect global tendencies to experience life in a consistent manner positively or negatively -​ Personality traits determine your baseline levels of emotional responses. ​ Because they influence how you interpret your momentary life experiences. Ex. Maybe high levels of extroversion lead you more often than not to interpret your experiences positively so just in terms of your baseline, it's going to be relatively high in terms of positive emotions (positive affect). Same for Neuroticism → higher levels = interpret experiences negatively → baseline is lower in terms of positive affect (higher negative affect) -​ The situations you encounter move you a little above or below the baseline but personality traits set the baseline. ●​ Neuroticism sets baseline for negative affect ●​ Extroversion sets baseline for positive affect -​ -​ Meta analysis that wanted to look at personality traits (other than big 5) Reviewed the findings of previously published research (197 samples) Found: -​ Overall correlation between personality and subjective well being was .19 -​ Personality seems to account for only 20% of subjective well being -​ Weak correlations between the big 5 and subjective wellbeing. -​ Subjective well being was most strongly correlated with a personality trait called Repressive defensive- tendency to avoid negative information (esp abt ourselves) -​ People high on repressive defensiveness have lower levels of subjective well being. -​ Subjective well being more strongly correlated with (in slide) -​ How the big five capture differences in our emotional tendencies. Emotion effect is a component of subjective well being. Not just personality but how much personality influences how we feel. Personality traits that are strongly linked to wellbeing are the ones that influence our relationship functioning. Studies found that agreeableness contributes a bit more than what we thought. Facets of agreeableness capture your relationship behaviours (relationships are an important contributor to wellbeing) Criticisms of this meta analysis. Other meta analysis have found something a bit different: -​ Lucas and Fujita found that there are stronger correlations between extraversion, neuroticism and wellbeing than what Devene and Cooper found. -​ Heller found correlations alot stronger than what Devene and Cooper found.