Main content



Loading wiki pages...

Wiki Version:
The published article can be found [here][1] or as a preprint in Files. <br> **Citation:** Bahník, Š., Vranka, M., & Dlouhá, J. (2015). X good things in life: Processing fluency effects in the “Three good things in life” exercise. *Journal of Research in Personality, 55*, 91-97. <br> Introduction The Three good things in life exercise was shown to improve life satisfaction of participants in a randomized controlled trial (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005). Subjects doing the exercise reported at the end of each day of one week three good things that went well during the day and reasons for them. Even though the study of Seligman et al. found that the exercise improved life satisfaction, the effect was seen only after one month. While the exercise lasted only one week, some participants continued the exercise even after the first week. Nevertheless, that in itself does not explain why the effect was not seen after the first week of exercise. We believe that one possible reason is that the exercise might have been hard at the beginning and became increasingly easier afterwards. Previous study (O’Brien, 2013) showed that a recollection of good memories may lead to lower perceived life satisfaction when the recollection is hard. To explore whether our explanation of the delayed effect of the exercise is plausible, we conducted a study which showed that more than half of subjects found it hard to come up with 3 good things that happened to them during the previous day. Furthermore, we found that the subjects trying to provide large number of positive things that happened to them during the previous day reported somewhat lower life satisfaction than subjects trying to provide the same number of negative things. Therefore, the goal of the present experiment is to explore whether the number of good things that people conducting the good things in life exercise should provide can influence the effect of the exercise on life satisfaction. <br> <br> O’Brien, E. (2013). Easy to Retrieve but Hard to Believe: Metacognitive Discounting of the Unpleasantly Possible. <i>Psychological science, 24</i>, 844-851. Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress. <i>American psychologist, 60</i>, 410-421. [1]:
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.